How the ACLU and International Law Threatens Our Sovereignty

The video above is from ADF, and is practically a commercial for them, but I don't see anything wrong with that at all. I urge you to go join and donate!

By the way, Kender inspired this post. He wanted to write the blogburst, but his rant inspired me and I wanted to add more. So, I'm gonna use Kender's quotes throughout.

It seems a German citizen claimed that the CIA abducted him, drugged him and sent him to a prison in a third world country where he was tortured and finally released on a hilltop in another country in a case of mistaken identity.

The Supreme Court yesterday dismissed the case without comment after the Bush Administration said that if the case were not dismissed it would threaten state secrets.

What I want to know is WHY a group that calls itself the AMERICAN Civil Liberties Union is so concerned with the civil liberties of a German citizen. The last time I checked our civil liberties did not apply to the citizens of other countries, and the ACLU is not the arbiter of international law.

Last March, the ACLU went crying to the U.N. about how 'evil' the U.S. is.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the U.S. Human Rights Network today urged the U.N. Human Rights Committee to hold the U.S. government accountable for flagrant and repeated violations of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

"Locally, nationally and globally, the United States has repeatedly failed in its responsibility to uphold basic human rights," said Ann Beeson, Associate Legal Director of the ACLU. "We are appealing to the international arbiters to hold the U.S. accountable to basic human rights standards."

As sickening as this is; it is only one step in the ACLU’s agenda to undermine America’s sovereignty and freedom that so many soldiers have sacrificed and died to preserve. The ACLU are obviously frustrated by their inability to advance their radical agenda more quickly under the U.S. Constitution, and are now determined not only to convince the American judiciary to look to international law, but also to use it as a means to their ends. They hold it as a higher authority than our own Constitution and are more than willing to sacrifice our sovereignty in their pursuit to radically force change on America to fit their own radical views.

The sad thing is that they don’t have to try very hard to convince our judiciary. While they lost ground in the case above, they win enough to make it scary. Last year, former ACLU lawyer, and current Supreme Court Justice, Ruth “Snoozer” Ginsburg gave a speech that argued explicitly for the relevance of foreign law and court decisions to interpretation of the American Constitution. She isn’t the only Justice that buys into this philosophy. FIVE Justices believe that international law should bear weight in interpreting our constitution.

The ACLU don’t hide this agenda, they are proud of it.

The ACLU sponsored a conference at the Carter Center in Atlanta, Georgia, October 9-11, 2003, to promote the use of international law in U.S. courts. The conference was titled “Human Rights at Home: International Law in U.S. Courts.” Publicist for the event stated, “The emphasis throughout the conference will be on using international law and human rights norms to advance justice in U.S. courts or on behalf of U.S. clients.” Some of the alleged human rights “injustices” cited were in the areas of “environmental justice,” “gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender rights,” and “children’s rights.”

ACLU publicity included comments from ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero and conference organizer Ann Beeson. Romero said, “Our goal is no less than to forge a new era of social justice where the principles of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights are recognized and enforced in the United States.”

Beeson added, “From the grassroots level all the way to the Supreme Court, international human rights law is beginning to emerge as a tool for the victims of discrimination here at home.”

The ACLU’s rhetoric and efforts to use international law to rewrite, undermine, and bypass the Constitution has already gone beyond academic debate into the realm of actual use. As stated earlier, there are plenty of judges that have already adopted the philosophy and the ACLU are already participating in court cases where the judge uses international law in their decisions. It isn’t only at the federal level, but has penetrated even into the state level.

All through the confirmation process of Justice Alito, the ACLU and leftards were screaming that Alito was a racist bigot that would undermine judicial precedent. However, this judicial philosophy has more potential to undermine judicial precedent than any current philosophy being espoused, and it has already proven to do so. The purpose of the judicial branch is to interpret the law and determine if laws are constitutional. There are several major flaws in the use of international law in our courts. Not only does it undermine the very authority of the Constitution deeming it impotent of any power, but it also gives the judicial branch a power that was never intended to be granted to it; the power to write law. Followers of this philosophy view the Constitution merely as a persuasive authority, equated with foreign law, to be relied upon if they are in line with her predetermined beliefs. It doesn’t really matter if their beliefs are inconsistent with the Constitution itself, they can simply find a foreign law that is.

New rights, such as gay rights, or abortion should not be stretched from our Constitution that never granted them. If new rights like these are to be given, then the people should have some say in that. There is a process set in place by the founders to do just this. They should be granted through law or a constitutional amendment. They should not be granted via judicial fiat.

Besides the issues within our own judicial system and its decay, the ACLU is also turning to international sources to undermine our nation’s sovereignty and national security.

For instance, the ACLU filed a formal complaint with the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention against the United States, stating that the United States violated international law when it detained 765 Arab Americans and Muslims for security reasons after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on our nation. Eventually, 478 were deported. ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero said, “With today’s action, we are sending a strong message of solidarity to advocates in other countries who have decried the impact of U.S. policies on the human rights of their citizens. We are filing this complaint before the United Nations to ensure that U.S. policies and practices reflect not just domestic constitutional standards, but accepted international human rights principles regarding liberty and its deprivations.” Source

Romero, of course, makes the United States sound like some rogue nation with no regard for human rights, not the beacon of liberty that so many have come to escaping from tyranny and the bonds of oppression.

Right now, Britain is practically banning freedom of speech and the Bible in the name of gay rights and tolerance.

“Inciting homophobic hatred will become illegal, the justice secretary, Jack Straw, announced last night, following a campaign by gay rights groups. The introduction of an offence of rallying hatred against gays and lesbians follows similar measures to tackle religious hate crime, which were passed earlier this year after lengthy rows over freedom of speech.

“It is a measure of how far we have come as a society in the last 10 years that we are now appalled by hatred and invective directed at people on the basis of their sexuality. It is time for the law to recognise this,” said Mr Straw, introducing the second reading of the criminal justice and immigration bill.

If you can't imagine the ACLU helping make the same thing happen here, you need to wake up. All of this should concern you. You may think that it doesn’t directly affect you in your everyday life, but it will eventually. The ACLU’s embrace of international law seeks to hypocritically do the opposite of what the ACLU claim to protect, and the Constitution forbids; prohibit the free exercise of religion.

In spring 2003, a group from the United Nations Human Rights Commission, of which former ACLU officials Paul Hoffman and John Shattuck are a part, met and discussed a resolution to add “sexual orientation” to the UNHRC’s discrimination list. Homosexual activists at the meeting called for a “showdown with religion,” clearly intending to use international law to silence religious speech that does not affirm homosexual behavior. Source

After the first amendment, the next thing you can kiss goodbye with international law is the second amendment.

It is a direct threat to our very freedom of speech, and religious exercise. In some countries, laws are being pushed, and in some cases, enacted that essentially criminalize forms of religious speech and activity that does not affirm homosexual behavior.

Another rant from Kender:

The ACLU, the NYT and other groups and organizations that fight against our government on the GWOT are basically attacking freedom and the safety and security of this nation, putting Americans in harms way in their misguided attacks on our governments attempt to track and deal with terrorists.

What I want to know is this;

When the islamists get control and impose sharia law, will the ACLU have the balls to stand up and say “no way achmed”, or do you think it more likely that they will realize that speaking against the caliphate is a death sentence?

I am betting they will shut up and become good little dhimmis.

If we are going to turn the interpretation of our laws to international jurisprudence, and decisions of foreign courts, judges, and legislatures, the question begs...why did we fight a war of independence? If the ACLU are successful in their agenda for international law, the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution will eventually become irrelevant documents. More and more of America's freedoms, and our very sovereignty will be sacrificed for international law. Our freedoms will vanish. The ACLU's vision of freedom that includes the public sale of child pornography, the silencing of churches and ministries, and unlimited abortion and euthanasia will replace them.

Get involved. Donate and support organizations like the Alliance Defense Fund and the ACLJ that are out there fighting the ACLU's agenda. Contact your representatives and Senators and tell them to support Constitution Restoration Act that would put an end to the use of foreign law in our courts. Tell them to support the The Public Expression of Religion Act which would put a stop to taxpayer funding of the ACLU in establishment clause case. Sign Our Petition To Stop Taxpayer Funding Of The ACLU. Pray that America wakes up before its too late.

Crossposted from Stop the ACLU

U.S. Christian Camp Loses Tax-Exempt Status over Same-Sex Civil-Union Ceremony

By John Jalsevac

OCEAN GROVE, N.J., September 19, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) -

The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) announced on Monday that it was stripping the Methodist Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association of its tax-exempt status for part of its property. The Methodist camp made the news earlier this year after it refused, for religious reasons, to allow a lesbian couple to hold a "civil-union" ceremony at a pavilion on the camp's property.

We, the people of the State of New Jersey, grateful to Almighty God for the civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing upon our endeavors to secure and transmit the same unimpaired to succeeding generations, do ordain and establish this Constitution.

Wow. That lasted all of 60 years before they decided to crap on it!

The pavilion, said Scott Hoffman, the camp's chief administrative officer to LifeSiteNews, "is a facility we have used exclusively for our camp meeting mission and worship celebrations since 1869."

Until recently the camp held tax-exempt status on its entire boardwalk property under a New Jersey program that gives tax-breaks to organizations that open up their property to the general public.

In June, however, Harriet Bernstein and Luisa Pester, a lesbian, filed a complaint with the state attorney general's office on the basis of sexual orientation discrimination, after Ocean Grove refused to allow them to hold their "civil-union" ceremony at the camp's pavilion. A second lesbian couple has also sued Ocean Grove. New Jersey's anti-discrimination laws currently forbid those who "offer goods, services, and facilities to the general public" from "directly or indirectly denying or withholding any accommodation, service, benefit, or privilege to an individual" on the basis of sexual orientation.

"It is clear that the pavilion is not open to all persons on an equal basis," DEP Commissioner Lisa Jackson, wrote to the camp on Monday, in announcing the DEP's decision to revoke the camp's tax-exempt status.

"When people hear the words 'open space,' we want them to think not just of open air and land, but that it is open to all people," Jackson continued. "And when the public subsidizes it with tax breaks, it goes with the expectation that it is not going to be parsed out, whether it be by activity or any particular beliefs."

In otherwords, "all your church are belong to us."

Currently, however, there is some confusion over just how much of the camp's property no longer has tax-exempt status. As such, one homosexual advocacy group is threatening to appeal the DEP's decision, saying that it doesn't go far enough, reports the AP. "We're looking for a bigger victory here," said Steve Goldstein, the chairman of Garden State Equality. "We have the symbolic victory of the state telling Ocean Grove they're wrong, but there is a bigger victory to be had by having the entire tax-exemption removed. We're happy, but there's a lot more happiness to be had."

Any doubts that Steve Goldstein is a firm believer in so-called separation of church and state?

According to the Neptune Township tax assessor, the revocation of the tax-exempt status on the pavilion will only cost Ocean Grove about $175/year, although Scott Hoffman has reportedly issued a statement claiming that the DEP's decision in fact appears to revoke tax-exempt status for "over 99 percent of the land." Hoffman said that Ocean Grove's lawyers are currently reviewing the decision.

In August, the Christian camp preempted the complaints currently pending against it by itself suing New Jersey state officials. According to the Alliance Defense fund, which is representing the camp, the attorney general's office is violating First Amendment protections by investigating Ocean Grove. "Religious groups have the right to make their own decisions without government interference," said Brian Raum, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund. "The government can't force a private Christian organization to use its property in a way that would violate its own religious beliefs."

I seem to remember not all that long ago, the homosexual community claiming they have no intentions of attempting to force their agenda on the churches and that no religious organization would be coerced to recognize homosexual unions or perform such ceremonies if they conflicted with their religious beliefs.

I hope this is the case taken to SCOTUS. With the ADF involved, it just may be.


See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Methodist Camp Meeting Association Sues New Jersey for Civil Union Investigation
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/aug/07081501.html

Lesbian Couple Files Complaint against Church for Refusing Civil Union Ceremony
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jul/07071011.html


Crossposted at Stop the ACLU

Retro Reprint: Top Ten Reasons To Stop The ACLU

I wanted to put something up for Labor Day here to get some inspirations sparked. For a while my priorities have been shifted. I want to announce that we will be more active in our original cause and want to thank everyone that has supported us thus far. To get our blogburst reinvigorated, I thought I'd pull out a classic...one that explains why we started and what we are all about...

Stop The ACLU was started on February 9th, 2004. We started with high hopes, and we realized we were facing a goliath. There were many reasons why we thought the ACLU needed to be countered, and they are numerous. We wanted to provide a way to inform the public of the ACLU's agenda, as the MSM sugar coated it. We wanted to be a central database for people to gather, exchange ideas, and get actively involved in real ways of stopping them. It is a monumental task, exhausting, time consuming, and often frustrating. But it is a fight worth fighting.

We would be nothing without our supporters. To all of you, we appreciate the continued support. We have called you to action and you have answered.

There are many reasons to stop the ACLU. For this blogburst, I've decided to list my top ten list.

10. The ACLU was founded by Communist, with communist ideals, communist goals, and they continue to impose a Communist like agenda on America daily. The founder of the ACLU, Roger Baldwin stated clearly...

"My chief aversion is the system of greed, private profit, privilege and violence which makes up the control of the world today, and which has brought it to the tragic crisis of unprecedented hunger and unemployment�Therefore, I am for Socialism, disarmament and ultimately, for the abolishing of the State itself�I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal."

9. The ACLU does not believe in the Second Amendment.

ACLU POLICY -The ACLU agrees with the Supreme Court's long-standing interpretation of the Second Amendment [as set forth in the 1939 case, U.S. v. Miller] that the individual's right to bear arms applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia. Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected. Therefore, there is no constitutional impediment to the regulation of firearms.�ACLU Policy #47

#8. Their outright hatred of the Boy Scouts. They are currently doing everything in their power to hurt this organization. They attacked their free speech right to exclude gays, and are threatening schools, and fighting in court to get their charters shut down. They oppose the military supporting them, and will sue the pants off any school that attempts to charter them.

#7. The ACLU are pro-death. Not only is the ACLU Pro-abortion, it's the ACLU's top priority. It most definitely takes a backseat to free speech for the ACLU. As a matter of fact, the ACLU has fought against the free speech rights of those that oppose it. If it's abortion or euthanasia, as long as it's pro-death you can count on the ACLU to support it. The only exception to the ACLU's pro-death stance, is if it is a convicted criminal; in this case they are against death.

#6. The ACLU advocate open borders. Not only have the ACLU opposed the Minutemen, a group who are simply exercising their freedom of speech, protesting and stepping up where the government is failing, but they have helped illegals cross the border.

#5. The ACLU is anti-Christian. The list is endless on this one. Under the guise of "separation of Church and State", the ACLU have made a name for themselves by being rabidly anti-Christian. This is one area where they are most hypocritical. They oppose tax exemptions for all churches, but fight for them for Wiccans. They are against Christianity in school, but oddly remain silent as our children are taught to be Muslims. Whether it's baby Jesus, ten commandments, or tiny crosses on county seals, the ACLU will be to secularize America, and rewrite our history.

#4. The ACLU Opposes National Security. The ACLU have opposed almost every effort in the arena of national security. From the bird flu to bag searches, the ACLU have been against it. No matter what kind of search someone tries to do to protect people, the ACLU have proved they are against them across the board. It's kind of ironic that they don't practice the principles they preach.

Take a walk into the NYCLU's Manhattan headquarters - which it shares with other organizations - and you'll find a sign warning visitors that all bags are subject to search.

#3. The ACLU Defend the enemy. They have a long history of this one. They defended the P.L.O. in 1985. They defended Quadafi in the 1980's. And they continue today. They have told Gitmo detainees they have the right to remain silent, as in not talking to interrogators. One issue that really disturbs me is their refusal of funds from organizations such as the United Way that were concerned the money would be used to support terrorism.

In October of 2004, the ACLU turned down $1.15 million in funding from two of its most generous and loyal contributors, the Ford and Rockefeller foundations, saying new anti-terrorism restrictions demanded by the institutions make it unable to accept their funds.

The Ford Foundation now bars recipients of its funds from engaging in any activity that promotes violence, terrorism, bigotry, or the destruction of any state.

The Rockefeller Foundation's provisions state that recipients of its funds may not directly or indirectly engage in, promote, or support other organizations or individuals who engage in or promote terrorist activity.

#2. The ACLU supports child porn distribution and child molesters like NAMBLA.

As legislative counsel for the ACLU in 1985, Barry Lynn told the U.S. Attorney General's Commission on Pornography (of which Focus on the Family President Dr. James C. Dobson was a member) that child pornography was protected by the First Amendment. While production of child porn could be prevented by law, he argued, its distribution could not be.

There is no doubt the The ACLU are perverting the Constitution.

#1. The ACLU fulfills its agenda using my tax money. What more can I say on this one?

There are countless reasons the ACLU needs to be stopped. So don't just stand by and complain, do something. Get involved. Here are some ways you can get involved to help us stop the ACLU.

Support and donate to organizations fighting them in Court. Here are the ones at the forefront.

ACLJ
Alliance Defense Fund
Thomas More Law Center

Join the Stop The ACLU Coalition

Help us write Churches to get involved.

Tell your Congress to support the Public Expression of Relgion Act of 2005. This legislation seeks to limit attorney's fees in Establishment Clause cases to injunctive relief only.

SIGN THE PETITION TO STOP TAXPAYER FUNDING OF THE ACLU


This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com or Gribbit at GribbitR@gmail.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 115 blogs already on board.

Iowa Gay Marriage Applications Halted

By DAVID PITT
^AP Associated Press

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) —

Same-sex marriage was legal here for less than 24 hours before the county won a stay of a judge's order on Friday, a tiny window of opportunity that allowed two men to make history but left dozens of other couples disappointed after a frantic rush to the altar.

At 2 p.m. Thursday, Judge Robert Hanson ordered Polk County officials to accept marriage license requests from same-sex couples, but he granted the stay at about 12:30 p.m. Friday. By then 27 same-sex couples had filed applications, but only Sean Fritz and Tim McQuillan of Ames had made it official by getting married and returning the signed license to the courthouse in time.

In the front yard of the Rev. Mark Stringer, pastor of the First Unitarian Church of Des Moines, they become the only same-sex couple wed in the U.S. outside of Massachusetts, where some 8,000 such couples have tied the knot.

Stringer concluded the ceremony by saying, "This is a legal document and you are married." The men then kissed and hugged.

"This is it. We're married. I love you," Fritz told McQuillan after the ceremony.

No more same-sex weddings will be recognized, and no more applications will be accepted, pending Polk County's appeal of Hanson's ruling to the Iowa Supreme Court, County Attorney John Sarcone said.

Hanson's order had applied only to the county, but because any Iowa couple could apply for a license, people from across the state rushed to Des Moines, only to see fluorescent green signs explaining the stay and adding, "Sorry for the inconvenience."

Lytishya Borglum and partner, Danielle Borglum, drove 2 1/2 hours from Cedar Falls, along with their 13-month-old daughter, Berlyn. They planned to apply in Polk County and told their pastor in Cedar Falls to be ready to marry them when they returned.

"(We) plan to take the application home and pray that things change. Even though it is a setback, it is a step in the right direction," Lytishya Borglum said.

She said they would like to get legal status to gain more rights but added, "As far as we're concerned, our marriage is between us and God. We've been married for three years — if you ask us."

Accepting marriage licenses from same-sex couples has been illegal under a 1998 state law that permitted only a man and a woman to marry.

Hanson, ruling in a case filed by six same-sex couples who were denied marriage licenses in 2005, declared the law unconstitutional Thursday. He ruled that the marriage laws "must be read and applied in a gender neutral manner so as to permit same-sex couples to enter into a civil marriage."

The marriage license approval process normally takes three business days, but Fritz and McQuillan took advantage of a loophole that allows couples to skip the waiting period if they pay $5 and get a judge to sign a waiver.

Other couples, even those who got an early start Friday, were out of luck. Katy Farlow and Larissa Boeck, students at Iowa State University, said they got to the county recorder's office at 5 a.m., then sat in lawn chairs and ate snacks until the office opened at 7:30 a.m. They got their application in but didn't get their license.

"This might be our only chance," Farlow said. "We already knew we were spending the rest of our lives together."

Hanson granted the stay after Sarcone filed a motion saying his ruling should be put on hold because lifting the ban was far reaching and would likely be overturned by the Iowa Supreme Court.

Hanson wrote that Sarcone's arguments "do indeed constitute good cause for the issuance of the requested stay."

Plaintiff's attorney Dennis Johnson had argued that the county's appeal probably would not succeed and disputed its contention that a reversal would throw any licenses issued into legal doubt.

He said a marriage license is valid until one or both of the spouses seek to have it dissolved or one dies, "regardless of changes in the law that may occur after the couple marries."

It's obvious that the ACLU won this case if this lawyer can make such a stupid statement.

The Iowa Supreme Court can refer the case to the Iowa Court of Appeals, consider the matter itself or decide not to hear the case. The flurry of activity in the courts prompted a quick response from some lawmakers. House Republican leader Christopher Rants called on Democrats, who hold a majority of seats in the Legislature, to respond.

"The Democrats should call a special session immediately to take up such issues and to introduce a marriage amendment for Iowa's constitution," he said in a statement. "House Democrats need to start leading or get out of the way."

Language defining marriage as being between a man and a woman has been written into the constitutions of 27 states, according the National Conference of State Legislatures. Most other states have laws to the same effect; Iowa's was approved overwhelmingly by the Legislature in 1998.

Gov. Chet Culver on Thursday issued a statement stating his opposition to gay marriage and said he would wait for the court process to play out before considering any push for legislative action.

"While some Iowans may disagree on this issue, I personally believe marriage is between a man and a woman," Culver said.

Gay marriage is legal in Massachusetts, and nine other states have approved spousal rights in some form for same-sex couples.

Associated Press writers Henry C. Jackson, Amy Lorentzen and Nafeesa Syeed contributed to this report.

Polk judge rules against (Iowa) gay marriage ban

Crossposted from STOP the ACLU


I don't even want to get into the gay marriage debate here, except to note that most of the time when this kind of thing is "ordered" and forced on the people by the judicial branch it only results in backlash, new legislation, and making it even more difficult down the road for their advocates. Anyway...here is the news thats sure to make the primary explosive!

A Polk County judge on Thursday struck down Iowa’s law banning gay marriage.

The ruling by Judge Robert Hanson concluded that the state’s prohibition on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional and he ordered Polk County Recorder Tim Brien to issue marriage licenses to several gay couples.

“It’s a moral victory for equal rights,” said Des Moines lawyer Dennis Johnson, who represented six gay couples who filed suit after they were denied marriage licenses.

Camilla Taylor, an attorney with Lambda Legal, a New York-based gay rights organization, said the ruling requires “full equality for all Iowans including gay and lesbian Iowans and their families.”

“The Iowa Constitution has lived up to its promises of equality for everyone,” she said.

The county is expected to appeal the ruling to the Iowa Supreme Court.

Brian at Liberty Pundit:

Obviously, this will eventually wind up in the Iowa Supreme Court…it might even go beyond that. Eventually there will be an amendment offered to the Iowa Constitution, but I highly doubt it will pass. Stranger things have happened, though.

Some say schools giving Muslims special treatment

By Oren Dorell, USA TODAY

Some public schools and universities are granting Muslim requests for prayer times, prayer rooms and ritual foot baths, prompting a debate on whether Islam is being given preferential treatment over other religions.

The University of Michigan at Dearborn is planning to build foot baths for Muslim students who wash their feet before prayer. An elementary school in San Diego created an extra recess period for Muslim pupils to pray.

At George Mason University in Fairfax, Va., Muslim students using a "meditation space" laid out Muslim prayer rugs and separated men and women in accordance with their Islamic beliefs.

Critics see a double standard and an organized attempt to push public conformance with Islamic law.

"What (school officials) are doing … is to give Muslim students religious benefits that they do not give any other religion right now," says Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel at the Thomas More Law Center, an advocacy group for Christians.

Advocates say the accommodations are legal.

"The whole issue is to provide for a religious foundation for those who are observant while respecting separation of church and state," says Salam Al-Marayati, executive director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, based in Los Angeles. Many schools accommodate the Christian and Jewish sabbaths and allow Jewish students to not take tests on religious holidays, he says.

Barry Lynn, of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, says however that the law is murky on these expressions of faith. And the American Civil Liberties Union says overt religious symbols like crucifixes are not legal, but whether Muslim foot baths and prayer rugs fall into that category is not clear.

"That's a difficult one, and it's right on the edge," says Jeremy Gunn, director of the ACLU program on freedom of religion and belief in Washington, D.C.

At the forefront of the movement is the Muslim Students' Association, which has formed a Muslim Accommodations Task Force to push for foot baths and prayer rooms. At least 17 universities have foot baths built or under construction, including Boston University, George Washington University and Temple University, and at least nine universities have prayer rooms for "Muslim students only," including Stanford, Emory and the University of Virginia, according to the MSA's website. The association did not return calls seeking comment.

Zuhdi Jasser, a Muslim and chairman of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, which promotes separation of mosque and state, says he is concerned about the accommodations. "Unusual accommodations for one faith at the cost of everybody else doesn't fall on the side of pluralism," he said.

At George Mason University, non-Muslim students were asked to observe Muslim rules in the prayer area, such as keeping men on one side and women on the other and removing their shoes, according to Broadside, the school newspaper. Alissa Karton, assistant to the vice president for student life, said the article prompted the school to order students to roll up prayer rugs when not in use and move the dividers.

The University of Michigan agreed to install foot baths after talks with the MSA, said Terry Gallagher, director of public relations at the campus. Some Muslims ritually wash their feet before praying five times a day.

Daniel Pipes, founder of the Middle East Forum, a conservative think tank, sees the requests as part of a movement to force the public to acquiesce to Islamic law.

"The goal of Islamists is the application of Islamic law," Pipes says.

In the San Diego case, a substitute teacher at Carver Elementary School alleged that teachers were indoctrinating students into Islam. The San Diego Unified School District determined that a teacher's aide was wrong to lead Muslim students in prayer. Carver still has a special recess to allow 100 Muslim students to pray.

The ACLU, which has often sued schools for permitting prayer, says it is waiting to see what kind of policy the school settles on before deciding whether to sue. It says promoting prayers is unconstitutional.

"If you start carving out time in the school day that you would not do but for the need to let students pray, then it begins to look like what you're trying to do is to assist religion," says David Blair-Loy, legal director for the ACLU in San Diego.

Thompson says such conflicts are bound to proliferate. He and other Christians, he says, are preparing to ask for equal consideration such as a Christian prayer recess.

"What you're going to see out there is more of these kinds of cases as the Muslim community tests how far it can go in the public school system," he says. "If this can happen for Muslims, it can happen for Christians and other religions."

ACLU, journalists file lawsuit to make entire executions open

By JILL ZEMAN, Associated Press Writer
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
sfgate.com

(07-25) 12:30 PDT LITTLE ROCK, (AP) --

The American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas and several journalists filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday, asking state prison officials to let witnesses see the entire execution process, not just when poison flows into condemned inmates.

Now, media and public witnesses cannot watch as intravenous tubes are inserted and removed from the inmates. The curtains to the execution chamber open to witnesses after the condemned prisoner is already strapped to the gurney, and close once the inmate is dead.

"Witnesses should be allowed to see the entire process, including strapping the condemned down and the insertion of needles," said the lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Pine Bluff. "The public has a First Amendment right to view executions from the moment the condemned is escorted into the execution chamber, including those initial procedures that are inextricably intertwined with the process of putting the condemned inmate to death."

Plaintiffs are the ACLU of Arkansas, the Northwest Arkansas Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists, the Arkansas Times Inc., and journalist Max Brantley, editor of the Arkansas Times.

Arkansas Department of Correction Spokeswoman Dina Tyler didn't immediately return a call for comment.

The last inmate executed in Arkansas was Eric Nance, put to death in 2005 for the murder and attempted rape of Malvern teenager Julie Heath.

"Allowing such observation would not only ensure access to a public governmental proceeding, but would foster understanding, discussion, and debate concerning an issue of public controversy, to wit, the propriety of capital punishment in Arkansas," the lawsuit said.

The ACLU has filed similar suits in other states, saying that corrections departments violated First Amendment rights by not allowing public and the media access to the entire process.

In July 1999, the Oregon Supreme Court declared state rules invalid that prohibited execution witnesses from seeing the insertion of needles.

In August 2002, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled the public has a First Amendment right to view executions from the beginning, including procedures involved with putting an inmate to death. Its decision is not binding on states outside the 9th Circuit.

In early 2003, the California Department of Corrections stopped its legal battle and decided to allow the media to witness the executions in full.

I have to admit that I agree with them. In fact, we shouldn't stop there.

In keeping with the ACLU's thinking; "The public has a First Amendment right to view abortions from the moment the condemned (and mother) is escorted into the execution chamber, including those initial procedures that are inextricably intertwined with the process of putting the condemned baby to death."

or

"The public has a First Amendment right to view the court ordered death of the disabled from the moment the feeding tube is withdrawn, including those initial procedures that are inextricably intertwined with the process of putting the condemned patient to death."

Of course, the journalists and newspapers are only interested in producing the print version of "reality TV" and propping up their flagging profits.

ACLU Monitoring School Bible Handouts

by Susie Hassan
Monday, April 16, 2007
ABC7 News Online
COLLIER COUNTY:

A Collier County man who hands out bibles to Collier County high school students is under fire by the American Civil Liberties Union. Officials with the ACLU spent Monday night talking to Collier County democrats about the issue.

People on one side of the argument say it's not a separation of church and state issue while the other side says it is in fact a perfect example and neither side is backing down.

The debate begins with bibles handed out by Jerry Rutherford to Collier County high school students. He says there's no harm in what he's doing.

"This is not a church and state issue. It's a free speech issue," said Rutherford.

But the ACLU says the separation of church and state is exactly the issue.

"There is a time to speak you religious beliefs and that is in your church. *But the public education is not the forum for bible distribution," said ACLU Attorney Yale Freeman.

Typical ACLU position in their ongoing attempt to remove Christianity from the public sphere, and contain it to a more localized, segregated place in society.

Yeah, I've heard all the lefts' defense of the ACLU, saying that the ACLU has defended Christians in the past. Small cases that didn't amount to much of anything other than PR and to give the appearance of equal treatment. If Labor Unions represented their members in the same manner, members and liberals would be going ballistic.

Thomas More Law Center To Argue For Reversal of Decision Permitting Public Schools to Teach Students to “Become Muslims”... where was the ACLU?

Public Minnesota College to Install Foot-Washing Basins for Muslim Students...where is the ACLU?

Seattle Airport Removes Christmas Trees Instead of Putting Up Menorah...ACLU?

Muslims Seek Prayer Room at Airport...ACLU?

Rumsfeld supports Scouts meeting on military bases... "The ACLU contends the government sponsorship violates religious freedoms since the Boy Scouts require members to pledge allegiance to God."

JONES INTRODUCES BILL TO PROTECT PRAYER IN
OUR MILITARY ACADEMIES... "In May 2001, the Virginia Chapter of the American Civil Liberty
Union sued the Virginia Military Institute on behalf of two former cadets who opposed the non-
denominational pre-supper prayer."

Taxpayers fund Islamic center... "An announcement that the U.S. Marine base at Quantico, Va., has refurbished a building to be used as a prayer room for Muslim soldiers and civilians on base is a "bad signal," one critic has concluded."... where is the ACLU?
_______________________
*But the public education is not the forum for bible distribution," said ACLU Attorney Yale Freeman.

The Founders that gave us the First Amendment is also the same that sanctioned the "Aitken's Bible" and permitted its' printing under the authority of Congress.

Fisher Ames-Framer of the First Amendment

"Our liberty depends on our education, our laws, and habits . . . it is founded on morals and religion, whose authority reigns in the heart, and on the influence all these produce on public opinion before that opinion governs rulers."

(Source: Fisher Ames, An Oration on the Sublime Virtues of General George Washington (Boston: Young & Minns, 1800), p. 23.)

James McHenry-Signer of the Constitution

"[P]ublic utility pleads most forcibly for the general distribution of the Holy Scriptures. The doctrine they preach, the obligations they impose, the punishment they threaten, the rewards they promise, the stamp and image of divinity they bear, which produces a conviction of their truths, can alone secure to society, order and peace, and to our courts of justice and constitutions of government, purity, stability and usefulness. In vain, without the Bible, we increase penal laws and draw entrenchments around our institutions. Bibles are strong entrenchments. Where they abound, men cannot pursue wicked courses, and at the same time enjoy quiet conscience."

(Source: Bernard C. Steiner, One Hundred and Ten Years of Bible Society Work in Maryland, 1810-1920 (Maryland Bible Society, 1921), p. 14.)

Benjamin Rush-Signer of the Declaration of Independence

"The only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be laid in religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments."

(Source: Benjamin Rush, Essays, Literary, Moral and Philosophical (Philadelphia: Thomas and William Bradford, 1806), p. 8.)

George Washington-Father of Our Country

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of man and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connexions with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice?

And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who, that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?"

(Source: George Washington, Address of George Washington, President of the United States . . . Preparatory to His Declination (Baltimore: George and Henry S. Keatinge), pp. 22-23. In his Farewell Address to the United States in 1796.)

In front of the Collier County democrats, Freeman said the county shouldn't overlook this incident.

"If we had one religion, one voice saying this is the religion we must practice, we would have a very different society today," said Freeman.

Freeman says handing out bibles is no different than colleges handing out literature and military branches handing out literature in high schools. He says that's all the same thing.

But for Roger Brown, President of the American Foundation for Separation of Church and State, that comparison is nowhere near the same.

"They're passing out non-religious material they not trying to recruit students to come to their church," said Brown.

Brown sited a court case that allows bibles to be handed out in schools as to why he should also be allowed. He added the students seemed to want the bibles.

"The reason is the students wanted them. Had they not wanted them, they wouldn't have picked them up and taken off with them," said Rutherford.

But in a letter written to Freeman by a school board attorney, the attorney states that Rutherford and his attorney have been advised that they are not permitted to continue handing out bibles. The letter also stated that district high school principals have been advised not to allow distribution at the building level.

But Rutherford isn't backing down until the court case is overturned.

"Until then, we will continue giving out bibles in schools," said Rutherford.

The ACLU isn't backing down either. They will continue to monitor the incident and push so that it does not happen again.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com or Gribbit at GribbitR@gmail.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 240 blogs already on-board.

Forsyth Commission to fight ACLU lawsuit

4/12/2007 9:51 PM
By: Kira Mathis
News 14 Carolina

WINSTON-SALEM --

After nearly three hours of closed session discussion on Thursday afternoon, the majority of the Forsyth County Commission decided it would fight a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union.

The lawsuit was filed on March 30 after the ACLU had asked the Commission and several local governments to remove sectarian prayer from public meetings and the Forsyth County Commission did not do so.

The Commission will be represented by Alliance Defense Fund Senior Legal Attorney Mike Johnson. The alliance specializes in this type of legal matter.

After nearly three hours of closed session discussion on Thursday afternoon, the majority of the Forsyth County Commission decided it would fight a lawsuit filed by the ACLU.

"We battle the ACLU all the time, all over the country, so this is not new territory for us, and I look forward to the vigorous defense of this lawsuit and hopefully to prevailing in the court, Johnson told News 14 Carolina on Thursday.

Commission Board Chair Gloria Whisenhunt says the decision wasn't unanimous, but the majority felt that opening meetings with an invocation is an important tradition.

"As we've said all along, we don't think we're doing anything wrong. We think that we have been inclusive in the faith community and we just felt very strongly that we had not done anything wrong," Whinsenhunt said.

And tax payers don't need to worry about how the Commission will handle the legal fees. The Alliance Defense Fund will defend the case free of charge.

Crossposted at Stop the ACLU

American Civil Rights Union blasts sanctuary city policy

Chad Groening
OneNewsNow.com
April 12, 2007

The American Civil Rights Union contends it is unfair for cities like New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles to prohibit law enforcement officers from asking suspected illegal aliens the key question of whether they are in the United States legally. The ACRU, a group dedicated to protecting Americans' fundamental rights and liberties, says it sends the wrong message for U.S. cities to provide sanctuary to those who have come into the country illegally.

Hear This Report

William Otis, director of legal affairs at the American Civil Rights Union, says illegal aliens are not the only ones ignoring the rule of law. "It's one thing for illegal immigrants to do it, and that's bad enough," he observes, "but for people in this country entrusted with enforcing the rule of law to walk away from it just sends a terrible message."
Otis says it is quite a serious matter when cities like New Haven, Connecticut, deliberately ignore U.S. immigration laws by providing sanctuary for illegal aliens, and when police officers in many cities are ordered not to inquire about the legal status of people they encounter.
"As serious as the problems of illegal immigration may be," the ACRU legal affairs director contends, "even more serious is the problem of officials in this country turning their back on the law."
Not everyone who comes into the United States illegally does so because of a desire to work hard for a better life, Otis points out. Recently, he notes, several crimes committed against American citizens by illegal aliens have been in the news headlines.

Crossposted at Stop the ACLU

Parents Can Stop ACLU Lawsuit Against Wilson Co. Schools

Tennessean: Parents allowed to enter legal battle over church-state separation

A federal judge has granted permission to four parents to try to stop a lawsuit filed by the Tennessee chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union claiming that Wilson County schools violated constitutional separation of church and state.
The parents are being represented by the Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative legal group that takes up cases nationwide.

The ACLU filed a lawsuit in September alleging that Lakeview Elementary school in Mt. Juliet and the Wilson County school system endorsed and promoted activities on campus that led to constitutional violations.
The suit claimed, for example, that a group of Praying Parents who met at the elementary school passed out fliers in classrooms to let students know they had been prayed for — a step that, according to the ACLU, broke the church and state separation clause.
The ADF officials said in a statement today that they’re committed to defending people’s constitutional right of religious freedom.
The trail date on the merits of the case has been set for Oct. 9, ACLU officials have said.

Very short article, lacking much information, but here is an Oct.2006 piece from Alain's Newsletter that gives a bit more detail.

Old Hickory, TN –

U.S. Senate candidate Bob Corker today said the Tennessee chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is woefully wrong to have filed what he called a “frivolous liberal lawsuit” against the Wilson County School District alleging a morning prayer endorsed by Lakeview Elementary School officials is a constitutional violation of church-state separation.

“When the President declared September 14, 2001 — just two days after the attacks of 9-11 — a National Day of Prayer, no one sued him for crossing some arbitrary line between church and state,” said Corker. “We just bowed our heads and prayed. When a school in Wilson County or anywhere in our country allows children to do the same on the National Day of Prayer, or at a gathering at the flagpole, the courts ought to stay out of the way."

Corker said he supports the efforts of Mt. Juliet Commissioner Glen Linthicum, who said it was time for the community to take a stand against the ACLU lawsuit recently filed against the Wilson County School District. Linthicum co-sponsored a resolution unanimously approved last Monday night by the Mt. Juliet City Commission that encourages the elementary school and the Wilson School District to fight for their rights to religious expression.

"Like many parents across our state, I pray for my family everyday,” Corker stated. “We should never force anyone to believe a certain faith or pray a certain way," Corker continued, "but if a school decides to set aside some time to allow children who wish to pray to do so, we ought to support that school and community. That is precisely what it means to protect our freedom of religious expression — and I will fight to do just that in the U.S. Senate if elected."

It appears that the ACLU has set it's sights on this school district...The ACLU Targets Christians

ADF's motion to intervene can be found here.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com or Gribbit at GribbitR@gmail.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 240 blogs already on-board.

Crossposted at Stop the ACLU

Former ACLU Chapter President Arrested for Child Pornography

Feb. 23, 2007 ABC News

Federal agents arrested Charles Rust-Tierney, the former president of the Virginia chapter of the ACLU, Friday in Arlington for allegedly possessing child pornography.

According to a criminal complaint obtained by ABC News, Rust-Tierney allegedly used his e-mail address and credit card to subscribe to and access a child pornography website.

The complaint states that federal investigations into child pornography websites revealed that "Charles Rust-Tierney has subscribed to multiple child pornography website over a period of years."

As recently as last October, the complaint alleges, "Rust-Tierney purchased access to a group of hardcore commercial child pornography websites."

Since the ACLU thinks that child pornography should be legal, it is not surprising to read that it is against making it a felony to advertise, sell, purchase, barter, exchange, give, or receive child pornography. It is particularly distressed about the prohibition on advertisement, arguing that “the law cannot expect every publisher to decode every advertisment for some hidden and sinister meaning,” as if it took a technician-armed with a special decoding device-to ferret out pictures of children ludely exhibiting their genitals. Quote from Twilight Of Liberty

Complaint Alleges Access to Graphic Material

Rust-Tierney admitted to investigators that he had downloaded videos and images from child pornography websites onto CD-ROMs, according to the complaint.

Dan Riehl at Riehl World View, says: "Hmm. Just doing research, no doubt."

The videos described in the complaint depict graphic forcible intercourse with prepubescent females. One if the girls is described in court documents as being "seen and heard crying", another is described as being "bound by rope."

The investigation is being conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and the Arlington County Police as part of the Northern Virginia and District of Columbia Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force.

Rust-Tierney made an initial appearance in a federal court in Alexandria, VA, Friday. He is being detained pending a preliminary hearing scheduled for Wednesday, February 28.

Youth Coach, Argued Against Restricting Public Internet

Rust Tierney coaches various youth sports teams in and around Arlington, Virginia, according to court documents.

In the past, Rust-Tierney had argued against restricting Internet access in public libraries in Virginia, writing, "Recognizing that individuals will continue to behave responsibly and appropriately while in the library, the default should be maximum, unrestricted access to the valuable resources of the Internet."

Hot Air has the O'Reilly Fox News Clip

The Washington Times also has a story on it.

LGF hits this too.


This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com or Gribbit at GribbitR@gmail.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 200 blogs already on-board.



Crossposted from Stop the ACLU