Christmas and ACLU christians
My thoughts in bold.
How the ACLU Didn't Steal Christmas
By FRAN QUIGLEY
12-7-2005
When the angry phone calls and e-mails started arriving at the office, I knew the holiday season was upon us. A typical message shouted that we at the American Civil Liberties Union affiliate in Indiana are "horrible" and "we should be ashamed of ourselves," then concluded with an incongruous and agitated "Merry Christmas."
We get this type of correspondence a lot, mostly in reaction to a well-organized attempt by extremist groups to demonize the ACLU, crush religious diversity and make a few bucks in the process. Sadly, this self-interested effort is being promoted in the guise of defending Christmas.
Yes Mr. Quigley, of course anyone who dares to disagree with you and your organization are "extremist" and selfish money seekers. That's fresh!
For example, the Alliance Defense Fund celebrates the season with an "It's OK to say Merry Christmas" campaign, implying that the ACLU has challenged such holiday greetings. (As part of the effort, you can get a pamphlet and two Christmas pins for $29.)
Perhaps not exactly as your carefully well legally trained worded statement implies, but the ACLU has done something similar...
A children’s Christmas program has been deemed to be an “illegal act” because of the ACLU.
Oh, and the $29.00, it's like a membership to the ACLU, except only better. Your not suggesting capitalism and the free market are bad are you? or is it just the people once again who disagree with you?
The Web site, WorldNetDaily, touts a book claiming "a thorough and virulent anti-Christmas campaign is being waged today by liberal activists and ACLU fanatics." The site's magazine has suggested there will be ACLU efforts to remove "In God We Trust" from U.S. currency, fire military chaplains and expunge all references to God in America's founding documents. (Learn more for just $19.95 . . . )
Well, like you said, they are indeed touting a book. Should it be free? Are ACLU memberships free? But what about this ACLU attempt: ACLU bullies Winston-Salem City Council, demands end to references to God in opening prayers... “Reasonable people understand that there’s nothing wrong with opening a public meeting with prayer. Once again, the ACLU’s desire to purge Christianity from every facet of public life has reared its ugly head,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Mike Johnson. “Their tiresome claims that the law requires all public prayer to remain ‘neutral,’ and therefore meaningless, has no constitutional roots whatsoever.”
Of course, there is no "Merry Christmas" lawsuit, nor is there any ACLU litigation about U.S. currency, military chaplains, etc. But the facts are not important to these groups, because their real message is this: By protecting the freedom of Muslims, Jews and other non-Christians through preventing government entanglement with religion, the ACLU is somehow infringing on the rights of those with majority religious beliefs.
There may be no direct ACLU "Merry Christmas" litigation, but there most certainly is a boat load of litigation. In addition, when you say 'protecting', don't you really mean limiting the the free exercise of the community? The ACLU is indeed infringing on the rights of those people to freely exercise their religion, mostly Christians. Remember Congress has not established any religion. The ACLU is however preventing, not "protecting" the rights of others to their free exercise clause. That's wrong and that is what puts money in their (ACLU) pockets.
In truth, it is these Web-site Christians who are taking the Christ out of the season. Nowhere in the Sermon on the Mount did Jesus Christ ask that we celebrate his birth with narrow-mindedness and intolerance, especially for those who are already marginalized and persecuted. Instead, the New Testament -- like the Torah and the Quran and countless other sacred texts -- commands us to love our neighbor and to comfort the sick and the imprisoned.
Mr. Quigley, you really disappointment me. Your name calling of "Narrow-mindedness and intolerance" are once again tossed out at those who disagree with you. I'd hate to be at your dinner table on game day. Nevertheless, no where in the Sermon on the Mount did Jesus Christ encourage us to celebrate anything, much less our own human wisdom over God's.
as far as "the other sacred texts" you have lumped the Bible into, I ask you to consider this "sacred text":
Quran Surah 4:
8. Have no unbelieving friends. Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them.
If the unbelievers do not offer you peace, kill them wherever you find them. Against such you are given clear warrant (Offering peace in Islam means surrendering. All 67 out of 68 wars of Muhammad were offensive. They are called qazwah (raid, ambush, sudden attack). That is how Muhammad waged his wars. He raided, massacred and looted civilians with no warning. The one defensive war, 'ditch' was not fought. That is why the Islamic terrorism 'jihad' will continue until the West "offers peace". This was made clear by Bin Laden.)
That's what the ACLU does. We live in a country filled with people who are sick and disabled, people who are imprisoned, and people who hunger and thirst for justice. Those people come to our Indiana offices for help at a rate of several hundred a week, usually because they have nowhere else to turn. The least of our brothers and sisters sure aren't getting any help from the Alliance Defense Fund or WorldNet Daily. So, as often as we can, ACLU secures justice for those folks for whom Jesus worried the most.
(wipping a tear from my eye) no, but the Alliance Defense Fund or WorldNet Daily have not to my knowledge defended child molestors ( In 1982, the ACLU, in an amicus role, lost in a unanimous decision in the Supreme Court to legalize the sale and distribution of child pornography.”
The case is…: New York Vs Ferber, 458 U.S. 747It can be found here.)
are these folks also who "Jesus worried the most" about? or would it be their child victims?
As part of our justice mission, we work hard to protect the rights of free religious expression for all people, including Christians. For example, we recently defended the First Amendment rights of a Baptist minister to preach his message on public streets in Southern Indiana. The ACLU intervened on behalf of a Christian valedictorian in a Michigan high school, which agreed to stop censoring religious yearbook entries and supported the rights of Iowa students to distribute Christian literature at their school.
you forgot one ...
NASHVILLE - Tennessee drivers wanting a "Choose Life" anti-abortion license plate will now be able to get one at county clerk offices beginning Friday.
A State spokeswoman says nearly 1,300 people have ordered the plate, which features the image of a smiling baby.
The ACLU of Tennessee challenged the license plates on free speech grounds, but eventually lost its case.
Sixteen states, including Tennessee, have a Choose Life license plate.
I guess encouraging others against killing the unborn is not a worthy enough cause for the ACLU? In fact, the opposite may even be the ACLU's top priority!
There are many more examples, because the ACLU is committed to preserving the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom for all. We agree with the U.S. Supreme Court's firm rulings that this freedom means that children who grow up in non-Christian homes should not be made to feel like outsiders in their own community's courthouse, legislature or public schoolhouse.
There are many many more examples of the ACLU's outright war on Christain values. If the majority of people in a community hold certain values, and Congress has not made a law establishing a religion, (the ACLU) is preventing, not protecting constitutional rights.
There are three elements to the Establishment Clause. They are: (1) Congress must (2) make a law that (3) establishes a religion. When that happens, I'll join the ACLU! Until then, I will speak against bad works.
To our "Merry Christmas" correspondents and all other Americans, we wish you happy holidays.
Merry Christmas!
As much as some may despise it (hint: aclu), we are a Christian community and nation.
:)
Fran Quigley is the executive director of the Indiana Civil Liberties Union. Emai: fran.quigley@iclu.orgmailto:fran.quigley@iclu.org



6 Comments:
Are these really your thoughts?:
"Offering peace in Islam means surrendering. All 67 out of 68 wars of Muhammad were offensive. They are called qazwah (raid, ambush, sudden attack). That is how Muhammad waged his wars. He raided, massacred and looted civilians with no warning. The one defensive war, 'ditch' was not fought."
Unless you also go by the name Jim...
By the way, if these are your thoughts, what are some of the 67 wars that you are talking about that Muhammad took part in? And why these were offensive wars?
And did you ever think that 'surrender' is not to ones enemies, but surrender to God?
again kevin, the italics and only the italics are not my words.
Please refer to the links:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina41019.htm
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Quran.htm
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/index.html
http://www.faithfreedom.org/debates/looting51223.htm
oh and Dr. Kevin, You'll find this on the link below. Go for it!
If you disagree with my site and want me to remove it, instead of acting as bully or as victim, I invite you to disprove my charges against Muhammad and Islam. If you can show that what I say is unfounded I promise to remove this site not before confessing that I was wrong and Islam is a true religion. I will also pay $50,000 U.S. dollars to anyone who can disprove my charges and prove Islam is a true religion in an objective (not subjective) way. This is to thank you for showing me the right way. Hey, what is $50.000 dollars compared to being burned and tortured by a sadistic deity?
Disprove my accusations against Muhammad.
I accuse Muhammad of being:
a rapist
a pedophile (had sex with a child)
an assassin
a mass murderer
a ruthless torturer
a terrorist (I have been made victorious through terror)
a lecher
a misogynist
a narcissist
a thief and plunderer
a cult leader
a mentally deranged (was paranoid, heard voices, hallucinated of seeing jinns, Satan and angels, used to think he had sex with his wives when he did not, suffered from depression and had suicidal tendencies).
http://www.faithfreedom.org/challenge.htm
Nope, Mr. Mark, I am not interested in a looking at a site called faithfreedom that is so clearly against freedom of faith.
Besides, people have said that Jesus was crazy because he heard the voice of God or because he thought he was God. How is that different from what the person above believes about Muhammed being 'mentally deranged'? The difference is that one person believes Jesus was God, and another believes that Muhammed was the last prophet of God. You can't prove either--you can only believe one or the other. Clearly that has nothing to do with "I'm right and you're wrong."
And since you quoted "Jim", you must agree with what he says or at least know what he is talking about. You are trying to make a point that Islam is a vicious religion and I repeat my question--what are the 67 wars that Muhammed fought?
Anyone who does research into Islam cannot deny that Muhammed was a violent man, who killed lots and lots of people in caravan raids right before he robbed them, all in the name of Allah. Jesus did none of these things, and never commanded anyone to harm another. You're right on Mark, and don't worry about losing $50,000.
Highboy, you didn't answer the question.What were the 67 wars? You say anyone who researched it would know, but I have doubts that you yourself have ever studied deeply into the history of Islam
Post a Comment
<< Home