[milan]

If the sign read "I am a proud gay man" I bet the ACLU would pick up the case! This is a crock. Yeah, he probably broke ordinances, but the reality is, the content is what made the ACLU say "uhuh, we can't do anything." If the content was Islam, Hindu, gay, transvestite, Greenpeace, etc. the ACLU would gladly take this case.

Like Bill Oreilly said, the ACLU has gone left and they don't plan on coming back.

[Junior]

More info! Where is the sign? Is it on private or public property? There is a lot missing from the article you posted.

[UCFRoadWarrior]

Yeah...you are right. If the sign promoted the HomoNazi agenda...the ACLU would be fighting the judge.

The bigotry of political correctness strikes again

[goldstategop]

Its a worthy cause to go to jail for. My only Lord is My God. :)

[gdc61]

here's the local poop. bob foor used to be a bigtime car dealer in bedford. he retired several years ago and reuped with god. this building is on the corner of pitt and richard sts. in downtown bedford. the sign is on the back of the building facing a 4lane bypass across a river. the building was build in the 1920-30s as a showroom for cars. there used to be a large Ford sign on building in a more conspicuous place.in the photo richard st. is left of bob and the river and 4lane is behind the photographer. richard st is also business rt 220.

[Dave S]

It's plenty easy to find reasons to bash the ACLU but this is a poor example. Not only is the guy clearly in violation of a number of ordinances which the city is in its right to have, the BLINKING SIGN, close to a heavily traveled street is major driving hazard. When I saw this on Fox News the other day, the clear reason the city was not allowing his sign was fear that it would cause traffic accidents. But I perhaps you dont care about someone dying if there is a chance that this one sign is going to bring someone to the Lord or even worse that it interferes with your expression of religion.

[Eccl 10:2]

Romans 13:1 says: "Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God."

I Cor 13:1: "If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.

The guy is breaking the law, regardless of the content of the sign, and he should stop.

Also, it's a poor witness, a "noisy gong" and makes Christians look heartless to unbelievers.

The Christians should be the ones after this guy to stop it. IMHO, his efforts are not Biblical, and he should stop.

[maxwell]

The man's sentiment is admirable, but I don't think it's something Jesus would've done.

Our Lord didn't run around breaking city ordinances by posting His Name where every passing Roman army could see it.

He spoke His Name by personal example.

[IronJack]

freedom of speech does not extend to a man's large "Jesus is Lord" sign

It doesn't? Why? In the country formerly known as the United States of America, the burden of proof in this case would be on the government to usurp this man's First Amendment protections. As I recall from law, that is only possible under a fairly narrow set of circumstances (clear and present danger, prior restraint, that sort of thing).

[JimRed]

But, it would be OK if it referred to a gang leader and was pronounced hay-SOOS!

[RJCogburn]

Why do some Christians seem to have the need, such as this man, to be so ostentatious about his faith? Isn't it the way one lives one's life that is important? Nothing wrong with proclaiming one's faith, but why so in-your-face?

[Jhoffa_]

A borough government in Pennsylvania says freedom of speech does not extend to a man's large "Jesus is Lord" sign, threatening the man with jail time if he doesn't remove it, reports the Johnstown Tribune-Democrat.

No surprise, he can't burn a cross either, because that's offensive to blacks.

Before long, none of us will be "offended" But none of us will have the First Amendment either.

with all the peeceeisms coming our way and nibbling at the margins, don't be surprised if your children's children have no right's left..

[skr]

The ACLU is most discriminating in its civil liberties policy. In any other case, the person's constitutional rights would outweigh a city ordinance, especially about a sign on the back of a building.

It's funny how the historic view of a building is more important than someone's private property rights.

[AgThorn]

How dare this man tackle our free society by posting such an obnoxious sign!!!

[nosofar]

This is the site.

http://www.tribune-democrat.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=8100904&BRD=2332&PAG=461&dept_id=484742&rfi=8

[LiteKeeper]

SPOTREP

[kuma]

Whoa!!! I'm from Bedford, Pa the same town as this man.

[kuma]

My husband says he saw the sign and likes it. I know exactly where this is. Most of the people on the Bedford Historical Society are liberal Democrats who hate the Republicanism of Bedford. Trust me! Two of them are my relatives *~_^!

It's right on a main road that everyone north of Bedford uses to travel into the town.

[WOSG]

" ACLU has gone left "


They always were. It was started by a Communist in the 1920s, ya know.

[Quick1]

If it were a giant neon flashing sign saying "I'm Gay!", I have a feeling you'd be fighting AGAINST it.

[Uri’el-2012]

Like Bill Oreilly said, the ACLU has gone left and they don't plan on coming back.

1 posted on 05/25/2003 5:39 AM MDT by milan

If Bill oreilly had studied history,
he would know that the ACLU was founded by three Marxists
and funded by V.I.Lenin in the 1920's.
It was started to destroy this Christian Nation through the
Bill of Rights.

The tongue of the wise commends knowledge, but the mouth of the fool gushes folly. (Proverbs 15:2)

chuck <truth@YeshuaHaMashiach>