ACLU In The News

[Soldier4Christ]

Lynch says Web registry will stay

New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch has no plans to review his state’s online registry of sex offenders in light of two killings in Maine, a spokeswoman said Tuesday.

"We are focused on making sure that parents can protect their children from threats," Lynch spokeswoman Pamela Walsh said. "Obviously, we hope people will use the information responsibly."

Claire Ebel, executive director of the New Hampshire Civil Liberties Union, opposes such registries. She said they do little to protect children and may hurt them by giving parents a false sense of security, as when an offender living across the street fails to register.

"The vast majority of people who abuse children are people known to them - (members of) their families, neighbors," Ebel said.

 She hopes the events in Maine will remind state legislators everywhere that "vigilante justice does not result in justice."

New Hampshire had its own episode of vigilante justice involving its sex-offender registry in 2003, when Lawrence Trant stabbed a man and lit fires in two buildings in Concord, where at least seven convicted sex offenders lived.

He was sentenced to 10-to-30 years in prison after pleading guilty to two counts of attempted murder. In a prison interview in 2004, Trant, then 57, said he thought his crimes were "morally justified."

A prosecutor said Trant probably would have killed someone if he hadn’t been caught.

"He doesn’t seem to have any conscience about violence to other people," prosecutor John Weld said. ---

[airIam2worship]

Pray As They Say, Or Else


Bunkey Morgan, of the Chatham County Commissioners, received notice from the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina that the prayers he delivers before each county meeting are possibly offensive and could be alienating those who attend.

The issue seems to be not the prayer itself, but rather the name “Jesus Christ.” The ACLU requested that the board discontinue its use of “sectarian invocations at Chatham County Commissioners meetings.”

So, is the ACLU not against prayer but merely voicing the name of the Christ? It would seem so. I wonder if they would be willing to provide a list of other unacceptable gods?

Although Morgan prefaced his delivery of the Lord’s Prayer by saying, “In the Bible, Jesus taught us in prayer,” all the commissioners agreed to avoid legal hassles by complying, minimally, with the ACLU’s request.

One commissioner said, “We’re all Christian, and we can’t pray in the way we usually do.”

That doesn’t sound much like freedom of religion does it? The ACLU wanting to be in charge of telling us where we can pray and who we can pray to, sounds like the beginning of a state “religion” to me. Maybe that’s what they’ve been after all along.

I think that Bunkey Morgan should pass out earplugs to the members of the ACLU if they don't want to hear the Name of Jesus while prayers are being said, OR Mr. Morgan should simply post a BIG sign stating: ATTENTION ACLU; Prayer in session do not interrupt.

[Soldier4Christ]

I think that Bunkey Morgan should pass out earplugs to the members of the ACLU if they don't want to hear the Name of Jesus while prayers are being said, OR Mr. Morgan should simply post a BIG sign stating: ATTENTION ACLU; Prayer in session do not interrupt.

Why not both. With proper ear plugs they can't find something else in the meeting to sue over either.

[Soldier4Christ]

Suit settled over conditions at juvenile center


Cook County and the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois have agreed to settle a lawsuit over conditions at the county's Juvenile Temporary Detention Center, a federal judge said.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Martin Ashman said in a written order issued Monday that he had canceled a settlement conference in the case, "the court having been notified that the parties settled."

An ACLU official declined to comment Tuesday on the terms of the agreement, saying it still must be finalized and presented to U.S. District Judge John Nordberg for his approval.

"We have reached an agreement in principle, and we just have one detail to negotiate about one aspect of it," said Benjamin Wolf, associate legal director for the ACLU of Illinois. The remaining detail "is something that we all believe will be resolved."

Wolf said he expects to finalize the agreement in the next 10 days and that Nordberg could consider it at status hearing May 3.

Cook County officials could not be reached Tuesday for comment.

The ACLU and the county reached an earlier settlement in the same lawsuit in 2002.

But in November, ACLU officials filed a petition alleging that staff members at the center had violated that agreement, subjecting residents to threats and beatings.

County officials denied the allegations. They also contend that conditions have improved since new Supt. Jerry Robinson took over last year.

[Soldier4Christ]

Senate panel backs driver's license measure

SACRAMENTO – Sen. Gil Cedillo's maneuvering to broaden the appeal of his ongoing campaign to grant undocumented immigrants the legal right to drive may cost him traditional allies.

The Senate Transportation Committee yesterday approved his bill on a 7-3 vote amid the backdrop of recent massive immigrant rights rallies and a planned boycott of stores and jobs May 1.

The bill, SB 1160, is designed to give illegal immigrants the opportunity to apply for a clearly distinguishable document that could only be used as a certificate to drive – not for identification.

The legislation also includes provisions that would bring California into compliance with the Real ID Act, a new federal anti-terrorism law that requires states to impose tough identification standards on all driver's license applicants by May 2008.

If California fails to comply, the federal government would not accept the state's driver's licenses from those who want to board airplanes or enter federal buildings.

“This comes from the 9/11 report,” said Cedillo, D-Los Angeles. “This is the national consensus.”

But some advocates for immigrant rights and civil liberties have urged Cedillo to amend his bill to return to its original goal of granting actual licenses – as opposed to driving-only certificates – to those who cannot prove they are here legally. They contend a lesser measure could be perceived as California's stamp of approval of the federal law.

“We don't want to send the wrong signal to federal policy-makers about the state's willingness and ability to implement the Real ID Act,” said Valerie Small Navarro of the American Civil Liberties Union.

“We're trying to put pressure on Congress,” added Jeanette Zanipatin of the California Immigrant Welfare Collaborative.

States have complained the Real ID Act is too complex and costly. Privacy experts worry about data security. Others say many people, including older Americans, do not have ready access to documents, such as birth certificates.

Bowing to calls to proceed on separate tracks would deny millions – including many here legally – the ability to obtain licenses, Cedillo said.

“The proposal to bifurcate it is a proposal for the status quo and the status quo is unacceptable,” he said.

However, Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed similar legislation last year and previously rejected a measure to grant licenses to those who cannot prove they are here illegally.

San Diego Democrats Christine Kehoe and Denise Ducheny voted for the bill.

[Soldier4Christ]

State plans fight on early release after jail ruling


SANTA FE - A state district judge, unpersuaded by the recent move of 68 inmates, said a special panel on prison overcrowding must meet to consider the early release of nonviolent female prisoners.

Judge Jim Hall ruled it's "absolutely clear" that under state law, Corrections Secretary Joe Williams must notify the panel of overcrowding at the New Mexico Women's Correctional Facility at Grants.

At the same time, he must provide the Corrections Population Control Commission with a list of nonviolent offenders who are scheduled for release within six months, the judge said Tuesday.

Williams, who chairs the commission but is opposed to any early releases, said he would likely appeal Hall's ruling.

"We haven't had a lot of success with nonviolent offenders in this state recently," Williams said in an interview.

Williams' lawyer told the court that with last Friday's shift of 68 women from Grants to a privately operated jail in Albuquerque, the prison was no longer over-capacity.

It would be "nonsensical" to convene the commission, argued James Brewster, deputy general counsel for the Corrections Department.

The inmates were moved more than a week after Hall first issued a preliminary ruling - in a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico - that the department wasn't complying with a 2002 state law. Tuesday's follow-up hearing was a chance for the department to state its case.

Under that law, once a facility has been at more than 100 percent of capacity for 60 days, the corrections secretary must notify the commission and provide the list.

The commission must then meet within 10 days "to consider the release of nonviolent offenders" and to discuss with the department changing the prisoner classification system and expanding alternatives to incarceration.

The department acknowledges the Grants prison had exceeded its capacity of 600 for 60 days. The ACLU contends it may have been overcrowded for as much as a year.

Williams said he could have scattered inmates around New Mexico, but he thought the "conditions of confinement and quality of life" in Grants were better, "and I certainly didn't want to release nonviolent offenders."

Williams cited public safety as one reason for his opposition, mentioning the 1996 Hollywood Video murders in Albuquerque and the recent slaying of a Bernalillo County sheriff's deputy.

In the 1996 case, the two people charged with murdering five people during and after a video store holdup were out of prison under an early-release "reintegration" program, later abolished. One had been in prison for armed robbery and the other on drug charges.

In the recent case, defendant Michael Paul Astorga was on parole - and already wanted for a November 2005 murder - when he allegedly shot a deputy during a traffic stop.

Gov. Bill Richardson's office issued a statement in support of an appeal, which would go to the state Supreme Court.

"The governor believes the secretary has the authority to properly manage the corrections system and protect the public safety," said Gilbert Gallegos, a spokesman for the governor.

Maureen Sanders, representing the ACLU, told the court the Grants prison "has been woefully overcrowded" and that last week's shift of inmates didn't correct the problem. Under the law, some inmates had a right to be considered for early release because of the overcrowding, she told Hall.

She said the executive branch was "ignoring the will of the Legislature," and the administration could keep circumventing the law by moving inmates around each time it was sued.

Williams said the Grants prison has a capacity of 606, and the Albuquerque jail - operated by Cornell Companies, Inc. - could take 96, for a total capacity of 702.

"So I have more beds than I have inmates," he said.

Williams said as of Tuesday there were 595 women in Grants.

The department also plans to use the Camino Nuevo prison facility in Albuquerque, set to open in June, to eventually house 192 inmates, including some of those transferred last week.

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU effort to toss Minutemen from state lands fails

TUCSON, Ariz. The state has rejected a complaint filed by the A-C-L-U about Minuteman patrols in southern Arizona.
Minuteman volunteers are patrolling all month on a ranch south of Three Points, looking for illegal immigrants who they can report to the Border Patrol.

The A-C-L-U complained to the state Land Department, pointing out that that some of the ranch actually is leased state land. Therefore, it argued, the volunteers are on state land without state permission.

But Deputy State Land Commissioner Richard Hubbard says the volunteers can continue their patrols without permits because they've been invited by the ranch leasing the land and agreed to do ranch work.

Rancher Pat King says she has a contract with the Minuteman group to monitor cattle, pick up trash and fix fences.

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU wants Milford definition of ’family’ stricken

MILFORD -- The American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts has asked state Attorney General Thomas Reilly to reject the town’s new definition of a family.
    At Town Meeting on Feb. 13, over the objections of some residents and the ACLU, the town voted to change the definition to "one or more persons occupying a dwelling unit and living together as a single housekeeping unit, not including a group of more than three persons who are not within the second degree of kinship."

A group of more than three people, who are all either spouses, parents, children, grandparents, grandchildren and siblings, are allowed to live together under the new law.
    The change was made in an attempt to control residential overcrowding in town. In challenging the vote, the ACLU said it believes the law "significantly infringes on the rights of individuals to make choices about family living arrangements."
    A collection of more than three aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, cousins, great-grandparents and great-grandchildren would not be recognized as family under the new definition.
    "It limits even relatives who could live together in Milford," said ACLU staff attorney Sarah Wunsch. "Traditionally, families have lived in those settings with those types of relationships."
    Though case law currently supports the town’s position, Wunsch said the most recent test before the state’s Supreme Judicial Court was in 1974, and the court has more recently "been quite protective of unconventional families."
    Instead of implementing the new definition, the town should use other methods to deal with overcrowding, noise and parking problems, said Ronal Madnick, director of the Worcester County Chapter of the ACLU.
    "The bottom line is we don’t think the government should be deciding what is a family, especially in this situation," he said. "I think it’s best for Milford to keep out of this business and stick with the laws that it has."
    Town Counsel Gerald Moody, who modeled the zoning definition after ones currently in place in Worcester, Brookline and Cambridge, had little to say about the challenge.

"That’s fine. I have great respect for the ACLU," he said. "That’s their viewpoint, so that’s their viewpoint."
    The attorney general’s office has until May 17 to approve or reject all articles approved at the Feb. 13 Town Meeting, including the family definition change, said spokesman Terance Burke. The routine checks by the attorney general’s Municipal Law Unit are to ensure the local bylaws are consistent with state law, he said.
    The ACLU’s concerns will be noted, and if there is an inconsistency, the local law or portions of it will be disapproved, Burke said.
    Moody said the town would abide by whatever the attorney general decides.
    "If the attorney general disapproves it, the current definition stays in place," Moody said.

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU Targets City Council Prayers

The group is reminding lawmakers that it feels mentions of Jesus Christ, Allah or other specific religious figures in prayers before meetings are unconstitutional.

When the Rev. Dumas Harshaw Jr. of the Raleigh First Baptist Church had only mentioned God in a non-sectarian way in his prayer before Raleigh City Council meetings, the ACLU says that would be fine. But they think his prayer closing, "In Christ's name we pray, amen," is an example of what should not be allowed in a government setting.

The ACLU recently sent a letter to the Raleigh City Council, stating its case. In the letter, the ACLU states several court rulings that found prayer before legislative bodies must be non-sectarian. They are asking the City Council to issue instructions to anyone who prays before meetings to keep it neutral.

The ACLU has asked Raleigh officials to respond to their concerns by Monday. A city committee will review the group's concerns, but will not meet until Tuesday. City Council plans to respond earlier.

An ACLU representative tells Eyewitness News that an article in a local paper sparked them to send the letter. The article covered how local governments start their proceedings in prayer. Lawmakers in Clayton, Pittsboro and the Chatham County Board of Commissioners also received ACLU letters.

Raleigh City Councilman Philip Isley was not happy with the letter.

"I was actually incensed by it," he said. "I don't like when people tell me what I can and can't do."

Isley also is an attorney. He says he understands the argument, but Isley says changing the prayer policy will not get his blessing.

"We do not discriminate as to who can pray before us," he said. "I will not vote to take away our right to pray before a City Council meeting."

[Soldier4Christ]

Cook County juvenile center and ACLU reach settlement

The Cook County Board said it was pleased that an agreement has been reached in the battle between the American Civil Liberties Union and the county over substandard conditions and staff abuse at the juvenile detention center.

"There's nothing more important than our precious children, who are our future," the board said in a statement. "We will continue to focus on the well-being of the Juvenile Temporary Detention Center's residents."

The settlement in the 7-year-old federal lawsuit was reached earlier this week. Though details of the agreement have not yet been released, Benjamin Wolf, associate legal director for the ACLU of Illinois, said it includes specific plans for reform.

He said the agreement calls for independent parties to oversee changes at the detention center because the current detention center administration "could not address the problems."

"There is one specific thing left to be done, but we have reached an agreement in principle on all the other details," Wolf said. "My only hope is that once we reach an agreement, we can get on to solve the bigger problems."

Wolf added that both sides agreed not to discuss the case until all issues are resolved. A hearing is scheduled in federal court on May 3, at which time

U.S. District Judge John Nordberg may approve the settlement. Wolf said he hopes to finalize the proposed agreement at that hearing.

In 1999, the ACLU sued the county, claiming that young offenders housed in the detention center had been assaulted and subjected to threats and that conditions at the center were substandard. An agreement was reached in 2002 to improve the overcrowded conditions, but the ACLU has charged the county with failing to carry out that agreement.

The detention center submitted a plan in 2004 to reform the facility and reportedly has been working to implement that plan since then. Two court-appointed monitors have been overseeing the reforms. But in November, the ACLU went back to court, alleging that the center failed to make the agreed changes.

A children's advocacy group based in Baltimore, the Annie E. Casey Foundation, issued a report earlier this year citing multiple instances of battery or assault by detention staff on the young residents.

Most workers at Cook County Juvenile Court Wednesday were unaware that a settlement had been reached. The few who did were tight-lipped about the case.

A staff member at the detention center said he could not comment on the case or the settlement. Al Tomaso, a supervisor for the Cook County State's Attorney's office, said he was surprised at the news of the settlement, but would not comment on the details.

Members of the Cook County Public Defender's office also were surprised to hear about the settlement. A spokeswoman for the public defender declined to comment until the terms of the settlement are released because the public defender represents many of the children in custody at the detention center.

Steve Eiseman, deputy chief probation officer, said he was familiar with the Casey report's criticisms of the detention center. He said there are "areas that were found to be wanting" in the detention center and he believes the settlement "would touch on each of these issues."

[Soldier4Christ]

Immigration “Reform” Bill Must Not Violate Privacy, Say ACLU and AFL-CIO; Urge Reforms to Protect All Workers in America

WASHINGTON – The American Civil Liberties Union and the AFL-CIO said today that any immigration reform Congress considers must not violate workers’ privacy through an intrusive, bureaucratic Employment Eligibility Verification System. The Senate is expected to address immigration when it returns next week from its Easter recess.

 “Too much of the debate over immigration reform has ignored one of the greatest threats to our privacy,” said Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office.  “The proposed employer verification system would require Americans, regardless of citizenship, to get a ‘permission slip to work’ from the government.  If Congress wants to reform immigration, then it should, but it shouldn’t use this legislation as a clandestine means to subvert our constitutional right to privacy.”

“Unfortunately, proposals currently before Congress do not address the real issue, which is the incentive to exploit workers--both US and native born,” said Jon Hiatt, AFL CIO General Counsel.  “Instead, they contemplate a large expansion of electronic verification systems, which have already been tested, and have proven to be detrimental to workers.”

The EEVS would require - for the first time - all workers to obtain a federal agency’s permission to work, regardless of citizenship or immigration status.  It would create two massive government databases containing the most sensitive personal information on every lawful resident. Every worker would be registered in the two systems with data files tracking every job they ever sought or held. The two systems combine that information with substantial amounts of personally identifiable information, all keyed to a person’s Social Security number.

All employers would be required to participate in a national employment eligibility verification program in an expansion of the faulty but voluntary “Basic Pilot” program.  However, no proposals have been brought forth to provide for a secure system; making it likely that the EEVS system would be a ripe target for identity thieves.

The Government Accountability Office estimated implementation costs at $11.7 billion annually, a large share of which would be borne by businesses.  In addition to the ACLU and the AFL-CIO, the conservative Heritage Foundation, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business organizations have expressed strong objections to the employment verification provisions.

[Soldier4Christ]

Civil rights groups rally with John Jay students over cell-ban


A prominent city civil rights watchdog group and a noted activist attorney backed students at John Jay high school who walked out of classes last Tuesday in protest over a cell phone ban.
Eric Adams, head of 100 Blacks in Law Enforcement Who Care and civil rights lawyer Norman Siegel, former director of the New York branch of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) held a joint press conference with John Jay students outside the Park Slope secondary school last Saturday.
“This is not about cell phones, this issues is much larger than cell phones,” said Adams. “When you look at the list of denials that these students are denied, they are the same denials that prisoners at Riker’s Island are denied,” said Adams, adding that students are also prohibited from bringing items like bottled water into the building.
On April 12, scores of students walked out of the Brooklyn school
protesting a rash of cell phone confiscations by school security. John Jay parents were equally up in arms for not being informed about the apparently new procedures.
The Department of Education maintains that the cell phone/beeper ban is hardly new and has been has been part of its disciplinary code for over a decade.
“The cell phone ban has been enforced since 1987,” said DOE
spokeswoman Alicia Maxey who says the ban is enforced in all the city’s 1400-plus schools. Under the DOE’s code cell phones and beepers are cited as “prohibited equipment,” the possession of which can result in a disciplinary action against a student.
Maxey said that the enforcement of the cell phone ban at John Jay comes as a result of a school safety audit of the high school’s scanning machines.
“An audit by school safety determined the scanners were not
calibrated correctly and were not picking up cell phones,” Maxey said.
“Scanners were recalibrated last Monday, April 10th and began picking up cell phones going forward,” she added.
For John Jay parent Lagrane Brooks, who has a medical condition and gave her son a cell phone following the September 11th attacks, the ban is a
hassle.
“We have to be more careful with our children, we want to know where they are and how to get in touch with them, that is why cell phones are given,” said Brooks.
Krystle Guejuste, the junior student who helped organize last week’s walk out says the cell phone-ban is just the tip on the iceberg of woes John Jay students face. Guejuste says the school carries dated textbooks, offers no SAT
prep classes, is plagued with rodent problems and has leaky ceilings.
“We feel that once this is set off, it will cause a domino effect,” said Guejuste, arrested by the NYPD along with five other students during
last Wednesday’s protest.
“We are telling the Board of Education, be the leaders of education
and not the NYPD,” Adams said.
The retired police captain added, ”We commend these students [for] following the long legacy of young people blowing the winds of change
and ensuring their lives are conducive to learning, growing and being
productive citizens.”

[Soldier4Christ]

Fallbrook High School responds to ACLU



FALLBROOK ---- In a formal response Thursday to the American Civil Liberties Union, the Fallbrook Union High School District said a 15-year-old student was not disciplined for wearing an American flag to school on March 31, but that students were asked not to display flags on campus that week because officials feared it might fuel disruptions caused by student protests over proposed federal immigration reforms.

The response ---- written and signed by the district's attorney, Daniel Shinoff ---- appears to contradict statements by district Superintendent Tom Anthony that Fallbrook High School did not prohibit its students from displaying flags.

The two-page letter does not state whether the school district will grant three demands made last week by the ACLU concerning student Malia Fontana, who alleges the district violated her right to free expression when it asked her to put away a flag handkerchief she wore tucked into her back pocket.

In the letter, the district does not apologize to Fontana ---- as the ACLU had asked ---- and only peripherally addresses the group's other demands: that any record of the incident be removed from Fontana's student file and that the school cease any prohibition of flags on campus.

The district provided a copy of the letter to the North County Times.

Kevin Keenan, the executive director of the San Diego and Imperial Counties chapter of the ACLU, declined to comment Thursday, saying he preferred to wait until he received the district's letter in the mail.

The district's response appears to focus on two issues: whether Malia was disciplined and what prompted the district to ask her to remove the flag.

The letter states that during the week of March 27 "school officials were attempting to control campus activity where students took part in rallies and inappropriately left school grounds to do so."

"It was believed by school officials that students displaying flags during those days could lead to further disruption of school activities. ... therefore, students were asked not to display any flags during those days," the letter states.

Anthony has repeatedly denied that students at Fallbrook High were asked not to display flags during the week of student protests.

He said Thursday that Shinoff's letter refers to the Oceanside Unified School District ---- though that district is not mentioned in the letter ---- and that at Fallbrook High, students were only told to put away flags if they were displaying them in a disrespectful or disruptive manner.

"If the kids were displaying them in a way that was causing a disturbance, we would ask them to put them away," he said. "And it wasn't just the American flag, it was any flag. I think we had more problems with bandanas than we did with flags."

In the March 31 incident, Fontana was approached by a campus security guard, who asked her to put away the flag-print handkerchief that was hanging out of her back pocket. She refused, and was escorted to an assistant principal's office.

The district states in its letter that the ACLU has expressed "concern that Ms. Fontana was subject to discipline." The letter states Fontana was not disciplined for her refusal to put away the flag, but was simply asked to go to the assistant principal's office to talk about the issue.

An incident report later added to Fontana's file "only makes reference to the interaction between the campus supervisor and Ms. Fontana" and such reports are routinely done so there is a record of interactions between students and staff, the district's letter states. No disciplinary action was taken against Fontana, the letter states.

The district's letter repeatedly emphasizes that Fallbrook High School respects every student's right to free expression and that Fontana "was not, and will not be, subject to any sort of discipline whatsoever for her display of the American flag on school grounds."

When asked whether the district will apologize to Fontana, Anthony said, "We're waiting to hear a response from (the ACLU) now."

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU Urged To Free Terrorist Who Later Pleads Guilty

Neocon Express sent me this news that includes a link to The Counterterrorism Blog where Steven Emerson discusses his interview on Bill O’Reilly where he talked about the plea bargain of Sami al-Arian. We mentioned the news earlier in the week, but it does good to remind our readers just how dangerous and reckless the ACLU’s anti-American agenda is.

Neocon Express says:

    Let the record show that it was only a few months ago that the ACLU urged the Federal Government to drop all efforts to retry Florida Professor Sami al-Arian on charges that he helped fund a notorious Islamic terrorist organization.
    In a letter to federal authorities, the director of the Florida ACLU wrote: “In light of the jury’s [partial] acquittal … on the most serious charges and in light of reportedly spending millions of dollars in a trial that led to no convictions, a decision to retry (Dr. Al-Arian) would appear to be pointless and vindictive.”
    This weak, al-Arian plead guilty as charged to one count of engaging in a conspiracy to provide services to a terrorist organization and agreed as part of a plea bargin to be deported from the United States. In other words, if it were up to the ACLU, this terrorist would now be walking free in the US and teaching an audience of captive, impressionable young university students. Thanks ACLU.

[Soldier4Christ]

Tax Breaks And Vouchers And Free Choice, Oh My


Congressman Vito Fossella (R-NY) plans to introduce a bill giving parents of children in private and parochial schools a $4,500 tax credit.

He is concerned that rising tuition costs are making it difficult for middle and low income families with children in private schools. He also feels, that parents should have a choice about where they send their children to learn.

Cue the leftwing nuts who are afraid some child might be learning anything, except how to write essays entitled “Global Warming, George Bush’s Energy Plan” or “Karl Rove and the Halliburton Hurricane Machine,” or reading something other than “The Boy With Two Dads In Bondage.” Their frustration at not being able to control the minds and souls of all our youth are thinly veiled in statements like the following from Donna Lieberman, the executive director of the NYCLU. “It’s a voucher dressed up like a tax credit, and it raises serious concerns about subsidizing private and religious education while undermining our public schools, which are already in duress.”

What she’s really worried about is the undermining of the plot to overthrow our way of life, by poisoning the minds and hearts of our children. In private and parochial school there’s a good chance kids are learning moral absolutes and traditional American values. The left is afraid, very afraid. As Lieberman railed on, “The taxpayers should not be supporting religious education. “They should be supporting nonsectarian education.”

How else will atheistic socialism triumph?