"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
In a previous article, "C J Campbell"
said:
You already know how I feel about issues such as posting the ten
commandments, nativity scenes, Stars of David and crosses and the like,
as
well as private schools. You think these things are public imposition of
religion and are prohibited by the Constitution. I think that prohibiting
these things violates freedom of worship guaranteed by the Constitution.
Please do not insult my intelligence by pretending that you do not know
the
issues involved. We may never agree, but don't try to tell me you don't
know
what we are talking about.

I know the ACLU has worked hard and long to keep people like you from
using government organizations, funds, and buildings to impose your
religious beliefs on me and my children. That is not working to "prohibit
the exercise of freedom of religion". It is working to *strengthen* my
exercise of freedom of religion.

As for ACLU's association with communism, don't be ridiculous. It was
founded by anarchists and communists and continues to be run by them
today.
Some of the very earliest members included Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, who
later
became chairman of the American Communist Party, and Agnes Smedly, a
Soviet
agent. In every single case that I know of where the United States had a
legal issue with the Kremlin or Castro, the ACLU supported the
communists,
even to the point of forcible repatriation of persons who came here
looking
for political asylum.

So it was founded by people associated with communism. How has it worked
to "promote communism". Name one concrete thing.

As for "forcible repatriation", the only case I can think you're thinking
of is Elian Gonzalez, who was kidnapped by a non-parent away from a
parent. That should have been a simple child custody case, and if it
wasn't for the national border nobody would have wasted a second's thought
on coming to the conclusion that the boy should have been returned to the
parent.

Saying that the ACLU is neutral on gun control is bogus. If ACLU were
interested in protecting Constitutional rights then they would be in the
forefront of defending gun owners, especially in states like Washington,
where Constitutional protections are much stronger than in the US.

That particular constitutional ammendment has a MUCH larger organization
protecting it. Why would the ACLU waste its limited time and resources
protecting the second ammendment when the largest political organization
in the country, the NRA, is already working on the case?


ACLU also continually sides against parents on such issues as birth
control,
sex education, and abortion. Apparently ACLU is able to see a clear

Again, name one case.

ACLU's attack on the Boy Scouts is legendary. Apparently ACLU does not
believe in freedom of association, either, if it involves groups that it
does not like.

ACLU attempted to prevent the Boy Scouts from discriminating against
people. Hardly an attack.

Except the Boy Scouts is a private organization. Just like there can be no
private censorship under the 1st Amendment (...CONGRESS shall pas no law...)
the Communists abhor freedom of association (individual rights) over
collectivization.

While I agree CJ is totally bonkers regards his version of freedom of
worship, he is correct on his take on the ACLU, who take a very erratic view
of the Bill of Rights. BTW, the GRU was the group that was fundamental in
founding the ACLU, not to protect freedom of speech (notice they never take
the case of conservatives/free market types at colleges that have speech
codes) but to maintain their propaganda outlets.

By the way, note too that the Communist Party USA endorses Kerry
http://www.cpusa.org