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

To: ConsistentLibertarian
I don't want "maybes" or "will bes" about the ACLU. I want to see more than one case where the ACLU actually defended the rights of the conservative Christian. Most of the cases I saw listed defended everything BUT! And, Lovell v. Griffin sure did not since many Christians do not believe in the Witness doctrine. It is viewed by some to be on the level of Buddism.
180 posted on 08/21/2003 9:53:24 AM PDT by beachn4fun (The media and liberals are destroying the American way of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies ]


To: beachn4fun
I want to see more than one case where the ACLU actually defended the rights of the conservative Christian

ACLU Supports Right of Iowa Students to Distribute Christian Literature at School

DES MOINES--The Iowa Civil Liberties Union today announced that it is publicly supporting the Christian students who recently filed a lawsuit against the Davenport Schools asserting the right to distribute religious literature during non-instructional time.

“The school's policy against the distribution of religious literature outside of class is clearly wrong,” said Ben Stone, Executive Director of the ICLU. “Not only does the policy violate the students' right to freely exercise their religious beliefs, but it also infringes on their free speech rights," he said.

The case, brought by Davenport students Sasha and Jaron Dean and Becky Swope, was filed in federal court on May 31, 2002. The ICLU said it plans to file a "friend-of the-court" brief in support of the Christian students.

According to the ICLU, the literature ban could be an example of poorly informed school officials acting out of ignorance. "Once in a while, we hear of schools taking away a kid's Bible at school or not letting students say grace before lunch,” Stone said. “Such restrictions are dead wrong, and are usually stopped rather quickly once the school receives some instruction on constitutional law. Let's hope the Davenport schools change their policy without further litigation,” said Stone.

223 posted on 08/21/2003 10:19:33 AM PDT by libravoter (Live from the People's Republic of Cambridge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies ]

To: beachn4fun
I want to see more than one case where the ACLU actually defended the rights of the conservative Christian

Evangelical Christians arrested on Mormon plaza By The Associated Press 04.09.02

SALT LAKE CITY — Two protesters have been arrested on the Mormon church's Main Street Plaza, the first trespassing arrests on the site since the city sold the land to the church and prompted a free-speech lawsuit.

Kurt Van Gorden, 48, and Melvin Heath, 46, were arrested April 7 for trespassing. Three other protesters received citations. The group had been distributing evangelical Christian literature during the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' semiannual General Conference. Members of the group twice refused to leave the plaza before they were arrested, said Salt Lake Police Sgt. Fred Louis.

"Arrests were made Sunday afternoon on the West Church Plaza that demonstrate why it is critical to the church to retain private property rights to prevent protests on its grounds," said church spokesman Dale Bills.

He said the two men were disruptive and intrusive and had ignored repeated requests to respect the church's property.

Stephen Clark, the American Civil Liberties Union's legal director for Utah, saw it differently. "They were engaging in core free-speech activities," Clark said. Last month, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver heard arguments in a dispute over the Mormon church's efforts to restrict behavior in the plaza. They have yet to rule on the case.

The case arose after the Mormon church imposed rules restricting protests, demonstrations and other activities on the one-block stretch of Salt Lake City's Main Street it bought from the city. The ACLU sued, arguing that the restrictions were unconstitutional because the city retains an easement across the block for pedestrian access.

The ACLU argued that the easement makes it unconstitutional for the city to allow the church to decide what behavior is offensive. The lawsuit was dismissed in U.S. District Court, and the ACLU appealed the decision to the 10th Circuit. Clark said now that the case has been dismissed by the lower court, the church feels free to control free speech on the plaza. "This is the result of a strategic plan," Clark said. "Now they feel free to implement this discriminatory practice."

The list of rules was written by city and church attorneys and approved by the City Council in April 1999. It outlawed smoking, sunbathing, bicycling and "engaging in any illegal, offensive, indecent, obscene, vulgar, lewd or disorderly speech, dress or conduct." The city sold the land to the church for $8.1 million. City leaders gave the church exclusive rights to distribute literature and broadcast speeches and music on the block.

229 posted on 08/21/2003 10:22:55 AM PDT by libravoter (Live from the People's Republic of Cambridge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies ]

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