I'm so sick of this bogus Christian persecution complex.
Throughout most of the last 2 millenia, Christians were more often the persecutors, not the persecuted. By the way the Christian Right whines on and on in this country, you'd think that they were somehow still being fed to the Lions. The reality is that Washington is now Rome... that is, Rome after the Empire had adopted Christianity as its state religion.
If anything, it is we atheists/agnostics who are persecuted in this country. Even mentioning in passing that you're atheist will earn you hateful stares, and may even endanger your job.
And every day we have to put up with the mad rantings of Christians (and every other religion - they're all plagues on human kind), who insist over and over that we conform to their culture, refrain from offending *them*, and celebrate all their holidays.
Look, if you're Christian, fine - I'm very happy for you. Just shut up about it, get out of my face, quit telling me what's right and wrong (as if you had any clue), and for God's sake please stop whining about how you're so damn persecuted!
And get out of my biology class!
Wow, Aaron... struck a nerve, did I?
A bit too close to the truth for you?
Unfortunately, Christians are often their own worst enemy.
Christians allow Liberals to continue their attacks on Christians and all things related to Christianity. Complacent Christians stand by while Liberals work to remove and destroy anything even remotely related to Christianity. Christians allow Liberals to manipulate and use their own beliefs against them -- even supporting those whose efforts are directed at undermining Christianity.
Christians vote for the Liberals who are attacking Christianity by voting for Democrats -- the very Democrats who support, vote for, and enable Liberals, their liberal agenda, and Liberalism.
A vote for Democrats is a vote for Liberalism and a vote against Christians and Christianity!
AAR
Leo - you mean the "truth" that you're continually whining about your persecution? Yes, that long ago got on my nerves.
Although I was never a Christian, I used to truly like Christmas. I liked its message. Hell, I think Jesus was a great guy. But now, in addition to all the inane commercialism, I have to hear every year more retarded obsessing about the "War on Christmas". Barf.
The "war on Christmas" is not only nonsense, but it's quite obviously specifically designed to manipulate you emotionally-inclined goobers. When are you going to wake up to the fact that the "WOC" is merely another tool to exert political control? It's a faux issue designed to get you flocking to the polls to "save Christmas" by... voting Republican. When are you putzes gonna learn that you're just being played?
Christians being persecuted? Hardly. You're 80% of the population, and you've got politicians indulging your every delusion, even to the point of forcing your mythologies onto our science classrooms. But you *are* getting played for fools.
Christians permit public schools to spread and sew the seeds of atheism to their own children -- permitting public schools to teach Darwinism exclusively in the science and biology classes -- excluding even the mention of God or discussions on Intelligent Design. Christians even vote against School Vouchers which would permit parents to remove their children from the Liberal indoctrination centers which our public schools have become!
Christians have only themselves to blame for allowing atheists to attack any and everything even remotely related to Christianity!
Christians should be outraged at what is happening to America, but instead, they silently permit it to happen!!!
AAR
AAR -
Public schools were never meant to purveyors of religion. That's what the Sunday school of your choice is for.
If you're so hot and heavy to squeeze your way into getting equal time for your religious mythologies in science class, then it would only be fair for there to be equal time for a scientist to explain Evolution at every church sermon.
More than 75% of Americans "claim" to be Christians, yet they permit a handful of atheists to attack Christianity and tell them what to do -- even removing Christmas from the Christmas holidays!
It's time Christians stand up and tell the atheists what and how they will celebrate -- not the other way around!
AAR
Aarontime,
If you want to learn and teach atheism, then you take a hike on over to your own private atheist school!
Most Christians don't even understand how the public schools are indoctrinating their children!
AAR
In the absence of the acceptance of God, man himself attempts to fill the void to become that which he rejects.
Thanks for providing us with an example, Aaron.
"even removing Christmas from the Christmas holidays!"
uh, last I checked, CHRISTmas was still on the calendar and still being celebrated by hundreds of millions of CHRISTians across the country as the birthdate of CHRIST. Yes, we're all clear on that - it's Jesus' birthday.
Yes, there are rules about religious celebrations and symbols under the auspices of public institutions. But that hardly means Christmas is not celebrated. Give it a rest already.
If Christmas has lost much of its original meaning and its emphasis as the day the Savior was born, that's not because of evil atheists, or liberals, or Democrats. It's because Christmas has been commercialized to death. You have no one to blame for that other than free market capitalism. Greed and self-interest, after all, are what make capitalism in many ways the most successful economic system yet devised. But those values don't mix well with the deeper message of Christmas.
"If you want to learn and teach atheism, then you take a hike on over to your own private atheist school!"
Uh, I'd prefer that our public schools taught reading, writing, arithmetic, critical thinking skills, and science.
Public schools are for teaching neither atheism, nor Christianity, nor Islam, nor anything else related to religion. If you prefer that religious doctrine permeates public schools and the government, then I suggest you'd be far more at home in a country like Iran.
I don't know what to say anymore, Leo!
I will say this!
God will help His people (Christians) to defeat Satan whenever they help themselves.
Whenever they decide to help themselves, they will rise up, and then God will help them and give them the strength to eliminate the Liberal cancer that plagues this land.
If Hillary Clinton becomes our next President, then that will be the wake up call to America, and the war will be on.
It may seem impossible to many--but the way things are now, with so many groups and organizations that have pushed anti-Christian laws through, it's the only way we can come to a solution for we Christians to be able to have our Freedom in America.
Jeremiah
"God will help His people (Christians) to defeat Satan whenever they help themselves.
Whenever they decide to help themselves, they will rise up, and then God will help them and give them the strength to eliminate the Liberal cancer that plagues this land."
"Eliminate" the liberal cancer? As in "exterminate", Jeremiah? Sounds like you want to send us all to concentration camps. You'd like that, wouldn't you - eh Jerry?
Aarontime,
When our founders wrote and ratified the Constitution, the Bible was used as a text book and prayers were permitted.
The founders of this nation never meant or intended for the Bible, the Ten Commandments, and God to be removed from America as you atheists want Americans to falsely believe.
The founders did not want a specific Christian denomination designated as the state religion -- they did not intend for Christianity to be removed and replaced with atheism or Islam!
It's past time for Christians to stand up for their religion. Unfortunately, far too many are Christians in name only!
And yes, Liberalism IS a CANCER, slowly eating away and destroying America from within!
AAR
One way to "eliminate" the liberal cancer is to vote ALL Democrats and Liberals out of office.
Democrats are the enablers and supporters of Liberals, Liberalism, the anti-Christian liberal agenda.
A vote for a Democrat is a vote against Christians!
AAR
"...they did not intend for Christianity to be removed and replaced with atheism or Islam!"
Name one liberal or Democrat who advocates "replacing" Christianity with atheism or Islam.
Go argue with your invented straw men if you must, AAR. Then, maybe when you're ready, you can have a debate with me. I've never spoken of any such thing as replacing Christianity with atheism or Islam or Buddhism or anything else. I'm just sick of hearing you whine that you're somehow being persecuted because you don't get to foist your personal religious beliefs on others through public means.
You want to indoctrinate your children in Chistianity? Fine - no one is stopping you. Just don't expect to use my tax dollars to teach your religious beliefs to my kids in a public science classroom.
Aarontime,
Democrats support Liberals, Liberalism, and the liberal agenda which IS ATTACKING Christians.
The friend of my enemy is my enemy. Democrats support those who are the enemies of Christians! A vote for a Democrat -- any Democrat -- is a vote for those who are attacking Christians!!!
How about YOU stop using MY TAX DOLLARS to support your public school indoctrination centers. Give me and every American a tax deduction, a tax credit, or a School Voucher so I can use MY tax dollars for the school of MY choice -- not YOURS!
AAR
Aarontime,
Don't expect to teach MY kids YOUR atheist beliefs in the public schools paid for with MY tax dollars!
Go celebrate atheism... burn a Christmas tree! Get a double Liberal high... wrap it in an American flag before you set it on fire!
AAR
"Eliminate" the liberal cancer? As in "exterminate", Jeremiah? Sounds like you want to send us all to concentration camps. You'd like that, wouldn't you - eh Jerry?
As you can see, Aarontime, this is the kind of crap that the vast, moderate, majority of Christian believers have to counter. People like Jeremiah and AAR, with their rabid and extremist leanings and dialogue, not only hurt the rest of the movement, but also shine a rather ugly light on our religion.
And to Jeremiah, and AAR: do me a favor - quit watching that Christian moneymaking, televangelist fraud Pat Robertson and actually re-read the Bible again......and this time, read for Christ's message, not just the made-up fables about the End Times and the story of Adam and Eve.
"Eliminate" the liberal cancer? As in "exterminate", Jeremiah? Sounds like you want to send us all to concentration camps. You'd like that, wouldn't you - eh Jerry?
As you can see, Aarontime, this is the kind of crap that the vast, moderate, majority of Christian believers have to counter. People like Jeremiah and AAR, with their rabid and extremist leanings and dialogue, not only hurt the rest of the movement, but also shine a rather ugly light on our religion.
And to Jeremiah, and AAR: do me a favor - quit watching that Christian moneymaking, televangelist fraud Pat Robertson and actually re-read the Bible again......and this time, read for Christ's message, not just the made-up fables about the End Times and the story of Adam and Eve.
I can see the resident libs are "stuck on stupid".
Unfortunately, my son goes to a government school. There they are not putting up ANY sort of Christmas decorations - nothing.
But, on day he came home singing the "Dradle(sp?) Song". I asked him where did he learn it and he replied "in class".
Now, exceptions have been made in government schools for some religious traditions - clothing, washing feet, etc. etc. but, bring a Bilble to a government school to read to yourself on your own time? Preposterous!
The stuck on stupid neocoms can deny all they want, but the proof is in government school actions.
I believe those quasi Christians pushing political, scholastic and military agendas can now sense their time, along with the GWB administration, is over. The hysteria emanating from their quarters is just a last ditch attempt to retain the power they exerted during the glory days of the Bush presidency.
Why they insist on calling themselves 'Christian' is indeed baffling to anyone who is familiar with true Christian principles. Christians promote peace, compassion and love for all mankind.
Is that what we see from those individuals who repeatedly call on Jesus to "eliminate" their fellow human beings?
They can call themselves anything they want, but Christian they are not.
Airhead,
I have never seen you more defensive than on the subject of Christianity and religion. I believe that there is a conflict in your soul.
I feel that down in your core, you believe in God and the truth, but you have been so liberally indoctrinated that you fight that with every fiber of your being.
Quiet your rage, listen to your soul and I will pray for you.
Christians promote peace, compassion and love for all mankind.
Nice attempt at forced pacifism CO. Christians also believe in fighting Satan and other forces that mean to denounce Jesus Christ.
And fight them ferociously.
If you're so hot and heavy to squeeze your way into getting equal time for your religious mythologies in science class,...airhead
We've gone over this before airhead, remember? I guess not.
The secular version of the big bang and evolution is NOT FACT. Questions left unanswered!!!!!
Wouldn't it be proper than to INFORM the children that there is another belief system, that a very large segment of the population subscribes to?
You seem to want only your version in the school system. Why is that?
Airhead and CO,
If liberals truly want what is best for the majority of Americans rather than the pockets of sycophants you two whine about daily. Than the 80% of Americans who identify as Christians should be able to worship wherever and whenever we want in the public or private square, right?
These HUD people have two choice; one - don't accept government money and they can put up any display they want; two - they can place a secular item such as a Santa Claus by the manager or other religious symbol. The Supreme Court has already ruled on this.
There is no war on Christmas. Since Faux news is unwilling to cover the Iraq Civil War they had to make up their own war for their war news reporters.
"Now, exceptions have been made in government schools for some religious traditions - clothing, washing feet, etc. etc. but, bring a Bilble to a government school to read to yourself on your own time? Preposterous!" TiredofLibBullShit
Actually, I've had kids bring Bibles to school to read on their own time. Never had a problem with it. The only reading material I ban in my room is porn. I've even had students give book reports on the Bible.
Jonathan, Canadian,
More "what does the Bible say" propaganda intended to use Christians' beliefs against them!
The Bible says we fight for and to protect and preserve our religion. Read the Bible about the battles!
The Bible does not say we concede to the will and desire of atheists like you who would destroy our religion! The Bible says nothing about achieving peace by permitting hedonistic atheists to destroy and eliminate Christianity! Those who willingly concede to the anti-Christian efforts, goals, and attacks of Liberal share the blame for its results.
The fact is, Christians don't need to fight a physical war to stop the anti-Christian Liberals. They need only to unite and vote those out of office who support Liberalism and it's anti-Christian agenda -- and that means voting against each and every Democrat!
AAR
BTW, I've also had students pray in class, usually just before a test.
Casper,
You are only one of more than 3 million teachers. Unfortunately, the vast majority of teachers in the public schools and their administrators do not teach their classes and students the way you say you do and have said in your past comments!
We need only to read the news to see that other teachers and schools do not teach their students as you do yours!
And to keep the children locked in the liberal school systems, Democrats (Liberals) block all efforts to promote and approve school vouchers or tax credits which would allow parents to place their children in the school of their choice -- either private or public!
AAR
Jonathan said:
re-read the Bible again......and this time, read for Christ's message, not just the made-up fables about the End Times and the story of Adam and Eve.
You mean you want them to read it for the other made up stories?
Casper,
I am sure there are many students who have said prayers in class prior to testing.
Like the old saying, there are not too many athiests in the fox hole.
Casper,
Be careful or those anti-religion Liberals will be after you like they are against the coach who bowed his head while his team prayed -- saying essentially that his actions encouraged and condoned the student's religious display and amounted to school (state) supported religion!
Don't look down while any of your students are praying for help with their test! Look over your shoulder and for any hidden cameras instead -- including cell phone cameras which may be aimed at you by an anti-religious student!!!
AAR
Look over your shoulder and for any hidden cameras instead -- including cell phone cameras which may be aimed at you by an anti-religious student!!!
Or by the Decidenator. He appears to be an anti-religious nazi.
One of the biggest misconceptions that most people have about public schools is that religion isn't allowed in school at all. Not true. What is not allowed is preaching religion in schools. We can have discussions about religion as long as we aren't attempting to indoctrinate our students in a particular belief system.
I have one group of seventh graders and this week we were discussing the Middle East. We spent one day discussing the similarities and differences between Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. I don't know how anyone can understand what is happening in the Middle East without some knowledge of the different belief systems that exist there.
Neocon -
"Wouldn't it be proper than to INFORM the children that there is another belief system, that a very large segment of the population subscribes to?"
Sorry Neo - Science isn't about "belief systems".
"If liberals truly want what is best for the majority of Americans rather than the pockets of sycophants you two whine about daily. Than the 80% of Americans who identify as Christians should be able to worship wherever and whenever we want in the public or private square, right?"
Several things. First, since somewhere around 80% of the population identify themselves as Christian, and since more citizens identify themselves as liberal and/or Democrat than they do Republican, it stands to reason that a majority of liberals and Democrats are in fact Christians.
Secondly, you seem to lack a basic understanding of how our country works. The Founders did indeed believe in democratic majority rule - that much is obvious. But at the same time, they clearly recognized that each individual retains certain rights that others can't take away, no matter how much the others are in the majority. Thus, they codified the Bill of Rights. This is what distinguishes a Constitutional Democracy, like we have, from "Mob Rule", as was the case after the French Revolution.
Thirdly, the first amendment specifically states that you are in fact guaranteed the right to "worship wherever and whenever we want in the public or private square". What is prohibited in the first amendment is merely any sanction by the State for a particular religion. Thus, if you wish to pray in public, you are free to do so - in fact, it is a right no one can take away. But you may not petition the government to specifically set up institutionalized prayer time for you, nor erect any prayer paraphernalia or religious monuments on government premises.
Lastly, you are assuming that because 80% of the nation identify themselves as Christians, then they must agree with you that Christianity should be taught in science classes. Not so. I'm sure most Christians in this country are satisfied to leave the science class to science, and supernatural belief systems to Sunday school.
The Bushies have tried to create this artificial schism between atheists/agnostics and Christians. This is otherwise known as "wedge-issue" politics. The reality is that most agnostics and Christians get along fine, and have many areas of agreement. I've been agnostic all my life, but count more Christian friends than not. The only time I have conflict is when a certain misguided minority of "Christians" whine, at the prodding of the Bill O'Reillys, Sean Hannitys, and Rush Limbaughs, that they are somehow being persecuted because they aren't allowed to take over a science class.
One of the biggest misconceptions that most people have about public schools is that religion isn't allowed in school at all. Not true. What is not allowed is preaching religion in schools. We can have discussions about religion as long as we aren't attempting to indoctrinate our students in a particular belief system.
I don't know how anyone can understand what is happening in the Middle East without some knowledge of the different belief systems that exist there.
Posted by: Casper at November 10, 2007 11:37 AM
Exactly. It's what we normally refer to as education; an idea, which to some, seems to be abhorrent.
Canadian,
If you want your Canadian kids taught ideas and behaviors that you find "abhorrent", do it in your Canadian schools. The fact that you would not fight to prevent your children from being taught "abhorrent" ideas and behavior says it all about the way you view and treat your children -- to say nothing of the way you would treat the children of others!!!
Open discussions? Not if a Liberal can prevent it! That's why Democrats are doing all they can to prevent even the discussion of Intelligent Design in public schools, even though the Intelligence need not be that of God!
That's why Democrats are doing all they can to prevent the use of School Vouchers which will allow parents to send their children to schools of their choice -- either private or public -- that do permit open discussions, and don't teach abhorrent behavior!
AAR
Aarontime,
"The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is at it again -- attacking the constitutional rights of individuals to enjoy free speech, practice their religion, and peaceably assemble. At issue is whether a football coach should be allowed to bow his head while his players offer a student-initiated and student-led prayer. For some reason, the ACLU believes that government has an obligation to stop people from praying and to stop them from exercising their religious faith..."
Yet another Democrat supported ACLU atheist attack on Christians!
AAR
Than the 80% of Americans who identify as Christians should be able to worship wherever and whenever we want in the public or private square, right?" -
You have a very poor sense of sarcasm airhead. And since the big bang theory and evolution have left many unanswered questions, IT IS a belief system.
Aarontime,
Allowing discussions of Intelligent Design and the possibility that other intelligent beings may have contributed to life on Earth is not "teaching Christianity in science classes" -- except by you narrow minded Democrats.
It does not negate the fact that life can and does evolve and change naturally as well!
AAR
Plainjane,
More lies and misinformation!
AAR
...and since more citizens identify themselves as liberal and/or Democrat than they do Republican,
Really? I think you've been drinking too much kool aid.
This is from media matters:
If Americans are so progressive, why don't more say so?
When asked for evidence, advocates of the idea that America is a conservative country will often cite the fact that polls show more people labeling themselves as "conservative" than "liberal." This is certainly true, as data from the NES show:
And this is from the DLC:
That agenda must stop the view we found prevailing among voters that Democrats are drifting unacceptably left. Forty six percent of all voters -- and 43 percent of independents -- see Democrats right now as too liberal. And, 41 percent of all voters -- and 42 percent of independents -- see them as becoming more liberal.
We found 36 percent of all voters identifying as conservatives, 47 percent as moderates, and only 16 percent as liberals. Moreover, seven in 10 Democrats self-identified as moderate (53 percent) or conservative (17 percent). Even among self-identified Democrats just 27 percent said they were liberals. On economic issues just 13 percent of all voters identified as liberals, on security issues just 14 percent, and on social issues 24
Casper, you are the exception not the rule.
Planejane?, hitting the koolaid hard today i see.
CO, spoken like a true outsider who has no clue as to what is happening here. Technically, it is not true, but in PRACTICE it is!
Airhead, samething! What is stated and what is practiced two different things! If religion is forbidden is public school so should a counter argument to any religion be also.
Neocorn -
Really? I think you've been drinking too much kool aid.
From the Pew Research Center Report released in March of this year:
In 2002, the country was equally divided along partisan lines: 43% identified with the Republican Party or leaned to the GOP, while an identical proportion said they were Democrats. Today, half of the public (50%) either identifies as a Democrat or says they lean to the Democratic Party, compared with 35% who align with the GOP.
link: people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=312
Again, if some 80% of the country identify themselves as Christian, and about half the country identify themselves as Democrat, then it is obviously true that a majority of Democrats are Christians. They just haven't fallen for some manufactured persecution complex, and don't agree with you that your brand of Christianity belongs in biology class.
They do pray, however, and do so freely... to themselves.
Aarontime...
I pray in your general direction.
Deal with it. :-P
Well, it does appear as if a certain number of individuals who proclaim to be followers of Jesus, the Prince of Peace, have in fact abandoned His teachings and have embraced the idea of death and destruction as advocated by the Prince of Darkness.
How many disciples of the devil do we have supporting the disastrous policies of the Bush administration? Anyone care to guess?
Leo -
"I pray in your general direction.
Deal with it. :-P"
Pray away - I am quite comfortable around prayer.
But I'm so sorry to inform you that you're not part of some poor persecuted group. Deal with it.
I'm also sorry to inform you that Evolution happened. Deal with it.
Nobody but nobody is buying that "Intelligent Design" is anything other than a poorly disguised version of creationism. Even a very conservative judge ruled that last year. Deal with it.
Again, if you wish for a country where religion has taken over public institutions, then I suggest that Iran would be more to your liking. Here in America, our founding preference is that religion is to be free for everyone - and for that very reason cannot be sanctioned by the State. Keeping religion out of public institutions not only protects the integrity of our governing bodies, but also protects religion from government! Deal with it pal ;)
I had to laugh reading airheads many "deal with it" statements.
I recall that being a school yard retort amongst the children. I guess it still is.
Evolution did happen airhead. What preceeded evolution? Care to enlighten us on that one?
Aarontime -- Like all postmodernists, you're very adept at changing the subject, not so good at addressing it. The question here was whether the government has any business prohibiting poor old ladies in HUD housing from decorating the outside of their apartments with religious Christmas symbols, such as angels or small creches. This is not a case of limiting GOVERNMENT display of religious symbols, but of PRIVATE display of such symbols on the outside of one's own private residence. This seems to me to be an enormous restraint on constitutionally-protected PRIVATE religious expression. This restriction should outrage all of us, unless it's necessary to protect some compelling government interest. The problem for me, however, is that I don't see ANY government interest at stake here, nevermind a compelling one.
Do you? Or do you simply not care, since it's "only" a suppression of religion?
JPL -
In case you hadn't read this thread, I started by expressing my irritation that you movement conservatives seem addicted to the melodramatic storyline that poor Christians are mercilessly attacked and persecuted. You love to cherry pick odd stories featuring "poor little old ladies" or some football coach who weren't allowed to put up their doo-dads.
Plainjane already addressed the issue. There are several easy choices here: the HUD residents can choose to 1) not accept government housing 2) put up secular Christmas doo-dads outside their doors, or 3) put up as many Christ figures as they want... inside their freakin government subsidized apartments.
Just so we're clear here, JPL: Not getting what you want is not the same as being persecuted. Sheesh - talk about a sense of entitlement!
Leo says: "And unfortunately, those who choose to ignore history are bound and determined to drag the rest of us along on their path toward its insidious repetition."
You mean like mad religious Zealots saying things like this:
"In the absence of the acceptance of God, man himself attempts to fill the void to become that which he rejects."
So Leo says anyone who doesn't believe in EXACTLY what he believes will do evil.
What insanity.
Not getting what you want is not the same as being persecuted. Sheesh - talk about a sense of entitlement!
So the little ol ladies have to choose between their housing and/or celebrating their tradition. That sounds about right in liberal land.
Tell me, would you require the transgenders to have to choose between expressing themselves and their housing or jobs? For instance, if a transgender moved into government housing and his "expression" offended others, would he have to choose between his expression and his housing?
WHAT PRECEEDED EVOLUTION AIRHEAD?????????
Aarontime -- You're dodging my question, so let me ask it again: What (if any) compelling interest does the government have in stopping these poor old ladies from decorating their front doors with religious Christmas symbols? Please answer that question.
JPL,
Airhead is the master deflector. Almost as good as Hillary.
I am still waiting for an answer on what preceeded evolution since he thinks that theory is so airtight.
And one more thing, JPL. If it were up to me personally, I'd let those little old ladies at the HUD housing to put up all their angels and Christ figures. But don't take a silly example of an over-zealous, self-important HUD administrator to pine that there is some systematic, massive persecution of Christians, or that there is some "War on Christmas". What a manipulative farce this bogus "WOC" is!
Again, if anyone is persecuted in this country, it's atheists and agnostics - not Christians. (And even then, "persecution" is a melodramatic stretch).
"Happy Holidays" to you pal.
Airhead,
What if Muslims wanted to put up a foot-washing basin in the government housing. Would you support that?
And one more thing, JPL.
This is airheads queue that he is out of here, having not answered a single direct question, but definitely leting you know that he is right. Typical liberal.
Bye Hillary.
JPL -
Aarontime -- You're dodging my question, so let me ask it again: What (if any) compelling interest does the government have in stopping these poor old ladies from decorating their front doors with religious Christmas symbols?
Answer: none. I think the whole thing is silly. If it isn't bothering anyone else, I say let them put up their Christ paraphernalia.
But quit pretending you're so damn persecuted.
Neocon -
"What if Muslims wanted to put up a foot-washing basin in the government housing. Would you support that?
Answer: nope
But quit pretending you're so damn persecuted.
They can't stop pretending they're being persecuted--it's an important fundraising tool.
Aarontime -- Thank you for answering my question. It may well be silly to you, but I assure you it's not to the people being bullied by HUD.
Canadian,
"What would Jesus do?" That's a well known Liberal propaganda technique intended solely to use Christian's beliefs against them!
Where did Jesus say we must or should yield to terrorists and those who would destroy us? That doesn't sound like the way to spread Christianity?
Where did Jesus say we must or should yield to the demands of atheists? That doesn't sound like the way to spread Christianity either?
Who do you claim are disciples of the devil? If anyone was a disciple of the devil, that would have been Saddam Hussein? Would Jesus have opposed freeing 50 million people from the rule, torture, and killing of Saddam or the Taliban?
So you believe Jesus would have turned the world over to Hitler rather than fight to stop him?
AAR
Thank You Aarontime, thank you CO.
JPL -
It may well be silly to you, but I assure you it's not to the people being bullied by HUD.
You misunderstood. What I meant is that it is silly for some HUD administrator to not let these ladies put up their Christ stuff (again, assuming that some Jewish resident wasn't offended...)
While I find it silly for a HUD admin to be so damn strict, lets keep this in perspective here. The way you toadies love to continually cast yourselves as victims over these isolated incidents of stupidity is truly laughable. Can't you see that pinheads like O'Reilly are purposely getting your panties in a wad over this ginned up "War on Christmas" nonsense? Don't you see that your emotions are being manipulated for a political purpose?
I mean, if some football coach isn't allowed to bring his students in for prayer before a game, a lot of you melodrama-addicted ninnies are ready to sing "Let My People Go!" as if you were Moses appearing before Pharoah. Gimme a break. (And it's a freakin football game for Chrisakes!)
This kind of emotion-driven hyperbole is precisely why the world is plagued with so much violence between Christians, Muslims and Jews. Personally, I think the world would be a far better and more peaceful place if the whole lot of your religious loons were to move to the moon. There you can kill each other to your hearts content and leave the rest of us sane people in peace.
You guys love to make a lot of hay about "PC", and deride "vitimhood". And yet, PC today really means God forbid you should ever criticize or not let a Christian do whatever he/she pleases under any and all circumstances. Otherwise, you're "persecuting" them.
Yep, there's an awful lot of PC and victimhood going on here alright... perpetrated by Christians.
Yep, there's an awful lot of PC and victimhood going on here alright... perpetrated by Christians.
You're the only one ranting like the victim airhead.
The above rant of yours is laughable. Then again most of your rants are.
Canadian Observer and Aarontime,
Perhaps the one thing that should gives us liberals some comfort is that people like AAR, neocon, Leo, and other brainwashed products of the Christian Right, do not speak for the vast, moderate majority of Christian followers.
Final comment to Aarontime -- You mock religious people who complain they're being "persecuted" by the government. Granted, "persecution" is a poor choice of word, because it overstates the facts. But instead of mocking religious people's choice of word, why don't you try to understand their legitimate complaint? I submit that religious Americans' legitimate beef is that liberal activist judges, the vast majority of the media, and certain well-funded non-profits, are purposefully INTIMIDATING (meaning, "trying to make timid") religious people to withdraw their expressions of religious faith from public view. And those groups to date have been succeeding.
Don't dare disagree with me for even a second, because you know perfectly well that that's exactly what's been going on for the past 50 years. At least 3/4 of the mission of the ACLU is to INTIMIDATE the government, corporations and non-profits into suppressing religious expression of the people they have power over, and to intimidate religious Americans into voluntarily hiding their own faith. Don't deny it. It's the truth.
So the only legitimate questions are: (1) whether it's in society's interest to continue suppressing public expression of religious faith; and (2) whether people of faith will eventually rebel against this repression. Be forwarned that the answers to these questions are "no" and "yes", respectively (and I'll expand on these another day).
Jonathan,
69% of Americans say that liberals have gone too far in keeping religion out of schools and government!
AAR
AAR, neocon, Leo, and other brainwashed products of the Christian Right, do not speak for the vast, moderate majority of Christian followers.
Posted by: Jonathan at November 10, 2007 07:48 PM
Agreed, Jonathan. Almost every religion, to some degree, produces fringe extremists who in no way represent the other worshipers. And yes, luckily for the rest of us they will always be in the minority.
Christians are not defined by "left" or "right" in this country. If you have accepted Christ as your personal Savior, then you are part of the Family of God. You are either a 'Believer', or a non-believer. To believe that Jesus existed, but that Jesus "was not the Son of God" does not qualify you as a Christian--Jesus said--'I spew the lukewarm water out of my mouth--Thus, you are same as a non-believer.
Ok, Now to these comments by Jonathan and CO--
AAR, neocon, Leo, and other brainwashed products of the Christian Right, do not speak for the vast, moderate majority of Christian followers.
Posted by: Jonathan at November 10, 2007 07:48 PM
Agreed, Jonathan. Almost every religion, to some degree, produces fringe extremists who in no way represent the other worshipers. And yes, luckily for the rest of us they will always be in the minority.
Posted by: Canadian Observer at November 10, 2007 09:10 PM
Sounds like CO and Jonathan are trying to claim themselves "Christians" by using the word "moderate" and label us as "extremists".
How can they claim themselves "Christians"? When they want to hinder us from celebrating Christmas; for example--An ACLU committe in Colorado is banning green and red lights for supposedly be "too religious". In Michigan, they are voting on displaying of Nativity scenes. Why? We've always shown Nativity Scenes, Why are they wanting to stop us now?
Sounds to me like the Liberals and ACLU are the 'extremists'!!!
Why can't the ACLU, Atheists and Liberals just take the few days off and mind their own business?? Billy Graham isn't slamming on your door to tell you that you're a sinner, even though you are!!!
The Constitution says--'Freedom of religion, not "from" religion as Atheists and Liberals would have us to believe.
In Romans 10:3 Paul explains the current situation.
Romans 10:3
Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness.
You see, the fact is, Liberals and their cohorts; the ACLU, (Abolishing Christian Legacy Union) are trying to set up their own kingdom where they can tell all Christians what to do, where, and how they can do it--and yet, they will allow Muslims to bow toward Mecca however many times a day they wish in our colleges, allow Atheists teachers to silence Christians however much they want, remove however many Christmas decorations they want, allow students to curse and defame Jesus name however much they want on and on, and on.
There are 500,000 ACLU members.
There are 300,000,000 Americans.
I think it's time we showed the ACLU their size.
Jeremiah
Canadian,
So you and the 17 year old foul mouth kid agree?
When did a Liberal atheist become such an expert on Christianity?!
AAR
Jonathan -
Amen brother.
Jeremiah -
You're a proto-fascist whack-job. Please quit salivating over visions of neo-Kristallnacht.
JPL -
"At least 3/4 of the mission of the ACLU is to INTIMIDATE the government, corporations and non-profits into suppressing religious expression of the people they have power over, and to intimidate religious Americans into voluntarily hiding their own faith."
Gee, and here I was thinking that the ACLU was dedicated to upholding the Bill of Rights. You know, like when they defended Oliver North for having testified under coercion, or like when they defended the rights of the whack-jobs from the Westboro Baptist Church to picket at the funerals of dead Iraq war vets with signs like "God Hates Fags". Thanks for enlightening me JPL. Now I'll foam at the mouth at the mere mention of the dreaded ACLU...just like you!
But surely, as a Christian, you find there are things just a wee bit more immoral in the world that justify obsessing over more than the ACLU and a trumped up "War on Christmas" - no? Or am I wrong?
Aarontime,
You don't have to worry, I don't hate the Jews, nor to I wish any ill will on them!
I am only concerned for my Freedom to celebrate the birth of my Savior, and for my fellow Christians to be able to do the same.
The Jews are my Brothers and Sisters too, you know. However, I will say this, to God, it doesn't matter who you are--Jew, Greek, Slave or Free; If you haven't accepted Christ into your heart and life then you can't be a part of the Family of God. That doesn't mean that God "doesn't" love you, Yes, He does still love you, but at the same time, He wants you to know the Joy and Peace than can only come through knowing His Son Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior.
__________________________________________________
You do need to fear a group of Ideologues who do in fact, hate you--One of them is the one you invited to Columbia University and the U.N., and other Extremist Jew haters
Hate of the Jews!
"There is no solution to the conflict except disappearance of Israel."
The Jews are a cancer that's liable to spread again at any moment."
Put a knife in your shirt, get close to an Israeli occupier and stab him."
Let the entire world hearm me. Our hostility to the Great Satan [America] is absolute."
"I encourage Palistinians to take suicide bombings worldwide. Don't be shy about it."
Hassan Nasrallah, Leader of Hezbollah.
To mention the mere fact that the Radical Jihadists hate you...How in the world could you support their coming to the United States? More than that, how could you tolerate their damaging propaganda and views in our schools, colleges and universities, and then tell us Christians that we can't spread our message of hope and generosity to help mankind become better civilized?????
Jeremiah
Agreed, Jonathan. Almost every religion, to some degree, produces fringe extremists who in no way represent the other worshipers. - CO
AAR & JPL,
We are part of the radical Christian right because we are defending the display of Christmas decorations according to CO.
That was the best Sunday morning laugh I have had for a long time.
And what was that comment from the DLC:
That agenda must stop the view we found prevailing among voters that Democrats are drifting unacceptably left. Forty six percent of all voters -- and 43 percent of independents -- see Democrats right now as too liberal.
Too liberal, I can't imagine why.
I actually feel a little sorry for the empty vessels with no soul who are CO and airhead. Their pessimistic, conspiracy-filled, self wprshiping lives must suck. Have a nice day.
He wants you to know the Joy and Peace than can only come through knowing His Son Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior.
Posted by: Jeremiah at November 11, 2007 01:10 AM
You know, Jeremiah, I just don't see any 'Joy and Peace' coming from you and the other religious right-wing radicals. What I do see though is a joyless rhetoric and an unhealthy adherence to violence toward your fellowmen.
So I have to ask, Jeremiah; can you truthfully say that you really know Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior?
CO,
Because Jeremiah aggressively defends Jesus Christ from his persecutors and deniers, and fails to acquiesce to their secular viewpoints, this raises a question of his faith in your little mind? Just consider Jeremiah to be detrimental to the downfall of his Savior. (you remember that one don't you, moron)
Tell me, would the Apostles have not defended Jesus? Would they have allowed mindless minions like yourself to continue to deny Him and persecute those who celebrate Him?
CO, why are you more interested in things you despise, ie: America and Religion, than you are about your own America-dependant country and your secular views? Is your life that pathetic?
neocon,
What most Christians don't understand is that when Democrats, especially their nutty Left-Wing base, talk about the radical Christian right, fanatical Christians, and Christian extremists, they are referring to any and ALL Christians!
Democrats (Liberals) identify Christian radicals, fanatics, and extremists as those who believe prayer should be permitted in school events... people who believe God should remain in the Pledge of Allegiance... people who believe it is okay to display the Ten Commandments in a public park... people who believe it is okay to display a cross on the graves of veterans in our national cemeteries... people who believe in traditional marriage... and people who dare to display a religious symbol in public during the Christmas holidays!!!
When Christians hear Democrats (Liberals) refer to Christians extremists -- they need only look in the mirror to see one of those fanatical right-wing Christian extremists!!!
How appropriate! I wrote the above before I read Canadian Observer's latest post.
AAR
CO,
Why do you suppose 46% of all voters believe the Democrats have become too liberal, or are moving too far left?
Jeremiah,
RE: Canadian's "...you and the other religious right-wing radicals ... joyless rhetoric and an unhealthy adherence to violence toward your fellowmen ... can you truthfully say that you really know Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior?"
Canadian's comment is nothing more than pure propaganda... using a well established Liberal trick and technique in an attempt to discredit Christians -- as I pointed out in a previous thread!
Readers can Google topics such as "propaganda techniques" and "propaganda methods" for a lesson and information on just what Canadian is doing!
Watch the techniques Canadian uses... a seasoned and experienced propagandist in action!!!
Learn their techniques... learn how to defend against them... and learn how to use them effectively yourselves. They will be very useful in the future!!!
AAR
Sunni, Shia Sheiks Present United Front Against al-Qaeda....Saturday, 10 November 2007
Members of more than 30 tribes attended the conference; both Sunnis and Shias were represented. Their differences were set aside for the day as they publicly united with one voice and vowed to fight al-Qaeda and work toward a lasting peace for their region.
And then there is this from the "reality based community:
November 3rd, 2007 3:10 am
Pelosi says Democrats plan 'repetition of the same' on Iraq
"We'll still persist in trying to force a new direction," Pelosi said.
Neocon -
"Because Jeremiah aggressively defends Jesus Christ from his persecutors and deniers..."
So now you all are righteous defenders of Jesus himself, who, along with his followers, are being "persecuted"? Oh Lord, here we go again (eyes rolling)
You know, I'd be really interested to know what Jesus would make of all of this. Were Jesus to return to the present day and see the world full of starving children, war, and untold misery, I wonder what he'd think upon seeing some of his supposed "followers" spending so much energy obsessing over being able to display little plastic made-in-China effigies of Christ?
Think about it.
Were Jesus to return to the present day and see the world full of starving children, war, and untold misery,...
I am sure he would be quite upset at apologists like yourself who refuse to actually do anything about. I am sure he would be disgusted at people like you who embrace Hugo Chavez, invite Ahmendijad to speak, rage against America for deposing Saddam, turn their head when confronted with the evil in Darfur, and speak out against public displays of His word.
Wouldn't you think?
Plainjane, More lies and misinformation!
AAR
Posted by: AAR [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 10, 2007 12:30 PM
Don’t normally waste my time, but your deception can not go unanswered. I know this one firsthand. Each year my father would place a crèche on the Courthouse Square and used Courthouse electricity. The only requirement was to have a plastic reindeer or Santa Clause strategically placed behind a tree.
In rendering their decisions in Lynch, Allegheny and Pittsburgh the majority (Supreme Court 1989) reasoned that the crèche in Lynch and the menorah in Pittsburgh were placed in an overwhelmingly secular context, while the crèche in Allegheny symbolized a religious Christmas since it was not “diluted” with other secular symbols (the “plastic reindeer rule”).
By reading these post, I am sure the wingers are all in favor of allowing any of a number of 22 major religions to practice their faiths in public school as well. Christian can gather in the cafeteria for bible study, Jewish kids can wear their Kippas and Islamic kids can wear full burkas and stop class as needed to pray towards Mecca. Most of you don’t think before you write.
(eyes rolling) - airhead
There's really no need to state this airhead. I assume that your eyes roll back into your head everytime you post.
Airhead,
Since you are an ardent follower of Jesus Christ and purport to know what he would do in these current times, please enlighten us.
Are you a member of the Christian right?
Aarontime,
More "what would Jesus do propaganda"!!!
He might ask why have we allowed Democrats (Liberals) to enslave and impoverish millions through welfare... taking away their incentive to work and excel... chaining them and their families permanently to government hand-outs and poverty!
He might ask why those people aren't taught how to fish and made to go fish from themselves rather than living off the backs and from the pockets of others!
He might ask why have we permitted and allowed Democrats (Liberals) to attack Christians, to remove the Ten Commandments from public view, to prohibit prayer and the Bible in our schools, to spread and teach their hedonistic liberal views and agenda even in our schools, and to remove Christian religious symbols from public display at Christmas -- the very celebration of His birth!!!
You and those Liberals like you tolerate and encourage consumerism and the purchase and display of all those plastic Chinese toys at Christmas, but you work and fight to prohibit the public display of His words, the Nativity, and Christian symbols!!!
He might say, why haven't Christians done more to stop Liberals and their hedonistic Liberalism!!!
AAR
AAR,
Kind of the wrong question for airhead to ask, no?
airhead reminds me of the saying; Those who stand for nothing will fall for anything.
Watch the techniques Canadian uses... a seasoned and experienced propagandist in action!!!
Posted by: AAR at November 11, 2007 09:55 AM
LOL, AAR, you give me way too much credit!!
We all know that the Bush administration wrote the book in that area and, by golly, the Decider himself could teach us all a thing or two about the subject.
Remember this gem:
"See in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda."
CO,
Bush is just being detrimental to the downfall of the truth.
That was my favorite gem.
Neocon said:
"Because Jeremiah aggressively defends Jesus Christ from his persecutors and deniers and fails to acquiesce to their secular viewpoints, this raises a question of his faith in your little mind?
No. We question his faith because he's an authoritative, Christian nutcase.
November 5, 2007:
Trying to claim waterboarding as "torture".
Which is the nuttiest thing I've ever heard of!!
With waterboarding I don't think they go prodding around on the detainees body. They simply strap them down, and pour water over their face, and it usually doesn't take long before they confess, after one belly full of water, with the inability to hold anymore--I don't think many would want to hold back.
The only "danger" with waterboarding would be the potential for future bedwetting.
It's clean, effective, and safe, it doesn't cause any external or internal bleeding.
Posted by: Jeremiah [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 5, 2007 03:21 PM
November 2, 2007:
Final note: As for the new movie my Philip Pullman coming out on December 7th--Golden Comapss--we already know where he is coming from in the Anti-Christian workings of his series of books. We know his message is harmful to young minds, because he has one thing in mind--to get children to hate Chrisitans and anything pertaining to Christianity--so that's an automatic NO for any child to view--The reason being, and you have to keep in mind--With the current generation growing up being polluted with all the filth on television and violence of video games--such as those which show the game players cutting peoples heads off with swords, shooting people with machine guns and other such harmful viewings, and then this film coming up on top of it, it will only further the destructive influence upon the minds of an already degenerate society.
We must do everything in our means to stop and halt all this Culture of Death. PERIOD!!!
Jeremiah
Posted by: Jeremiah [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 2, 2007 12:54 AM
October 26, 2007:
Peter Hitchen's says Pullman is "The most dangerous Author in Britain" and described him as "the person Atheists have been praying for, if Atheists pray".
Let me just make one thing clear--It's things like this will that take America closer and closer to a disaster in a fast way, with more problems than you could ever imagine--and it's not until Christians wake up and realize this for the Danger that it is, instead of sitting back and thinking it is "harmless."
This country is already in a bad enough shape as it is, and we need to fix what problems we have, and we sure don't need this distributed in America, because not only will children believe it, but many young Adults are gullible enough to believe it themselves.
Thanks for binging this to the table, Leo. I'm pretty sure my Pastor is aware of it already, but I'm going to send it to him anyway. I've already forwarded it to many on my list and will continue to do so.
Please--ALL--do what you can to keep this movie away from the young folks. We OWE it to the young people for their own good and safety.
Thanks!
Jeremiah
Posted by: Jeremiah [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 26, 2007 09:55 PM
So Jonathan,
Jeremiah is a "Christian nutcase" because he supports proven techniques of interrogation to obtain useful information from those who wish to destroy us and because he opposes a hate film which denigrates his faith?
Would you consider yourself a "Liberal nutcase"?
Jeremiah is a "Christian nutcase"
Posted by: neocon at November 11, 2007 12:09 PM
Just wonder how many Christians would want Jeremiah as their spokesman. How many faithful Christians would want Jeremiah's views on Christianity to be representative of their own?
We all know the so-called Christians who post here have no problem supporting his rants but how many normal Christians would be willing to embrace Jeremiah's take on their faith?
Neocon -
"Proven techniques of interrogation"? LOL. The only thing "proven" about them is that they regularly yield false information... and seem to give you a hard-on.
AAR,
Yes, the Canadian is using the #1 propaganda technique in the Liberal trick bag, and that's--Guilt by association, and then completly fabricating things that he has no clue about--Or, in other words, the name of the game for Liberals--outright lying!!
Jeremiah
Just wonder how many Christians would want Jeremiah as their spokesman. How many faithful Christians would want Jeremiah's views on Christianity to be representative of their own?
We all know the so-called Christians who post here have no problem supporting his rants but how many normal Christians would be willing to embrace Jeremiah's take on their faith?
Posted by: Canadian Observer at November 11, 2007 12:26 PM
Candadian Observer,
First and foremost, it's a complete misconception to assume that I speak for all Christians, I acknowledge that I don't speak for everyone, OK?
Secondly, all people who are Christians celebrate the birth of our Savior Jesus Christ on Christmas day--The Calender date, December 25 which is just about a month away.
Third, if you are a Christian then you partake in the Customs of the Christian celebrations, and hold these things dear to you.
Fourth, no Christian that I know, would want and should not want their Traditions and Customary celebration practices taken away from them.
Any Christian should recognize the ACLU as a threat to their Customs and Traditons.
Fifth, you see, this is the primary concern of we Christians, we just want to be able to celebrate in good faith, in Reverence to God.
Sixth and last, to assume that the Right has some "monopoly" on Christianity is pure non-sense.
Like I said, Christians are defined by left and right, poor or rich, slave or free.
If you've accepted Christ as your personal Savior, then you're a part of the Family of God.
All are welcome to partake freely in God's Gift to mankind, the Gift of Salvation through His One and Only Son Jesus Christ, who through His precious blood, bore all your sins on the Cross at Calvary, so if you know Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior? You are debt free. The only thing is, He wants you strive to help yourself by doing what little He asks of you, by Serving Him, and trusting in Him to give you the might to what is Right!!
Jeremiah
are defined--I meant 'aren't' defined by left and right.
Sorry 'bout the typo there.
:)
Jeremiah
Bbbwwwaaaaaaahaaaaaahaaaaaa!!!!
airhead,
waterboarding Khalid gained us very useful information as acknoeldged by everyone involved.
That defines as proven.
You're the only who gives me a hard on, and you know you like it.
My goodness Neocon, your full of venom and spittle.
I shall pray for you.
May peace be with you.
AgentSmear,
Pray to whom or what?
AAR
Canadian,
RE: your: "Jeremiah is a 'Christian nutcase' ... Posted by: neocon at November 11, 2007 12:09 PM"
What neocon really said was: "Jeremiah is a 'Christian nutcase' because he supports proven techniques of interrogation to obtain useful information from those who wish to destroy us and because he opposes a hate film which denigrates his faith?"
Truncating neocon's question, taking it totally out of context, turning it into a complete lie, and then misleading readers by referencing it as a quote!
Is that the best you can do? Or, are you having problems understanding American English? Perhaps it was a "computer malfunction"!
Here I was telling others to watch the way you work the propaganda, and then you do something like this!
"We all know..." Who is that "we"? You and the mouse in your pocket? Did I miss the poll? (Another propaganda technique!)
AAR
Jonathan (teenage liberal),
At least Jeremiah stands up for and defends Jesus, Christians, and Christianity -- unlike you who bashes and makes fun of them!
AAR
I'm praying to God, you know, he looks like Charles Heston as Moses. A white guy. Beard. Benevolent. He likes the U.S.A. bestest.
I was tickled pink (yes, pink) when I saw Keith Olbermann doing the Sunday Night Football intro show with Bob Costas.
I would prefer that Keith drop a few political zingers, you know, kind of like the way Al Michaels did during the Presidential campaign and his "flip flopping" remark directed at Kerry.
Payback time. Either way, its great to him gaining more and more popularity.
neocon,
RE: "Kind of the wrong question for airhead to ask, no?"
You'd certainly think so, but all these Liberal atheists are constantly asking questions like: "What would Jesus do?", "What would God say?", and "What does the Bible say?" If I didn't know otherwise, I'd say they were searching for answers they don't have!
You're right about Democrats (Liberals) "standing for nothing and falling for anything"! That's what happens when people are educated to the point of incompetence by those Liberal professors. The more education they receive, the dumber the get! I thought they were all moving to Canada when Bush won the second time, but they even lied about that.
AAR
"Gee, and here I was thinking that the ACLU was dedicated to upholding the Bill of Rights."
I concede that after dedicating 98% of its time to destroying religion and the military, the ACLU does in fact dedicate the remaining 2% of its time to neutrally upholding the Bill of Rights. As such, the ACLU does much more harm than good, and we'd be far better off without them, and with a more politically neutral organization in their place.
"You know, like when they defended Oliver North for having testified under coercion….”
OK, the ACLU did in fact stand up for the principle that when the government grants “use immunity” to a witness, it's not allowed to screw the witness by later using that testimony to prosecute him. But again, this is only about 2% of the ACLU's activities, and your example is from 17 years ago. A pretty pathetic record by any objective standard.
"...or like when they defended the rights of the whack-jobs from the Westboro Baptist Church to picket at the funerals of dead Iraq war vets with signs like 'God Hates Fags'."
True, issues like this present the ACLU with the extremely difficult question of, "who do we hate more, religious people or the military?" This time, the ACLU picked the military.
“Thanks for enlightening me JPL. Now I'll foam at the mouth at the mere mention of the dreaded ACLU...just like you!”
You should be more skeptical of ACLU phonies who claim they’re just out to help you.
"But surely, as a Christian, you find there are things just a wee bit more immoral in the world that justify obsessing over more than the ACLU and a trumped up 'War on Christmas' - no? Or am I wrong?"
On an "immorality scale" of 1 to 10, the campaign to "disappear" Christmas is at least a 5. Perhaps not the most evil thing in the universe, but still plenty to get worked up about. I think you "misunderestimate" the evil.
AgentSmear,
Didn't anyone ever tell you not to take the name of God in vain? Or not to worship false idols and graven images?
AAR
JPL -
"I concede that after dedicating 98% of its time to destroying religion and the military, the ACLU does in fact dedicate the remaining 2% of its time to neutrally upholding the Bill of Rights."
Please. The ACLU is not dedicated to "destroying religion". They are dedicated to upholding the Bill of Rights, which include a wide range of issues that don't even have anything to do with religion. No where near "98%" of the ACLU's cases have any relation to religion or the military. Even the most casual research would show that to be a ridiculous exaggeration.
When the ACLU is working on cases involving religion, it does so as an extension of its mission to defend the First Amendment. In some cases, this means upholding the "establishment clause", which has been interpreted with tons of judicial precedent, to mean that public institutions shall not promote or accommodate any particular religion. Thus, a public school official may not lead children in prayer, be they Christian, Muslim, or Jewish prayers. And a public courthouse may not display the Ten Commandments.
But more often than not, the ACLU's work in support of First Amendment rights also means upholding the "Free Exercise Clause", which states that the government cannot prohibit anyone from freely exercising their religious beliefs. Thus, under this part of the 1st Amendment, children at a public school may not be prevented from praying on their free time (although the teacher, who is a public employee serving the general public, may not lead or otherwise support any particular religious activities). Got it?
Here's a perfect example. In July of this year (you wanted recent examples), the ACLU stepped in to defend a Christian prisoner who was prohibited from preaching in prison. You see, even though the prison is government property, all citizens have the right to freely practice and express their religious beliefs:
ACLU Announces Settlement in Case of Christian Barred from Preaching in Rhode Island Prison (7/30/2007)
PROVIDENCE, RI - The American Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island today announced the favorable settlement of its lawsuit on behalf of a Christian prisoner who has been barred since 2003 from preaching during Christian religious services at the state prison.
Wesley Spratt, an inmate at the Adult Correctional Institution (ACI), believes God called on him to preach Christianity to other prisoners at the ACI. Spratt preached during Christian services for seven years before he was unilaterally stopped from doing so based on vague and generalized "security" concerns. A federal district judge initially upheld the ban, but in April the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit reversed that ruling and ordered a trial on the merits of the case. Today's settlement ends the case.
"The ACLU is very pleased with the settlement reached in this case, which allows Mr. Spratt to resume his preaching at the ACI," said ACLU cooperating attorney Lynette Labinger. "I commend the Department of Corrections for its work in adopting a policy designed to fulfill the letter and spirit of both the First Circuit's ruling and Congress' goal of respecting the exercise of religious freedom by incarcerated individuals."
Now, since prisons are government property, prison officials may not put up religious symbols or in other ways support any particular religion. However, they also may not prohibit prisoners from freely practicing their religion (so long as it doesn't interfere with security, of course).
There are many many such cases where the ACLU steps up to defend the freedom of religious expression. What you don't seem to understand is that this freedom is for individuals to choose, and does not extend to public institutions.
JPL, you seem to have a lot of hate-driven misconceptions about what the ACLU does. You really should learn more about the ACLU from other sources besides howling wing-nut outlets.
Having read many of the comments here I would just like to throw my support to Aarontime. Your willingness to fight the nonsense spread by people like Jeremiah and AAR is commendable; nonsense such as this:
"Whenever they decide to help themselves, they will rise up, and then God will help them and give them the strength to eliminate the Liberal cancer that plagues this land."
Jeremiah, I hope to God you don't own guns.
Don't fret AAR, God and I are friends. I don't have to live in fear.
Goodness, you and neocon are afraid of everything, aren't you?
"La vita è come un albero di natale, c'è sempre qualcuno che rompe le palle."
I hope to God you don't own guns.
Plenty, I couldn't live without them!
I'm a peace-lovin' Christian..and who also carries a gun. Don't worry, just in Buck Season...not every day!! But you have to admit, they are good protection all the way around.
Jeremiah
"Thus, under this part of the 1st Amendment, children at a public school may not be prevented from praying on their free time (although the teacher, who is a public employee serving the general public, may not lead or otherwise support any particular religious activities). Got it?"
Goodness, aarontime, I neither need nor want a con law lecture from you. I've been practicing law for 25 years, deal with First Amendment issues all the time, and have even taught it as part of an Entertainment Law course I taught at law school. Please spare me the “First Amendment for Dummies,” thank you.
"JPL, you...really should learn more about the ACLU from other sources besides howling wing-nut outlets."
Sorry to disappoint you, aarontime, but my source, like Ambassador Kissoff’s from "Dr. Strangelove," was the New York Times.
Look, you don’t need to be a “howling wing-nut” to realize that the ACLU is a leftist organization. Everyone knows that they champion liberal causes far more often than they do neutral libertarian ones. While I admit my 98% / 2% ratio is inflated, it's much less inflated than you suggest. Just go to the ACLU website. Its official list of "reasons to join the ACLU" are:
"REASONS TO JOIN THE ACLU
"Want to Have an Immediate Impact on Freedom in America? Join the ACLU Today.
"The American Civil Liberties Union has been defending liberty in America for more than 85 years. From the internment of some 110,000 Japanese-Americans during World War II to the abusive domestic spying, blackmail and harassment by the FBI during the McCarthy era, the civil rights movement and the Vietnam War, the ACLU has successfully defended the basic rights and freedoms of everyone across America when they were at their most vulnerable.
"But we’ve never been needed more than today. For the past four years, some of the most powerful politicians in America have made it their mission to accumulate unchecked government power, relentlessly undermining civil liberties. In unprecedented ways, they are invading our privacy, undermining our Constitution and squelching dissent. All too frequently, they are shamelessly using the 'war on terror' as cover for their assault.
"Time and again, the ACLU and its members have shown that we can be successful in defending freedom even in the current inhospitable climate. We have built bipartisan congressional support for eliminating certain unwarranted, dangerous provisions of the Patriot Act, and we have inspired a resounding chorus of diverse voices, individuals and community groups all across the country, calling for measures to reverse the government’s unjustified overreaching and to restore our precious freedoms. We have challenged the Patriot Act in court and won. We have squelched numerous government programs designed to spy on Americans. We have won legal victories curtailing executive power. We have defeated the first-ever federal abortion ban in court....
"Today, the ACLU is standing up for freedom in a clear, unequivocal and effective fashion. We are working to counteract the Bush Administration’s aggressive efforts to extend the Patriot Act by making permanent some of its most unwarranted, invasive provisions, which are due to expire in 2005.
"From abortion rights, to same-sex marriage, to government-funded religion, the ACLU is on the ground in all 50 states fighting those who would use the power of the government to dictate its citizens’ moral choices....
"There are always those in powerful positions who wrongly insist that we must trade away our fundamental freedoms to secure our safety. No organization can challenge that idea more effectively than the ACLU. And no individual can take your place in supporting our work. Join us today."
Hmmm, according to its own website, it seems like the ALCU’s top priorities are: (1) to weaken the Executive’s ability to fulfill its constitutional obligation to protect national security; (2) to “disappear” religion from government, as opposed to simply preventing government from “establishing” a religion; (3) to promote the non-existent constitutional right to abortion; and (4) to promote the non-existent constitutional right to same-sex marriage.
Funny, aarontime, NOWHERE does the ACLU list "protecting the free exercise of religion," or "protecting college students' right to be interviewed on-campus by the U.S. military," or "protecting college students' right to participate in on-campus ROTC" as one of the "reasons to join the ACLU." Do you think that maybe they're not that interested in the rights of traditionally-religious and pro-security Americans?
JPL writes
"Goodness, aarontime, I neither need nor want a con law lecture from you. I've been practicing law for 25 years, deal with First Amendment issues all the time, and have even taught it as part of an Entertainment Law course I taught at law school. Please spare me the “First Amendment for Dummies,” thank you."
So besides using Aarontime's point to show off your credentials, did you have any other point in making this statement? You being a lawyer, I would have expected you to atleast argue Aarontime's explanation of the Establishment Clause, instead you accept it carte blanche and say nothing more. Saying your lawyer means you have to act like one. How does the Constitution allow a teacher to lead a prayer in school? Hopefully your law students are getting more than we got, a dose of your arrogance.
It's absolutely fascinating to me that the loyal "patriots" posting here can actually print out the mission of the ACLU, read it, and then denigrate it.
We're talking about the bill of rights here. Not some goddamn piece of paper. (That's the constitution)
JPL's last two paragraphs sum up the insanity of the right.
Sigh.
"It's absolutely fascinating to me that the loyal 'patriots' posting here can actually print out the mission of the ACLU, read it, and then denigrate it."
That's because you're a typical liberal, who can't imagine any intelligent person having a different thought from them. Well guess what, there are many intelligent people who interpret the Constitution very differently from you and the ACLU. They are law professors, lawyers, scholars, judges, Supreme Court Justices, and ordinary voters.
Want to know what's REALLY fascinating? I'll tell you what. It's that I paraphrased the First Amendment in the last paragraph of my post (the part about protecting the "free exercise of religion"), and YOU denigrated it as "insanity."
"We're talking about the bill of rights here."
No, we're talking about the ACLU's interpretation of the Bill of Rights. And nowhere in the Bill of Rights does it say the ACLU has a monopoly on the correct interpretation of the Constitution. If you think they do, or that the ACLU is above criticism, then you're a dangerous fool.
"JPL's last two paragraphs sum up the insanity of the right. Sigh."
AgentFear's inability to mount a logical argument sums up the tragedy of the Left -- they haven't so much lost their minds, as abandoned them.
JPL,
For a lawyer you aren't doing a grwat job at research. Are you sure you are a lawyer?
The following is a brief overview of the ACLU's efforts to further the freedom of religion. It took me five minutes to find.
Rhode Island ACLU (2006) filed an appeal in federal court on behalf of an inmate who was barred from preaching during Christian religious services, something he had done for the past seven years under the supervision and support of prison clergy. The prisoner, Wesley Spratt, believes his preaching is a calling from God. Prison officials cited vague and unsubstantiated security reasons for imposing the preaching ban on Mr. Spratt. The ACLU argued that the ban violates Mr. Spratt's religious freedoms guaranteed to prisoners under federal law. www.riaclu.org/20060111.html
The ACLU of Pennsylvania (2005) (in conjunction with Americans United) in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District won a Federal court case on behalf of parents of public school children against the school district that had attempted to impose religious beliefs on those who did not share them. (For the opinion see: www.aclu.org/religion/schools/23137lgl20051220.html) The parents objected that the religious beliefs, under the guise "intelligent design" as an alternative to the theory of evolution, violated their religious liberty by promoting particular religious beliefs to their children under the guise of science education. www.aclu.org/religion/intelligentdesign/index.html
The ACLU of Nevada (2005) defended the free exercise rights and free speech rights of evangelical Christians to preach on the sidewalks of the Strip in Las Vegas. www.kvbc.com/Global/story.asp?S=3379553&nav=15MVaB2T
The ACLU of New Mexico (2005) joined forces with the American Family Association to succeed in freeing a preacher, Shawn Miller, from the Roosevelt County jail, where he was held for 109 days for street preaching. The ACLU became involved at the request of Miller's wife, Theresa. www.stcynic.com/blog/ archives/2005/08/aclu_defends_another_street_pr.php; www.aclu.org/religion/gen/19918prs20050804.html
The ACLU of New Jersey (2005) filed a a motion to submit a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of Olivia Turton, a second-grade student who was forbidden from singing "Awesome God" in a voluntary, after-school talent show. The only restriction on the student's selection for the talent show was that it be "G-rated." The case, filed in federal court, is Turton, et al. v. Frenchtown Elementary School, et al. www.aclu.org/religion/schools/20174prs20050920.html
The ACLU of Michigan (2005) filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Joseph Hanas, a Catholic, who was criminally punished for not completing a drug rehabilitation program run by the Pentecostal group. Part of the program required reading the Bible for seven hours a day, proclaiming one's salvation at the alter, and being tested on Pentecostal principles. Staff confiscated Mr. Hanas's rosary and told him Catholicism was witchcraft. www.aclu.org/religion/govtfunding/22354prs20051206.html
The ACLU of Louisiana (2005) filed suit against the Department of Corrections on behalf of a Mormon inmate, Norman Sanders, who was denied the right to practice his religion by being denied access to religious texts, including The Book of Mormon, and Mormon religious services. "Mormons should receive the same accommodation of their beliefs as do individuals of other faiths," said Joe Cook, Executive Director, ACLU of Louisiana. "Fair and equal treatment means they deserve the right to a place to meet, have a minister and discuss their beliefs like other groups." www.laaclu.org/SandersvCain; www.laaclu.org/News/2005/Aug26SandersvCain.htm
The ACLU of Pennsylvania (2005) won a battle against Turtle Creek Borough that repeatedly denied an occupancy permit to a predominantly African-American church, Ekklesia, which had purchased the church building from a predominantly white parish. The case is Ekklesia Church v. Borough of Turtle Creek. The case was settled. www.aclupa.org/downloads/SpringDocket.pdf
You see JPL, I actually go out and look instances where the ACLU protected religious freedom instead of just referring to their mission statement and calling it a day. Hopefully your clients get better fact checking than we do.
Best,
What?
JPL -
"Look, you don’t need to be a “howling wing-nut” to realize that the ACLU is a leftist organization. Everyone knows that they champion liberal causes far more often than they do neutral libertarian ones..."
"That's because you're a typical liberal, who can't imagine any intelligent person having a different thought from them. Well guess what, there are many intelligent people who interpret the Constitution very differently from you and the ACLU..."
"...And nowhere in the Bill of Rights does it say the ACLU has a monopoly on the correct interpretation of the Constitution."
Wow, JPL. So, the ACLU is liberal and other people may interpret the constitution differently. Thanks for stating the obvious.
Look, nobody ever said the ACLU wasn't liberal, or that it wasn't proper for people to disagree with them. I often disagree with them, as I'm sure many lawyers who are actually members of the ACLU sometimes do as well.
But pointing out that the ACLU is a liberal organization not everyone agrees with on every issue (or any issue) is a far cry from your previous rabid statements that the ACLU is "dedicated to destroying religion an
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.blogsforbush.com/nav-commenters.gif)