Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ACLU Doesn’t Want English Signs
NewsMax.com ^ | Friday, July 14, 2006 1:58 p.m. EDT | By the NewsMax.com Staff

Posted on 07/14/2006 2:13:22 PM PDT by E-Mat

The American Civil Liberties Union has asked officials in a Detroit suburb to reject a proposal that would require businesses with foreign language signs to add English translations.

"We write to strongly urge you to abandon the measure as unconstitutional, anti-immigrant and unnecessary," the ACLU wrote to the city Thursday in a letter that was also signed by officials with the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee of Michigan and Latin Americans for Social and Economic Development Inc.

In May, Sterling Heights, Mich., Councilwoman Barbara Ziarko asked the city's attorney to prepare an ordinance requiring businesses with foreign language signs to have identifiers such as "bakery" included, the Detroit News reports.

Fire Chief John Childs supported the move, arguing that people passing by the site of a fire or other emergency could inform dispatchers about the location more easily if they could read the signs.

He maintained that the issue has nothing to do with race.

"This is about response time," he said. The city issued a statement Thursday defending the proposed ordinance.

"Any assertion that the city's public safety effort is intended as a restriction on the expression of cultural diversity is categorically denied," the statement said.

According to the News, Michael J. Steinberg of the ACLU said the proposal is unconstitutional "because it singles out businesses with signs.”


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Michigan
KEYWORDS: aclu; english; immigration
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-45 next last
I almost want to side with the ACLU on this. Businesses that don't want English signs simply don't get my business.
1 posted on 07/14/2006 2:13:24 PM PDT by E-Mat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: E-Mat

I wonder what the ACLU would say to a proposal to require that all businesses with English signs add Spanish translations...


2 posted on 07/14/2006 2:15:24 PM PDT by xjcsa (The internet is not a truck. It's a series of tubes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E-Mat

At the insistence of the ACLU and their allies, we have voter information pamphlets, Social Security and welfare guides, and DMV tests printed in every conceivable language on Earth but they claim it's unconstitutional to make these people translate their lousy signs into English.

Liberals are the enemies of reason, justice, common sense and the survival of American civilization. They belong on another planet.


3 posted on 07/14/2006 2:17:24 PM PDT by Argus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E-Mat

And they simply won't get help from the English speaking fire dept. and ambulance services who cannot understand their 911 calls and cannot read their signs to determine if they are at the correct location.

THey won't get my business either.


4 posted on 07/14/2006 2:20:05 PM PDT by Muzzle_em (taglines are for sissies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E-Mat

I agree with that you should be allowed to post the sign you want in the language you want.

The business owner knows his clientele. If english-only patrons don't feel welcome, they won't come, and his business suffers. The loss is his. But it should remain his choice.

I similarly wouldn't agree with obliging anyone to post signs in spanish. If there is a significant spanish-only population in your area, its probably in your interest to make your business spanish-friendly, but it should always be the business-owner's call.


5 posted on 07/14/2006 2:20:21 PM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E-Mat

Private businesses should not have any interference in what language they use for their signs or their conduct of business. It is PRIVATE business.


6 posted on 07/14/2006 2:22:28 PM PDT by arthurus (It was better to fight them OVER THERE than here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arthurus

Taken to its conclusion, this is what gets us to having ROP neighborhoods, as exist in Europe. Businesses with Arabic only signs and spoken language, and no incentive for these "immigrants" to assimilate to the local culture.


7 posted on 07/14/2006 2:24:50 PM PDT by C210N (Bush SPYED, Terrorists DIED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: E-Mat

8 posted on 07/14/2006 2:26:02 PM PDT by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E-Mat

Wait just a minute here! What about the Philly Cheese steak guy? Were'nt they on the other side of that issue?


9 posted on 07/14/2006 2:27:31 PM PDT by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ("Don't touch that thing")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: livius

Speaking of an unwillingness to assimilate.....


10 posted on 07/14/2006 2:27:37 PM PDT by cripplecreek (I'm trying to think but nothing happens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arthurus
Private businesses should not have any interference in what language they use for their signs or their conduct of business. It is PRIVATE business.

Fine. When they call 911 to request emergency services for a heart attack victim and the EMTs can't read the sign to determine they have reached the location, they should have no legal recourse against the city for inability to respond.

11 posted on 07/14/2006 2:30:15 PM PDT by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa

This would be wayyy too intrusive on government's part. I can see it now - a motel named La Riviera would, by law, have to include a translation, The Riviera. Would this apply to names? Can someone have a bar named Juan's without putting a translation, John's up. And what about Johann's Printing?

The English translation law would be a perfect example of where government doesn't need to be sticking its nose.


12 posted on 07/14/2006 2:30:25 PM PDT by SeafoodGumbo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: E-Mat

13 posted on 07/14/2006 2:31:46 PM PDT by Gritty (The ability to simply wear out the opposition through endless litigation is the 'nuke' of the left-V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E-Mat
Detroit, huh? Yeah, ebonics does need translation ... no question.
14 posted on 07/14/2006 2:32:18 PM PDT by BluH2o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E-Mat

All the signs are already in English at the gun range.


15 posted on 07/14/2006 2:32:24 PM PDT by Westlander (Unleash the Neutron Bomb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E-Mat
" Fire Chief John Childs supported the move, arguing that people passing by the site of a fire or other emergency could inform dispatchers about the location more easily if they could read the signs "

Well as long as the address is displayed and the street sign is in english, I would hope the fire dept. could find it.

16 posted on 07/14/2006 2:33:40 PM PDT by Kakaze (American: a Citizen of the United States of America........not just some resident of said continent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E-Mat

Let's hope the ACLU doen't put their sign up in English and Fire Department misses it when it burns to the ground.


17 posted on 07/14/2006 2:34:38 PM PDT by Boiler Plate (Mom always said why be difficult, when with just a little more effort you can be impossible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E-Mat

According to the News, Michael J. Steinberg of the ACLU said the proposal is unconstitutional "because it singles out businesses with signs.”




So that's what goes for being unconstitutional these days?


18 posted on 07/14/2006 2:34:53 PM PDT by abercrombie_guy_38
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa

I think there position is clear. If you don't add them we just might sue your azz for everything you have. They are such wonderful, thoughtful, kind and sensitive totalitarians.


19 posted on 07/14/2006 2:37:56 PM PDT by daviscupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: E-Mat

Good grief what a stupid proposed law.


20 posted on 07/14/2006 2:38:45 PM PDT by catholicfreeper (www.theponderingamerican.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-45 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson