Posted on 12/04/2005 6:22:13 AM PST by Khashayar
The ACLU vs America
You won't believe your eyes.
The idea that the ACLU somehow protects civil liberties is flat out wrong.
Not once has the ACLU taken up a single issue in favor of the second amendment.
Instead of standing up for Freedom of Religion, the ACLU has done everything possible; including attempts to bankrupt cities/towns, to prevent that very freedom from being expressed.
NAMBLA - no more needs to be said.
It was the ACLU that pitched a fit when after September 11, the suggestion was made to profile people who matched the description of the 18 highjackers of that day. Instead, we have Grandma being stripped searched at airports.
I think most Americans have never heard of the American Communist Liars Union. Of those who are paying attention, i'd say most hate them but you'd be amazed from my conservations how few people know what the ACLU is. Not surprising I guess in a country where half the people vote.
For one thing, they constantly harass everything Christian, under the false premise of "separation of church and state," while forcing, through the courts, things like islam and immorality upon us every time they can.
They cannot be said to protect the civil liberties of American society.
The ACLU are the Mullahs of America.
ohhhhhh
thnx
The ACLU is very selective in the 'liberties' it chooses to defend. The ACLU has fought to remove all traces of Christianity from not only monuments but even from the names and symbols of places established long ago.
The ACLU rushes to defend perversion and dissent, but could care less when our real liberties are under attack. I would ask you to find one example of the ACLU defending conservatives against attacks by socialists and atheists. Also I have never seen the ACLU take action against holding Islamic prayers and instruction in public schools, even in the same public schools they have evicted Christianity and Judaism from.
Perhaps they once had a noble purpose, but not any more.
Next you'll be wondering why the NAACP only advances the cause of some colored people?
Or why "People for the American Way", aren't for any such thing.
Or why "Americans Coming Together" is such a divisive organization?
Or how "Pro-Abortion" morphed into "Pro-Choice"?
Or how ...
One picture is worth a thousand words
No offense intended, but this is a question I expect to see on the demoncraticunderground.
Under the aegis of the ACLU's Foundation---worth some $135 million---any number of financial travesties can be hidden.
The IRS should determine whether the ACLU is properly accounting for all its tax-funded activities, whether it is inflating legal costs, and whether it is using tax dollars for the purposes stated. We need to know whether the ACLU is engaged in Enron-style accounting and spending practices. How did the ACLU accumulate so much money? Because our taxes are used to subsidize these nefarious organization.
In 1976, Congress passed the Civil Rights Attorneys Fee Awards Act, which was designed to encourage private lawyers to take on suits to protect civil and constitutional rights. The law provides that judges can order federal and state governments to pay legal fees to private lawyers who sued the government and won.
The result has been a flood of civil rights cases in federal court. From The New American Feb. 2, 1987 FReepers can silence the ACLU with a bit of activism. We need to insist our Congressmen repeal this abusive law that allows the ACLU to get rich on harassing Christian America. Congress must repeal laws enabling the ACLU's Christian-hating activities. Cut off the ACLU's funds and watch them disappear.
Here's what we can do.
REFERENCE SOURCE FOR ARGUING REPEAL TO CONGRESS Apparently, when Congress contemplated the fee-shifting bill three decades ago, it never conceived that 42 U.S.C. §1988 would be used to secure fees in esoteric battles over the meaning of the establishment clause of the First Amendment.
The statute gives a court "discretion" to award attorneys' fees to the prevailing party in civil rights cases. Study of the legislative history of the statute reveals that Congress intended this statute to apply to civil rights abuses, including certain race and sex discrimination cases, but not to arguments about whether Judge Roy Moore is allowed to display the Ten Commandments in the Alabama courthouse. During the deliberations on the bill, the Senate penned that "in many cases arising under our civil rights laws, the citizen who must sue to enforce the law has little or no money with which to hire a lawyer."[6]
In the recent First Amendment lawsuits filed by the ACLU, the tables are turned. Small school districts and municipalities can either defend lawsuits and risk paying the ACLU's attorneys' fees if they lose, or they can voluntarily submit to the ACLU' view of the Constitution.
Even if lawsuits over the establishment clause somehow fall within 42 U.S.C. §1988, the statute empowers courts with nothing more than "discretion" to award fees.
In these cases, one would expect courts to withhold awarding fees. Since this is not happening, Congress must take immediate action to clarify 42 U.S.C. §1988 to explicitly exclude lawsuits related to the acknowledgement of God.
LMAO!
I thought I can get a better answer among conservatives
ugly! scary!
lol
The right to bear arms is the SECOND of ten amendments to our Constitution, commonly known as the Bill of Rights. Rather than support this critical right, they fight it. They're communists, Marxists, socialists, etc., and hate the US and the Christian foundation that it was built upon.
ditto. dontcha READ? everything they come near turns to stink.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.