Comments on: The ACLU – And The Spoiled Children That They Are http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/ Beating Them With Their Own Sickle And Hammer Sun, 22 Nov 2009 11:27:27 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2 hourly 1 By: Conservative Culture » Cut the ACLU off from the government teat - Blogburst http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/comment-page-1/#comment-36284 Conservative Culture » Cut the ACLU off from the government teat - Blogburst Thu, 26 Oct 2006 12:55:46 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/#comment-36284 [...] It has become a tradition for the ACLU to attack Christian nativity scenes every Christmas. They has already started early this year. We have all witnessed the ACLU’s hatred of Ten Commandment displays across the nation. The ACLU sue city counsil after city counsil over praying in Jesus name. They don’t sue to stop all prayer, but in every case the target has been Christian prayer. They even fought for the right of a Wiccan to pray at a counsil meeting. Many times it doesn’t even take a lawsuit. They just type up a threatening letter and that does the trick. If the ACLU were consistent to oppose all religions in its seperation of church and state quest it would be one thing, but in all too many cases it is Christianity that is targeted while other religions get a pass. The cases of double standards are numerous. A few blatant examples are how the ACLU fought to revoke the tax exempt status of the Catholic Church while fighting for a tax exemption for Wiccans and how they fight against any Christianity being exposed to school children yet are found absent when Islamic indoctrination is going on. In fact they were involved in creating the rules to allow such indoctrination to take place. [...] [...] It has become a tradition for the ACLU to attack Christian nativity scenes every Christmas. They has already started early this year. We have all witnessed the ACLU’s hatred of Ten Commandment displays across the nation. The ACLU sue city counsil after city counsil over praying in Jesus name. They don’t sue to stop all prayer, but in every case the target has been Christian prayer. They even fought for the right of a Wiccan to pray at a counsil meeting. Many times it doesn’t even take a lawsuit. They just type up a threatening letter and that does the trick. If the ACLU were consistent to oppose all religions in its seperation of church and state quest it would be one thing, but in all too many cases it is Christianity that is targeted while other religions get a pass. The cases of double standards are numerous. A few blatant examples are how the ACLU fought to revoke the tax exempt status of the Catholic Church while fighting for a tax exemption for Wiccans and how they fight against any Christianity being exposed to school children yet are found absent when Islamic indoctrination is going on. In fact they were involved in creating the rules to allow such indoctrination to take place. [...]

]]> By: Conservative Thinking http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/comment-page-1/#comment-36285 Conservative Thinking Thu, 26 Oct 2006 04:30:19 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/#comment-36285 <strong>ACLU's Double Standards</strong> Crossposted from Stop The ACLU Liberals always act shocked and astonished that conservatives believe that an organization claiming to be the guardian of religious liberty is actually is actually America's number one religious censor. They will spout o... ACLU’s Double Standards
Crossposted from Stop The ACLU Liberals always act shocked and astonished that conservatives believe that an organization claiming to be the guardian of religious liberty is actually is actually America’s number one religious censor. They will spout o…

]]> By: joe http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/comment-page-1/#comment-36283 joe Thu, 22 Sep 2005 00:06:04 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/#comment-36283 "If it were totally up to me I'd ban you"? Spoken like a true Communist. Admit it: you used to work for Fidel castro, right? And since you hurl insults left and right, you bring it on yourself. What's the matter - afraid of someone who sticks up for themself? Maybe deep down you're worried your arguments won't hold up under scrutiny. “If it were totally up to me I’d ban you”? Spoken like a true Communist. Admit it: you used to work for Fidel castro, right?

And since you hurl insults left and right, you bring it on yourself. What’s the matter – afraid of someone who sticks up for themself? Maybe deep down you’re worried your arguments won’t hold up under scrutiny.

]]> By: fark http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/comment-page-1/#comment-36282 fark Wed, 21 Sep 2005 23:50:48 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/#comment-36282 "By forcing them to stop this practice, infringes with their free exercise of religion rights." this isn't very complicated. your free exercise can't establish religion. go and freely exercise somewhere where you're not creating an establishment. And I see no support for why one being elected allows one to establish religion. “By forcing them to stop this practice, infringes with their free exercise of religion rights.”

this isn’t very complicated. your free exercise can’t establish religion. go and freely exercise somewhere where you’re not creating an establishment.

And I see no support for why one being elected allows one to establish religion.

]]> By: Gribbit http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/comment-page-1/#comment-36281 Gribbit Wed, 21 Sep 2005 23:08:55 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/#comment-36281 Ok if I'm right about the application of the law, then I am also right about the existance of implied application in the text. Because no where is ther an a direct application that would allow the restriction of the free exercise of religion. Because that in itself is a violation. City Counsel members are citizens. They have elected by a majority of their body to have a prayer to open their meetings. By forcing them to stop this practice, infringes with their free exercise of religion rights. Learn to read. Your site sucks and you can't read. What else can we establish about you Joe from Fark. A site which I received many personal attacks from by doing nothing. You and your people jump into pools without knowing if there is any water in them. If it were totally up to me, I'd ban you. Ok if I’m right about the application of the law, then I am also right about the existance of implied application in the text. Because no where is ther an a direct application that would allow the restriction of the free exercise of religion. Because that in itself is a violation. City Counsel members are citizens. They have elected by a majority of their body to have a prayer to open their meetings. By forcing them to stop this practice, infringes with their free exercise of religion rights.

Learn to read. Your site sucks and you can’t read. What else can we establish about you Joe from Fark. A site which I received many personal attacks from by doing nothing.

You and your people jump into pools without knowing if there is any water in them. If it were totally up to me, I’d ban you.

]]> By: fark http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/comment-page-1/#comment-36280 fark Wed, 21 Sep 2005 22:47:56 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/#comment-36280 "Reading implied meanings in text which do not exist." Says who it doesn't exist? you? or any court in this country? He's right. I'm wrong. It wasn't privileges and immunities that incorporated the Bill of Rights. “Reading implied meanings in text which do not exist.”

Says who it doesn’t exist? you? or any court in this country?

He’s right. I’m wrong. It wasn’t privileges and immunities that incorporated the Bill of Rights.

]]> By: Gribbit http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/comment-page-1/#comment-36279 Gribbit Wed, 21 Sep 2005 22:43:26 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/#comment-36279 For the benefit of our troll and those like him, let us examine the Amendment in question: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” 14th Amendment Section 1 of the US Constitution His reference to the "due process" clause is in error. Any application in this manner would be the phrase "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States". Leaving decisions as the establishment of religion, or discussions of a religious nature within the state and in the state's institutions is not infringing upon anyone's rights. The SCOTUS applying the restriction of the 1st Amendment on the governments of the states does violate the state's rights under the 10th Amendment. The left likes to use the 14th as a way to trump the 10th. That is why the ACLU and morons like Joe don't even acknowledge the 10th. " The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." There Joe, don't mess with me, I'll win every time. For the benefit of our troll and those like him, let us examine the Amendment in question:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” 14th Amendment Section 1 of the US Constitution

His reference to the “due process” clause is in error. Any application in this manner would be the phrase “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States”. Leaving decisions as the establishment of religion, or discussions of a religious nature within the state and in the state’s institutions is not infringing upon anyone’s rights. The SCOTUS applying the restriction of the 1st Amendment on the governments of the states does violate the state’s rights under the 10th Amendment.

The left likes to use the 14th as a way to trump the 10th. That is why the ACLU and morons like Joe don’t even acknowledge the 10th.

” The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

There Joe, don’t mess with me, I’ll win every time.

]]> By: Gribbit http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/comment-page-1/#comment-36278 Gribbit Wed, 21 Sep 2005 22:30:18 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/#comment-36278 Joe with a site under construction by GoDaddy.com. joeknows.org? Maybe that should be joedoesntknow.org Joe with a site under construction by GoDaddy.com. joeknows.org? Maybe that should be joedoesntknow.org

]]> By: Gribbit http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/comment-page-1/#comment-36277 Gribbit Wed, 21 Sep 2005 22:27:05 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/#comment-36277 OOO a personal attack. You Joe without a website are the moron. Your citing is in error. You must be a law student. Or an attorney with liberal leanings. Reading implied meanings in text which do not exist. Because the Supremes ruled the way that they did does not make that correct. I am a Strict Constructionist (that's someone who read what the Constitution says not what it supposedly implies). Comment again in a personal attack mode with no website and I delete you. OOO a personal attack.

You Joe without a website are the moron. Your citing is in error. You must be a law student. Or an attorney with liberal leanings.

Reading implied meanings in text which do not exist. Because the Supremes ruled the way that they did does not make that correct. I am a Strict Constructionist (that’s someone who read what the Constitution says not what it supposedly implies).

Comment again in a personal attack mode with no website and I delete you.

]]> By: joe http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/comment-page-1/#comment-36276 joe Wed, 21 Sep 2005 22:03:56 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2005/09/20/the-aclu-and-the-spoiled-children-that-they-are/#comment-36276 I can't believe you presume to talk about legal issues here and you don't even know one of the most basic things about the Constitution - something they taught us in law school on the FIRST DAY! The reason states have to obey the Bill of Rights is because of the 14th Amendment's phrase "due process clause", which the Supreme Court decided a hundred years ago meant that those amendments applied to states too (the privileges and immunities clause is unrelated). The fact that you didn't know that just shows how clueless you are. I'd love to see the judge snicker as you made that claim in court. I can’t believe you presume to talk about legal issues here and you don’t even know one of the most basic things about the Constitution – something they taught us in law school on the FIRST DAY! The reason states have to obey the Bill of Rights is because of the 14th Amendment’s phrase “due process clause”, which the Supreme Court decided a hundred years ago meant that those amendments applied to states too (the privileges and immunities clause is unrelated).

The fact that you didn’t know that just shows how clueless you are. I’d love to see the judge snicker as you made that claim in court.

]]>