Greetings from your friendly, neighborhood, TERRORIST!

"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.

Name even one instance where either I or my church has advocated any such
thing.

Nomen,

Ah, the land of the free...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Charlie" wrote in message
...
Bob Fry wrote in
:

Hey folks. Just ignore Mr. FullName...he's clearly a nut-ball with
fascist, extreme right beliefs.

Thats a shout out for free speech Bob... free speech is only good for
those that you agree with, the rest are nutballs and should be ignored.

Uh, you're under the impression that criticizing or ignoring someone
violates their freedom of speech somehow? You are very unclear on the
concept.

--Gary

Charlie wrote:

Thats a shout out for free speech Bob... free speech is only good for
those that you agree with, the rest are nutballs and should be ignored.

Oh, bull. Freedom of speech doesn't mean that everyone has to listen to you.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

In article ,
C J Campbell wrote:
ACLU attempted to prevent the Boy Scouts from discriminating against
people. Hardly an attack.

Freedom to associate with whom you please means also the freedom to not
associate with some people, no matter how unpalatable that may be. The Boy
Scouts is a private organization. ACLU has no business telling a private
organization who they must accept as members and who not.

I believe the ACLU's position on this does not have a problem with the
Boy Scouts. As you say, they are a private organization and may, while
not breaking the law, disallow anyone from joining their organization,
no matter how distasteful their policies are to some.

The problem is that many public school districts allow the Scouts to use
their grounds and promote them as an organization. This, many parents
of the "disallowed" children feel, is tantamount to the
government-funded school district discriminating itself.

Obviously others disagree with this interpretation. I don't, however -
school districts should not be supporting an organization that
discriminates based on religion or sexual orientation.

"The Boys Scouts may have a legal right to discriminate against
atheists, agnostics, gays and others, but we remain convinced that
as long as they continue that discrimination they have no right to
receive special access to Portland elementary schools during the
school day to recruit 6 and 7 year-old boys to join in that
discrimination," [Oregon ACLU Executive Director David] Fidanque
said.

Strangely, I was a Boy Scout for perhaps a year - I didn't enjoy it.
Our troop was based in a church, though; I have no problem with that
arrangement. Ironically, I was agnostic.

If there was a case where the ACLU went right to the Scouts and said
that they could not discriminate at all even without getting
preferential treatment from schools, I apologize - they are out of line
then in that case.

-bcd
--
*** Brian Downing bdowning at lavos dot net

In article xof7d.52464$He1.20410@attbi_s01, Brian Downing
wrote:



Obviously others disagree with this interpretation. I don't, however -
school districts should not be supporting an organization that
discriminates based on religion or sexual orientation.

assuming, of course, that said organization is actually discriminating.






"The Boys Scouts may have a legal right to discriminate against
atheists, agnostics, gays and others, but we remain convinced that
as long as they continue that discrimination they have no right to
receive special access to Portland elementary schools during the
school day to recruit 6 and 7 year-old boys to join in that
discrimination," [Oregon ACLU Executive Director David] Fidanque
said.

Strangely, I was a Boy Scout for perhaps a year - I didn't enjoy it.
Our troop was based in a church, though; I have no problem with that
arrangement. Ironically, I was agnostic.

If there was a case where the ACLU went right to the Scouts and said
that they could not discriminate at all even without getting
preferential treatment from schools, I apologize - they are out of line
then in that case.


you don't see a problem labelling the BSA as an organization that
discriminates?

--
Bob Noel
Seen on Kerry's campaign airplane: "the real deal"
oh yeah baby.

First of all, you are assuming that it is illegal to discriminate by sexual
orientation under the Constitution. It is not. There are some local laws
that prohibit it, but these clearly violate the Constitution's freedom of
association clause.

There are gay groups that also meet on school property.

In Boston and New Jersey, the ACLU attempted to prove that the Boy Scouts
could not discriminate at all because they are a "public facility" like a
restaurant or golf course.

"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

"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 off base as regards this 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

Bob Noel writes:
In article xof7d.52464$He1.20410@attbi_s01, Brian Downing
wrote:


Obviously others disagree with this interpretation. I don't, however -
school districts should not be supporting an organization that
discriminates based on religion or sexual orientation.

assuming, of course, that said organization is actually discriminating.

Of course the Boy Scouts discriminate - they've stated in court that
gays and atheists cannot be members.

Are you thinking that "discrimination" means "unlawful discrimination"?

"The Boys Scouts may have a legal right to discriminate against
atheists, agnostics, gays and others, but we remain convinced that
as long as they continue that discrimination they have no right to
receive special access to Portland elementary schools during the
school day to recruit 6 and 7 year-old boys to join in that
discrimination," [Oregon ACLU Executive Director David] Fidanque
said.

Strangely, I was a Boy Scout for perhaps a year - I didn't enjoy it.
Our troop was based in a church, though; I have no problem with that
arrangement. Ironically, I was agnostic.

If there was a case where the ACLU went right to the Scouts and said
that they could not discriminate at all even without getting
preferential treatment from schools, I apologize - they are out of line
then in that case.

you don't see a problem labelling the BSA as an organization that
discriminates?

I don't. The BSA clearly discriminates. They've stated in court
that atheists and gays can't join. I've called the legal department
at the national BSA, and David Park told me that atheists can't even
join a BSA unit sponsored by a public school; the Boy Scouts expect
the public school to break the law and exclude their own students
based on their religious views.

---
Merlyn LeRoy