RP>KK>You're skewing Chuck's argument a bit here.  The ACLU does not 
support_
RP>KK>the Klan.  What they support is freedom of speech.
RP>Wrong.  They oppose all Judeo/Christian speech in the public square.
RP>This is the season, in fact, when the ACLU crawls out from under every
RP>slimy rock across the country, doing its best to stifle every last
RP>vestige of the season as a religious holiday of any kind.
It will be very easy to test your assertion.  All you have to do to
support it is to show that the ACLU went into your own church, and into
every other church in New Jersey, and "stifled every last vestige"
of Christmas.  Did they actually do that?  Yes or no?
What you believe is none of my business, none of the ACLU's business,
and none of anybody else's business either.  Period.  But when you
try to make your religious beliefs into American policy, you are
violating everyone else's American right to not have to believe your
particular theology.
RP>I thouroughly enjoyed the reaction of that town in New Jersey to ACLU
RP>court suits - they removed the Christmas displays and replaced them with
RP>signs quoting the New Jersey Constitution preamble, which speaks of God
RP>from beginning to end.  Another sign indicates the town will continue
RP>its fight to restore religious freedom and once again proudly display
RP>the emblems of the season on public grounds as has so long been the
RP>tradition of this nation.
The _US_ Bill of Rights (which states what governments _cannot_ do to
individuals) states that the lawmaking body shall not make any law
favoring any establishment of religion.
RP>Open your eyes, Keith, what the ACLU supports is anything and everything
RP>that is conducive to suppression of the Judeo/Christian ethic in this
RP>country, and everything conducive to anarchy and/or socialism.
I would really appreciate it if you could explain how they could
be supporting both anarchy and socialism.  Could it be that they are
fighting against the fact that when one religious sect gains state
power, that sect immediately suppresses all other sects?  Read the
early history of the Puritans and other such groups.  They came here
seeking religious freedom, but once they got here, within six months
most had outlawed the practices of any sect but their own.
RP>Their support of free speech for the Klan is just another divisive
RP>tactic on their part, nothing more and nothing less.  No grand high
RP>principles are in any way a part of what the ACLU is about.  Their goal
RP>is the destruction of this nation as a Republic, particularly a Republic
RP>under God.
Whose God?  Your specific interpretation of what all of us should
do according to your sect's rules?
Always has been, and when they are cornered, their spokesmen
RP>will even grudgingly admit it to this day - especially will they admit
RP>to adamant opposition to Christianity.  The mayor of that town in New
RP>Jersey, I believe it was, got exactly that admission from the ACLU
RP>spokesman involved in those cases there.
I am a Christian, and I think that if your sect wants to have police
power to tell me to believe what your sect believes, then I think
your sect is being unAmerican.  Moslems, Hindus, and Buddhists
can be Americans too.  Americans believe in liberty -- especially
the liberty to believe what you choose.
RP>Make no mistake - the ACLU is bringing this country closer to revolution
RP>every year, just as it is so close to doing in Georgia, where the
RP>people and public officials are acting in open defiance of court order
RP>at every opportunity.  People in this country don't take lightly to
RP>having their religious freedoms trampled on the way the ACLU and its
RP>cronies are attempting to do, and have successfully done to a large
RP>extent already.
Have the "jackbooted thugs" come to your church and told you that
your religious freedoms are trampled on?  Or have you simply been told
that your sect cannot use state power to enforce itself on other
Americans?
RP>The ACLU is a heinous organization, as un-American as they get, twisting
RP>the Constitution to their purposes to such an extent our Founding
RP>Fathers would no longer recognize it.  Were they with us today, they
RP>likely would've called us all to arms again long ago because of that
RP>fact.
You're just saying that because they're opposing your self-righteous
belief that everybody should think the way you do.  I suspect that
Mr Franklin, Mr Jefferson, and Mr Lincoln would have signed up.
 * SLMR 2.1a *   Dammit Jim, I'm a writer, not a morning person!
--- PCBoard (R) v15.4/M 5 Beta
(1:301/45)
---------------