ACLU In The News

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU seeks permanent stop to biblical display
By BYRON HENSLEY
hensley@dnj.com

Murfreesboro residents D.A. Willoughby and Jim Veale illustrate the rift over the vote in April 2002 to post the Ten Commandments in the Rutherford County Courthouse.

Willoughby supports the decision; Veale does not.

"When most of us people who are over 60 were growing up, we had prayer and Bible reading in public schools," Willoughby said. "What part of the Constitution has changed since then?"

(Smart Judge in my book.)

Veale, though, said the County Commission should occupy itself with other matters.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee sides with Veale, and asked a federal court Friday to grant a permanent injunction against the display.

ACLU officials cited last year's court decision striking down a similar posting in McCreary County, Ky.

"The posting of the Ten Commandments sends the message that only certain believers can receive justice at the courthouse," said Hedy Weinberg, ACLU-TN's executive director. "Rutherford County residents should not be made to feel like second-class citizens because they do not hold the prevailing religious beliefs promoted by the county government,"

Matthew D. Staver, president and general counsel of Liberty Counsel, the legal firm defending Rutherford County's posting, counters that the Kentucky case won't end the fight to keep the display.

"The tide is turning against the ACLU's war on the Ten Commandments," Staver said Friday. "Within the past few months we defeated them when two separate federal Courts of Appeal upheld displays of the Ten Commandments identical to that displayed in Rutherford County, Tennessee.

"Every federal Court of Appeals that has ruled on the Ten Commandments since the Supreme Court's ruling has upheld such displays. The courts, and history, are working against the ACLU. With Judge Samuel Alito's impending confirmation to the Supreme Court, the ACLU can no longer count on the High Court to further their agenda."

(Way past time for this to happen.)

The brouhaha arose when in April 2002 when the Rutherford County Commission voted to display the Ten Commandments as part of a "Foundations of American Law" exhibit, which included such documents as the Magna Carta, Declaration of Independence and United States Constitution.

In June of that year, U.S. District Judge Robert Echols issued a preliminary injunction to remove the Ten Commandments from the exhibit, but staying the case pending the Supreme Court's decision in similar cases from McCreary and Mercer counties in Kentucky.

In December, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Mercer County's display, which is identical to Rutherford's, Staver said.

"The McCreary County case started off with a single display of the Ten Commandments, and the ACLU sued," he said. "The county modified the display so a second display included other documents that were excerpted, so only the religious portion was posted. That was ruled against and the county then changed to the current display.

"Based on the long history in that case, the court determined the display had a religious motivation," he said. "Rutherford County's display doesn't have the same long history that McCreary County had."

Weinberg said the ACLU is not conducting a war against the Ten Commandments.

"ACLU-TN brought the lawsuit to ensure that individuals have the right to decide for themselves whether to practice a particular religious faith or to post the Ten Commandments in their homes, businesses or places of worship," Weinberg said.

"Were government to prohibit these postings, ACLU-TN would fight to protect citizens' right to promote their religious beliefs and practice their religious faiths. That is what we are here for," she said.

Veale indicated religion may not have anything to do with it.

"When politicians get onto something like that, it's because they have other issues they don't want to talk about," he said. "They do it because it's popular and easy, rather than solving any real problems."

[Shammu]

Though the ACLU tries to stop our Liberty. I say, let Liberty shine.

[Shammu]

ACLU Sues White House For Spying on Terrorists
Written by Jeremy Robb
Monday, December 19, 2005

WASHINGTON, DC --- The ACLU announced today that they are representing more than 200 Al Qaeda members in the United States in a lawsuit against the White House after it was discovered that they were being monitored without a warrant.

"We're outraged!" said ACLU representative, Commie Greenstien.  "I can't believe the nerve of these people spying on terror.. um, immigrants without getting a warrant.  They'll pay for it.  Trust me.  Some day these people will get the respect they deserve from our government.  Maybe once this lawsuit is filed we'll step in the right direction."

The ACLU was unable to disclose the names of any terrorists they represent for fear of having their heads cut off.  The New York Times offered to assist in any way possible with the case.

My note; Who are they kidding, they want a sociailist system. That way they can rule, the way they want.

[airIam2worship]

ACLU Sues White House For Spying on Terrorists
Written by Jeremy Robb
Monday, December 19, 2005

WASHINGTON, DC --- The ACLU announced today that they are representing more than 200 Al Qaeda members in the United States in a lawsuit against the White House after it was discovered that they were being monitored without a warrant.

"We're outraged!" said ACLU representative, Commie Greenstien.  "I can't believe the nerve of these people spying on terror.. um, immigrants without getting a warrant.  They'll pay for it.  Trust me.  Some day these people will get the respect they deserve from our government.  Maybe once this lawsuit is filed we'll step in the right direction."

The ACLU was unable to disclose the names of any terrorists they represent for fear of having their heads cut off.  The New York Times offered to assist in any way possible with the case.

My note; Who are they kidding, they want a sociailist system. That way they can rule, the way they want.

DW, please tell me this isn't for real.
I can't believe this !!!!

[Shammu]

DW, please tell me this isn't for real.
I can't believe this !!!!

Yes it's real. Also it was just on TV, that the ACLU is Sueing the White House For Spying on Americans.

I say they need to be shot out of the space shuttle, on a one way trip to the moon. For they are a menace, to all Americans.

They are a rabid rat. or a snake in the grass.

[Soldier4Christ]

DW, please tell me this isn't for real.
I can't believe this !!!!

Yes, it is true Sister. The ACLU considers terrorists that are in our country as "citizens", then of course they consider all illegal aliens as citizens also. They want all of them to have the same rights as all legal citizens do so they are suing the governemnt over "spying" on these criminals.

[Shammu]

ACLU fights Commandments again
But legal defender sees 'tide turning' in battle over issue
Posted: January 14, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern


© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

In the wake of major decisions on public display of the Ten Commandments, the American Civil Liberties Union is asking a federal court to order removal of a Tennessee courthouse exhibit.

"The posting of the Ten Commandments sends the message that only certain believers can receive justice at the courthouse," said Hedy Weinberg, executive director of ACLU of Tennessee.

The ACLU filed the motion yesterday in U.S. District Court.

Weinberg said "residents should not be made to feel like second class citizens because they do not hold the prevailing religious beliefs promoted by the county government."

The display in Rutherford County was approved by a 16-5 vote of the county commission in April 2002, but two months later, federal court Judge Robert Echols issued a preliminary injunction removing it.

The decision was stayed, however, pending a decision on similar cases in two Kentucky counties, McCreary and Mercer.

In each of the counties, the Ten Commandments is displayed among historical documents. The Rutherford County display includes copies of the preamble to the Tennessee Constitution, the National Motto, the National Anthem, the Declaration of Independence, the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, the United States Constitution and the Mayflower Compact.

Last June, the Supreme Court in a split 5-4 decision upheld a preliminary injunction against McCreary County because the court said the prior history of the county's evolving display suggested a religious purpose. However, the court permitted the case to return to the trial court for a final ruling.

In the meantime, Dec. 20, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, the same court to which the Rutherford County case will be appealed, upheld Mercer County's identical display.

That court scolded the ACLU, rejecting its "repeated reference to 'the separation of church and state.'" *SNICKER*

"This extra-constitutional construct has grown tiresome," the court said. "The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state."

Florida-based Liberty Counsel, which represents all three counties, notes it also defeated the ACLU in defense of a similar display in Elkhart County, Indiana, before the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Mathew D. Staver, president and general counsel of Liberty Counsel believes the "tide is turning against the ACLU's war on the Ten Commandments." 

"Every federal court of appeals that has ruled on the Ten Commandments since the Supreme Court's ruling has upheld such displays," he said. "The courts, and history, are working against the ACLU."

Staver believes that with Judge Samuel Alito's expected confirmation to the Supreme Court, "the ACLU can no longer count on the High Court to further their agenda."

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU fights Commandments again
But legal defender sees 'tide turning' in battle over issue
Posted: January 14, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern


© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

In the wake of major decisions on public display of the Ten Commandments, the American Civil Liberties Union is asking a federal court to order removal of a Tennessee courthouse exhibit.

"The posting of the Ten Commandments sends the message that only certain believers can receive justice at the courthouse," said Hedy Weinberg, executive director of ACLU of Tennessee.

The ACLU filed the motion yesterday in U.S. District Court.

Weinberg said "residents should not be made to feel like second class citizens because they do not hold the prevailing religious beliefs promoted by the county government."

The display in Rutherford County was approved by a 16-5 vote of the county commission in April 2002, but two months later, federal court Judge Robert Echols issued a preliminary injunction removing it.

The decision was stayed, however, pending a decision on similar cases in two Kentucky counties, McCreary and Mercer.

In each of the counties, the Ten Commandments is displayed among historical documents. The Rutherford County display includes copies of the preamble to the Tennessee Constitution, the National Motto, the National Anthem, the Declaration of Independence, the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, the United States Constitution and the Mayflower Compact.

Last June, the Supreme Court in a split 5-4 decision upheld a preliminary injunction against McCreary County because the court said the prior history of the county's evolving display suggested a religious purpose. However, the court permitted the case to return to the trial court for a final ruling.

In the meantime, Dec. 20, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, the same court to which the Rutherford County case will be appealed, upheld Mercer County's identical display.

That court scolded the ACLU, rejecting its "repeated reference to 'the separation of church and state.'" *SNICKER*

"This extra-constitutional construct has grown tiresome," the court said. "The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state."

Florida-based Liberty Counsel, which represents all three counties, notes it also defeated the ACLU in defense of a similar display in Elkhart County, Indiana, before the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Mathew D. Staver, president and general counsel of Liberty Counsel believes the "tide is turning against the ACLU's war on the Ten Commandments." 

"Every federal court of appeals that has ruled on the Ten Commandments since the Supreme Court's ruling has upheld such displays," he said. "The courts, and history, are working against the ACLU."

Staver believes that with Judge Samuel Alito's expected confirmation to the Supreme Court, "the ACLU can no longer count on the High Court to further their agenda."

Post #105 in this thread, brother.

 

[Shammu]

Post #105 in this thread, brother.

 

[Soldier4Christ]

[Shammu]

[Soldier4Christ]

It happens to the best of us. 

[Shammu]

It happens to the best of us. 

I know, you have done it to me.

[Soldier4Christ]

Pro-Family Attorney Sees Tide Turning Against ACLU's Anti-Religion Efforts

By Allie Martin
January 25, 2006

(AgapePress) - A Tennessee County is fighting to keep its Ten Commandments display in public. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed a lawsuit requesting a permanent injunction against a display of the biblical laws at the Rutherford County Courthouse in Murfreesboro, Tennessee.

Four years ago, Rutherford County commissioners voted to display historical documents relating to the founding of the United States, including the Ten Commandments. The other documents in the "Foundations of American Law and Government" tableau include copies of the Magna Carta, the Mayflower Compact, the Tennessee Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, lyrics to The Star-Spangled Banner, and a drawing of "Lady Justice."

Despite the County's use of the Ten Commandments in a historical context, a lawsuit was filed claiming the display violated the United States Constitution. Mat Staver, president of Liberty Counsel, is defending the display in the legal proceedings.

On the plus side for his clients, Staver contends, is a recent federal appeals court ruling that upheld an identical display in Kentucky. "This case in Rutherford County, Tennessee, will now move forward," he explains. "But to the chagrin of the ACLU, which has now filed its motion to permanently prohibit the Ten Commandments, the case law is no longer in their favor."

The attorney contends that the courts and history both are working against the civil liberties group. "I think in fact what has happened," he says, "is the landscape and the court rulings have changed over the last six months." Notably, the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently declared that the First Amendment to the Constitution does not demand a wall of separation between church and state.

But despite the changing legal climate, Staver says ACLU litigators simply "can't restrain themselves" and will keep pressing to remove representations of religious faith from the public square, "even though they see the handwriting on the wall."

The Liberty Counsel spokesman says the civil liberties group's attorneys "still have an anti-religious agenda," although he believes they will probably be more careful in selecting their future cases. "They clearly realize that the landscape has changed," he says. "They no longer can count on the U.S. Supreme Court to be their friend in their anti-God campaign."

"The tide is turning against the ACLU's war on the Ten Commandments," Staver observes. "Within the past few months we defeated them when two separate federal courts of appeal upheld displays of the Ten Commandments identical to that displayed in Rutherford County, Tennessee."

In fact, Staver adds, "Every federal court of appeals that has ruled on the Ten Commandments since the Supreme Court's ruling has upheld such displays." He believes it is clear, particularly with the impending confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito, that the ACLU can no longer count on the high court's help in the liberal group's efforts to get rid of public representations of God's laws.

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU: Don't Bar Terrorist Sympathizers

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a federal lawsuit seeking to strike down a provision of the Patriot Act that prevents foreigners who endorse terrorism from entering the U.S.

The suit was filed in Federal District Court in Manhattan on behalf of a prominent Muslim scholar, Tariq Ramadan, and three national organizations of academics or writers who have invited him to speak to their members.

Ramadan, a Swiss citizen, has been denied a United States visa since July 2004, when he was about to move with his family to Indiana to take up a tenured professor's position at the University of Notre Dame, the New York Times reports.

At the time, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security, Russ Knocke, cited the Patriot Act clause as the reason Ramadan's visa was canceled.

 The provision bans foreigners who "endorse or espouse terrorist activity or persuade others" to support terrorism.

The ACLU suit seeks a declaration that the Patriot Act provision at issue is unconstitutional. It also seeks a court order preventing the government from relying on the provision to exclude Ramadan or any other foreign national.

Ramadan, the author of some 20 books on Islamic theology, filed a new visa application on September 16 after receiving invitations for speaking engagements in the U.S. When interviewed in December in Switzerland by agents of the Homeland Security and State Departments, Ramadan said, he was questioned about his views of the war in Iraq.

"I told them what I have said many times publicly, that I think the war was a mistake and illegal," he told the Times. "I think the resistance is legitimate but the means they are using are not."

Ramadan is the grandson of Hasan al-Banna, a founder in 1928 of the Muslim Brotherhood, an Egyptian group that has carried out violent attacks in recent decades.

He claims "there is nothing in my record supporting terrorism.”

But some critics say he espouses moderate views in Europe while embracing more militant views when addressing Muslims in the Arab world, according to the Times.

Homeland Security’s Knocke declined to comment on the lawsuit, but noted that the criteria for revoking visas included "public safety and national security risks.”