ACLU: First Amendment Protects Against Being an “Outsider”

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU: First Amendment Protects Against Being an “Outsider”


The ACLU in Illinois says a small town must remove a sign that reads, “Welcome to The Village of Alorton. Where Jesus is Lord. Randy McCallum Mayor,” even though there have been no complaints about the sign and virtually every resident approves.

    “If it’s been put up by the city, then it definitely raises a constitutional issue,” said Wendy Park, a staff attorney with the group.

    A city-funded sign with a specific religious message appears to violate the religious liberty guarantee of the Constitution, she said. That guarantee says no religion should be promoted over any other by a government.

    The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in the past that a government cannot endorse religion or express a message that endorses religion because “it basically leads nonbelievers to feel that they are outside the political community and are not participants in the political community,” she said.

A government? I’m certain that in Ms. Park’s time in law school she was introduced to the wording of the First Amendment, though I doubt she was trained in it’s vast and overwhelming history of pro-religion cases. More than likely, she was shown every case in the last 50 + years.

My six-year old can read what the The First Amendment says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…” Not “a government.”

    “If the community didn’t want that Jesus there, I’d take the signs down immediately,” the mayor said.

    But the ACLU said it doesn’t matter whether residents approve of the signs.

    “Even if the whole community is Christian, if someone is non-Christian and driving by Alorton or coming there to visit and sees that sign, they are led to think they are not full participants, or they are outsiders and don’t belong in that community,” Park said.

Outsiders? Not full participants? This is laughable that an organization with seemingly intelligent people that have passed the bar exam would make such a claim of the First Amendment. If the First Amendment was written to prevent people from being “outsiders,” America would not exist. Additionally, why was there no discussion of “full participation” in the design of the First Amendment if that was its intent, as the ACLU claims?

Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said:

    “If the Supreme Court hadn’t erroneously decided at one point that the First Amendment phrase ‘Congress shall make no law…’ should now include states, municipalities, even schools, we would not be in the position where an organization like the ACLU could roam to and fro across the land, seeking those acknowledgements of God they could devour with their well-oiled machine of intimidation and litigation."

But here is the most bizarre statement from the ACLU:

    "The ACLU hasn’t determined what, if any, action it will pursue", she [Park] said.

Maybe Ms. Park and her gang should call the Florida chapter of the ACLU and ask them what happens when you have no plaintiff.

Good luck to you, Ms. Park, in finding someone willing to have their name plastered forever to a losing case that was doomed from the start.

My guess is that the ACLU in Illinois will attempt to do as the Florida chapter did and play fire-breathing dragon in an effort to scare the small town of 3,000 residents into taking the signs down. While there may be alternative courses of action for the ACLU here even without a plaintiff, none seem to be very appealing. It is rare that the ACLU is “unsure of its course of action.” And when it is, it typically has no case.

[Shammu]

Shut up Bob, shut up Bob, shut up Bob, shut up Bob, shut up Bob.

Don't go on a spewing the evils of the Anti Christian Lawless Union again.

[islandboy]

I'm not sure if this topic is the place for my comment, but here goes. C-Span is running a viewing of Pro-immigration as it relates to legal issues in towns over- run with illegal immigrants. The panel consists of mostly hispanic members, plus on man from the ACLU. They are making statements that we are all wrong in our beliefs on the subject and they are all right in their progressive beliefs.
 Of all the questions they were asked, not one person mentioned welfare or the taking of jobs.  Our poor Americans are the ones who are suffering from the flood of illegals willing to work for less than most folks can afford to live on. On their side there is no accountability. No compassion for others. We are all not worthy of listening to. There is no understanding of loss of jobs to American citizens, hospitals forced to close, medicaid overwhelmed to the point it has nothing left for citizens. People working in hospitals & doctor offices & nursing homes that don't speak English. Citizens being refused jobs due to lack of their being able to speak Spanish. We have good reasons for our concerns. Home rentals are up due in part from hispanic's renting homes as a couple and then 10-20 more move in and trash the house. The owners have no choice but to raise the rent.  I do not know of a way to combat this flood, other then the government enforcing the laws.

[Soldier4Christ]

Brother, where you posted it is fine or you could have made a new thread for it. Either way would have been good.

Yes, our current laws do need to be enforced but too many politicians are afraid to take a stand on it and those few that do are considered racist.

As for that panel ... those individuals care for nothing but themselves and not for the situation of all those that have the legal right to be here. After all the ACLU thinks that all criminals have more rights than law abiding citizens. The hispanic members think that they have more rights here to this land than any of us do, that we are the ones here illegally. They don't stop to think that there wouldn't be any jobs here for them if it weren't for Americans and that it would be just like Mexico for them. After all we took their land so we owe them a living free and clear of any hassles. 

Don't get me wrong. Not all hispanics are of this consensus. There are many here that came here legally and of those many are hard working individuals that are law abiding and do what they can to provide properly for their families. I am not speaking of those individuals but rather those that are here illegally and not trying to do the right thing.