The Boy Scouts of America — a respected all-American, private organization — continues to be attacked by the ACLU. The latest example is the Pentagon's cave-in to settle a 1999 lawsuit by not allowing military bases to sponsor Boy Scout troops.
The name — American Civil Liberties Union — is at best a misnomer. More accurately, ACLU means Assault Christian Liberties Unmercifully.
The suit against the Defense Department by the ACLU is based on the Boy Scout oath, which states: "On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country, and to obey the Scout Law, to help other people at all times, to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight." ACLU attorney Adam Schwartz said, "If our Constitution's promise of religious liberty is to be a reality, the government should not be administering religious oaths or discriminating based on religious beliefs." Mr. Schwartz is wrong. The Constitution's First Amendment states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or restricting the free exercise thereof." The original intent of the First Amendment was to prevent Congress from establishing a federal religion and to prevent it from restricting the freedom of practicing one's religion. The Department of Defense is not establishing a religion by sponsoring Boy Scout troops, but is allowing the free exercise thereof. If a boy believes in the Boy Scout oath, then he has the freedom to join the Scouts. If he does not believe in the oath then he has the freedom not to join this private organization.
Mr. Schwartz is wrong because he bases his comment on an unconstitutional U.S. Supreme Court opinion — one, in fact, which the ACLU instigated. In 1947 the ACLU was responsible for Everson v. Board of Education coming before the high court. One of its lawyers, Leo Pheffer, wrote the draft of the opinion which resulted in the so-called "separation of church and state." This was the first time in history that the Supreme Court did not use precedent in its opinion. It ignored precedent. In at least two previous rulings America was declared to be a Christian nation, a Christian people. These cases were the Church of the Holy Trinity v. U.S. in 1892 and the U.S. v. Macintosh in 1931.
Although the ACLU was successful in turning the First Amendment upside down, that does not make it right. The Supreme Court's pro-slavery Dred Scott decision was reversed because it was unconstitutional. The same needs to be done with the Everson v. Board of Education ruling. That would be a good start in just saying no to the ACLU.
Dennis Prager's article, "A Jew Defends the Cross" published recently on FrontPageMagazine.com, eloquently states why he led a fight against the ACLU to keep the cross on the Los Angeles County seal.
First, he said he fears those who rewrite history. Second, he said he fears intolerance. "I have found over and over that most Christians who preach faith are more tolerant than most leftists who preach tolerance." Third, and most important, he states: "I fear the removal of the Judeo-Christian foundation of our society. This is the real battle of our time, indeed the civil war of our time." "The left," Mr. Prager continues, "wants America to become secular like Western Europe, not remain the Judeo-Christian country that it has always been. But unlike the left, I do not admire France, Belgium and Sweden. And that is what the battle over the seal of America's most populous county (and the Boy Scout oath) is all about. It is not about separation of church and state. It is about separation of a county (and a country) from its history. And it is about separation of America from its moral foundation." That is what Mr. Prager believes is at stake in the ACLU's attempt to eradicate God from our nation. The ACLU works consistently, and all too often successfully, to rewrite America's history. As Karl Marx said, "If I can steal their history I can steal their country." The ACLU is attempting to steal our Judeo-Christian history so it can steal our country. Citizen pressure needs to be applied to force Congress to use every weapon at its disposal — including its Article III power to define jurisdiction of federal courts, a constitutional amendment, regulations to enforce existing laws, and the withholding of taxpayers' money from counties or states that try undermining our Judeo-Christian heritage.
Phil Kent is an Atlanta-based author and media consultant.
Oh you're all for the ACLU when they're defending Rush Limbaugh or your buddies in NAMBLA, but let them go after the sacrosanct boy scouts, home of Charles Whitman and well..oh it's gloves on time now. f**k fighting insurgents in Iraq, the real fight is right here at home against the ACLU and secular humanists who want to take the christ out of christmas. You're such an internet tough guy, you make me want to pee blood sometimes.
Jailed Terror Suspect Helped ACLU Draft Schools' Anti-Christian Rules
Wes Vernon, NewsMax.com
Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2004
WASHINGTON – Abdurahman Alamoudi, an alleged senior terrorist operative, is behind bars on an 18-count indictment. But he can take satisfaction in the fact that a court in California has just given the green light to schools following ACLU’s religion-in-the-classroom guidelines, which he helped to formulate.
A federal judge judge has now upheld the constitutionality of an intensive three-week course in California government schools that requires children to choose a Muslim name, wear Islamic garb, memorize verses from the Koraan, pray to Allah, play “jihad games, and simulate worship activities related to the Five Pillars of Islam.”
The next step: likely an appeal to the notoriously left-wing 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which deems the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional.
But hasn't American Civil Liberties Union lectured us that religious instruction in school violates what it describes as “separation of church and state” (a phrase that appears nowhere in the U.S. Constitution)? Read on. That injunction seems to depend on which religion is involved.
The guidelines in ACLU's document is in effect a warning (some would say an implied threat) to schools as to how they can avoid legal challenges from the same ACLU on church/state issues in the classroom.
Alamoudi, founder and former executive director of American Muslim Council, was jailed last fall on charges that include taking money believed to come from a charity Libya has used to support terror, taking $340,000 in cash with the intent to bring it to Syria from London. It is also believed some of the money was to be taken to Saudi Arabia (or Saudi accounts) and from there to organizations of influence the United States. The charges include money-laundering, misuse of a passport and failure to report bank accounts.
J. Michael Waller, Annenberg Professor of International Communications at the Institute of World Politics, believes Alamoudi’s arrest “may have ripped the lid off an international support network in Washington that operated to finance terrorists inside the United States and abroad,” according to Insight magazine.
Clintonoid Terrorist Connection
Alamoudi’s name will ring a bell with some NewsMax readers. In 2000, we identified him as a “friend and sometime adviser on Islamic affairs to Hillary Rodham Clinton,” and reported that he had stood before a crowd in Lafayette Park across the street from the White House “and passionately declared his support for the terrorist organizations Hamas and Hezbolah.”
NewsMax also quoted Alamoudi, a Clinton administration appointee, as a “goodwill ambassador” to Muslim countries. We cited his comment to a pro-Palestinian organization in Chicago in 1997, years before 9/11: “I think if we are outside this country, we can say oh, Allah, destroy America, but once we are here, our mission in this country is to change it. There is no way for Muslims to be violent in America, no way. We have other means to do it [destroy America].”
Some outraged parents, particularly in California, believe one of the “other means” Alamoudi might have had in mind was indoctrinating American children in school, an issue back on the front burner with this week’s decision by U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton.
Alamoudi, a naturalized American, proclaims he is innocent of any terrorist links or activities. In a letter to the Washington Post for Dec. 12, 2003, he blames an inaccurate translation of an Arabic interview he gave in 1999 for the implication that he supports terrorism. He said the charge ignored a preceding sentence “in which I clearly and unequivocally denounced terrorist violence.” He added he had been “criticized by many of my associates for believing that violence is never justified by any religion.”
ACLU has confirmed to NewsMax that Alamoudi in fact represented American Muslim Council among the organizations that helped craft the ACLU document “Religion In The Public Schools: A Joint Statement of Current Law.”
Many government schools have given great weight to the document as a warning. Anyone who follows the news knows ACLU aggressively looks for opportunities to run to court and sue anyone or any institution that shows the slightest trace of promoting Christianity in the public square.
As a result, many of them have bended over so far backward to show “tolerance” and avoid costly nuisance lawsuits that they have prompted outrage from parents who believe school authorities have crossed the line from tolerance to indoctrination in Islam. NewsMax will have more on that in upcoming articles.
The parents’ outrage led to the lawsuit by Christian students, now dismissed by Judge Hamilton. The jurist did not find the prayer and worship to be “devotional activities.” We will address the double standard inherent in the judge’s ruling in our next installment in this series.
Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy and a severe critic of radical Islam’s attempted influence in both major political parties in the United States, reiterated to NewsMax.com that among Muslims “the vast majority do not subscribe to ‘Islamist’ radical, intolerant, often violent jihadist tendencies" of those who want to kill Americans.
[quote][i]Originally posted by gobbles[/i]@Dec 23 2004, 09:12 AM
[b] Oh you're all for the ACLU when they're defending Rush Limbaugh or your buddies in NAMBLA, but let them go after the sacrosanct boy scouts, home of Charles Whitman and well..oh it's gloves on time now. f**k fighting insurgents in Iraq, the real fight is right here at home against the ACLU and secular humanists who want to take the christ out of christmas. You're such an internet tough guy, you make me want to pee blood sometimes.
That's about as exciting as saying lets f**k. [/b][/quote]
"You wanna do a back stab double cross on me, Missy?! I only hired you cause I felt sorry for you cause you could only type 15 words a minute cause you said you had muscular dystrophy."