ACLU In The News

[Soldier4Christ]

and that's all the more reason to support this bill

________________________


Plan to cut ACLU money pipeline advances 
Effort would prevent group from collecting taxpayers' cash

A plan that would cut off the pipeline of taxpayer money that now flows into American Civil Liberties Union coffers has been advanced by the House Judiciary Committee.

The Public Expression of Religion Act, introduced by Indiana Congressman John Hostettler, now will move to the full House for a vote, he said in his announcement this week.

"This is a big victory for Americans who care about our rich religious heritage in this country," he said. "There is a lot of excitement about this bill."

It has been vigorously supported by the American Legion, where Commander Rees Lloyd described it as "a long overdue victory for justice, freedom, democracy, and the First Amendment."

"The American Legion has fought for reform of the attorney fee provisions of federal law which the ACLU has exploited to reap millions of dollars in taxpayer-paid attorney fees in Establishment Clause cases," Lloyd's statement said.

He said the ACLU has used the threat of the fees as 'a club' to bludgeon local elected bodies into surrendering to the ACLU's "secular cleansing demands."

The plan came about after the ACLU, "the Taliban of American liberal secularism," according to Lloyd, sued to tear down a cross on a rock outcrop erected by veterans as a memorial to World War I veterans in 1934 in the remote Mojave Desert.

Officials noted someone would have to drive 11 miles off the highway "to be offended" by the cross.

There had been no complaints against the memorial in 60 years, until the ACLU sued to have it removed, and then asked for and got $63,000.

"The American Legion," said former American Legion National Commander Tom Bock, "is in full support" of the plan. He said it would take away the authority of judges to award attorney fees to the ACLU in lawsuits under the Establishment Clause.

The law, approved in 1976, originally was to help individual citizens bring lawsuits against state officials who had deprived them of their constitutional rights. However, Hostettler believes it has been abused by groups like the ACLU, who claim any public official who expresses religious beliefs or displays a memorial with religious imagery, like the crosses at Arlington National Cemetery, is promoting the "establishment of religion."

For example, in 2001 Iowa county officials removed a Ten Commandments monument from a courthouse lawn rather than face the attorney's fees threatened. And in 2004, Los Angeles removed a tiny cross from the county seal when it was threatened with those fees.

Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback has similar legislation pending in the Senate.

In an endorsement of the plan, the American Legion quoted Thomas Jefferson:

"The germ of dissolution of our federal government is in our federal judiciary; an irresponsible body, working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing in its noiseless step like a thief … until all shall be usurped from the States, and the government of all be consolidated into one."

One such case that currently is grinding its way through the court system involves the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial in California.

The ACLU has been fighting to remove that for 17 years, even though 76 percent of the people in San Diego where it is located want it to stay.

[nChrist]

Nobody will ever be able to calculate all the destruction that the ACLU has done to America. It has been like having all of our enemies inside the country and never being able to defend ourselves. AND, it is absolutely sickening to know that they used tax payer money to do all the damage. Hardly anyone had the money to fight them, so them actually ran over many small organizations, churches, municipalities, and even the scouts. It has just been recently that some Christian legal organizations have decided to take the ACLU on, and the ACLU is finally being beaten on a regular basis.

It would be wonderful if this legislation passes. At least they wouldn't be using tax payer money to do the devil's work. If the ACLU kept up it's assault on morals, Christians, and everything decent in this country, the ultra-liberal left would have to pay for it out of their own pocket. They would at least no longer be the biggest bully on the block, and they might actually go out of business.  YEAH!  I, for one would be happy to borrow money to send them on a one-way trip out of the country. Iran might be nice.   

[Soldier4Christ]

If they were to go to Iran I think that it would be spelled "I Ran" by them and that would be fine by me. they need to be put on the run.   

[Soldier4Christ]

[nChrist]

          ROFL!  - What a hoot! - Now that's funny and I needed a good laugh this morning.

 

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU Loses In Latest Boy Scout Attack

Via BSALegal.Org

    An atheist mother represented by the ACLU complained that allowing Boy Scouts to recruit in public schools on the same basis as other groups discriminated against her atheist son who attends Portland public schools. In today’s decision reversing a lower court decision, the Oregon Supreme Court emphatically concluded that “nothing that occurred in any public school program, service, or activity was discriminatory at all.”

    “Giving Boy Scouts equal access is not discrimination,” said Scouting spokesperson Robert H. Bork, Jr. “It is the law.”

    “The First Amendment and two federal statues require that Boy Scouts be given the same access to school facilities as other youth or community organizations,” said Boy Scouts’ attorney George A. Davidson. If the lower court’s decision had been upheld, “every school district in Oregon would have been in jeopardy of losing federal funding.”

Read more details at BSALegal.Org

This is a ridiculous lawsuit in the first place. I feel bad for the judges that had to listen to the arguments in this one. It seems to me that it was a “no duh” equal access case, and the Oregon Supreme Court came to the same conclusion. Thank goodness this case was dealt with using common sense.

Listen to the ridiculous response from the executive director of the Oregon ACLU.

    David Fidanque, executive director of the Oregon ACLU, said the ruling turned on a technical definition of what constitutes discrimination in the schools.

    In theory, he argued, a hate group such as the Ku Klux Klan could make a presentation in an Oregon school about joining, and it would not be discrimination as long as it didn’t mention it restricts membership to white people. In practice, however, he said he doesn’t believe the ruling will encourage Oregon schools to change policies that promote nondiscrimination.

Not only is this an unfair and disgraceful attempt to compare the BSA’s policy to discriminate based on their moral code to a group that promotes hate and racism, but it is an inaccurate and losing argument. The Boy Scouts are not saying that all atheists are bad people they are simply saying that being an atheist is not compatable with being a Boy Scout. Discriminating membership to an organization does not equate to promoting hate against those that are excluded. This argument is completely false anyway.

    “The [Equal Access] Act expressly does not limit a school’s authority to prohibit meetings that would ‘materially and substantially interfere with the orderly conduct of educational activities with the school.’

Natt Hentoff has stated clearly in the past just how ridiculous all of this is.

    Should the NAACP be forced by the courts or by the ACLU to allow adherents of white racist organizations to take leadership positions in the NAACP? Should disability-rights groups be compelled to have disciples of Dr. Jack Kevorkian in leadership roles?

Perhaps the ACLU should sue to strip the NAACP of their public funding and access to public schools? I don’t think we will ever see that one happen.

Thankfully it looks like the ACLU is throwing in the towel in this particular attack.

    Fidanque said there will be no more appeals because the Oregon Supreme Court has the final word in cases involving state anti-discrimination laws.

The ACLU’s hateful war against the BSA is one more good reason to support the Public Expression of Religion Act. Let’s stop paying the ACLU to destroy America and freedom.

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU Loses In Attack On Christian Prayers

Via The Conservative Voice:

    The ACLU lost another lawsuit it had filed against Christianity. On Friday, US District Judge Richard Story ruled that Cobb County, GA commissioners could use the name of Jesus Christ and “identify the deity to whom they direct their prayer.”

    The lawsuit, which originally began in August 2005, was filed by the ACLU on behalf of 7 individuals who said that it is unconstitutional for the commissioners to use the name of Jesus in their prayers and was a ‘government endorsement of Christianity’.

    ACLU attorney Maggie Garrett said that the ACLU has not, as yet, decided if it will appeal Judge Story’s decision.

It is always good news when a judge rules in favor of the First Amendment. Too often they forget the part about “prohibiting the free exercize thereof.” This lawsuit is only one of many examples that the ACLU target the public expression of religion. In the cases they win they are often awarded hefty sums of money that are taken from the taxpayer’s pocket.

There is legislation going up for a vote that would put a stop to the ACLU’s monetary rewards when they win a case attacking the free exercize of religion. Tell your Congress Critters to vote yes on the Public Expression Of Religion Act.

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU Condemns Voter Integrity Act


Via The ACLU Website:

    The American Civil Liberties Union today expressed its disappointment with the House passage of a bill placing undue and unnecessary burdens on Americans’ fundamental right to vote. H.R. 4844, the “Federal Election Integrity Act of 2006,” requires voters to present a government-issued photo ID in order to vote in federal elections. In addition, beginning in 2010 voters would be required to present a photo ID that was issued based on proof of citizenship in order to vote. The measure passed by a vote of 228-196.

    The following can be attributed to Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office:

    “Less than two months after the renewal of the Voting Rights Act, the House of Representatives has chosen to pass legislation disenfranchising the very citizens the VRA was designed to protect. No eligible citizen should have to pay to vote. There are voters who simply don’t have photo ID and requiring them to purchase one in order to vote would be tantamount to a poll tax. This measure will disproportionately impact racial and ethnic minority voters, senior citizens, voters with disabilities, and others who do not have photo identification nor the financial means to acquire it.”

What a load of crap! This ridiculous “poll tax” meme is quickly making its rounds. Nancy Pelosi has taken the ball with this one and ran with it headlining with the alarmist title, “Voter ID Bill Is an Attempt to Suppress the Votes of Millions of American Citizens!”

Give me a break! You have got to be kidding! Perhaps they are worried this act will supress “millions” of illegals and dead people from voting! An I.D. is required in many of the most basic things in America such as driving a car or even cashing a check. Please, tell me how all of these poor people that can not afford to get an I.D. cash their welfare checks?

Rep. Henry Hyde makes the same point.

    But Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), who sponsored the Federal Election Integrity Act, says requiring voters to show photo ID at the polls “presents no greater hardship than people face performing everyday activities.”

    For example, Hyde noted that government-issued photo IDs are required for driving vehicles, applying for Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid, food stamps, boarding airplanes, entering government buildings, registering at school, getting student loans, renting movies, and cashing checks.

    Given all the cases in which U.S. citizens are asked to produce photo IDs, it should not be difficult to produce IDs to guard against fraud in the electoral system, Hyde said.

It really isn’t surprising that the ACLU would be against making our democratic process have more integrity. After all, they know which side butters their bread. They even keep a scorecard on Congress.

The ACLU are involved across the country fighting voter I.D. laws. In Missouri at least 16 St. Louis area Democrats have been found guilty of election crimes in the last year and a half! When Republican Gov. Matt Blunt signed a law requiring voters to provide I.D. the ACLU had to come up with a different argument than the poll tax crap. Even though Missouri the Missouri law provided for free photo IDs that voters could obtain before election day the ACLU represented a group of Democrats to challenge the law by arguing for a loophole they found stating the law violated a state constitutional provision against imposing costs on local governments without providing state funding. So much for the poll tax argument or putting an undue burden on the poor.

As a matter of fact as Digger’s Realm points out:

    Those against it are claiming it’s a poll tax on the poor, minorities and elderly and that they can’t afford to get a drivers license or passport. They fail to mention that the bill includes a portion to pay for free for the poor who can’t afford a photo ID.

The ACLU were also involved in the recent case against a similar bill in Georgia that was struck down. It also provided free I.D.s. They also fought voter ID laws in New Mexico, Michigan, and Indiana. The ACLU has clearly shown its true colors in support of voter fraud. The only possible reason I can realistically see why someone would be against this bill is if they actually desire for voter fraud to continue. Once again the ACLU has shown just how transparent their lie of non-partisanship is. It is clear what the ACLU and democrats want. They want rights for illegal aliens, dead people, and felons to vote early and often.


Full text of the bill follows.

[Soldier4Christ]

Federal Election Integrity Act of 2006' . (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)

HR 4844 EH

109th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. R. 4844

AN ACT

To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require each individual who desires to vote in an election for Federal office to provide the appropriate election official with a government-issued photo identification, and for other purposes.

      Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

      This Act may be cited as the `Federal Election Integrity Act of 2006' .

SEC. 2. REQUIRING VOTERS TO PROVIDE PHOTO IDENTIFICATION.

      (a) Requirement to Provide Photo Identification as Condition of Receiving Ballot- Section 303(b) of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 15483(b)) is amended--

            (1) in the heading, by striking `for Voters Who Register by Mail' and inserting `for Providing Photo Identification'; and

            (2) by striking paragraphs (1) through (3) and inserting the following:

            `(1) INDIVIDUALS VOTING IN PERSON-

                  `(A) REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE IDENTIFICATION- Notwithstanding any other provision of law and except as provided in subparagraph (B), the appropriate State or local election official may not provide a ballot for an election for Federal office to an individual who desires to vote in person unless the individual presents to the official--

                        `(i) a government-issued, current, and valid photo identification; or

                        `(ii) in the case of the regularly scheduled general election for Federal office held in November 2010 and each subsequent election for Federal office, a government-issued, current, and valid photo identification for which the individual was required to provide proof of United States citizenship as a condition for the issuance of the identification.

                  `(B) AVAILABILITY OF PROVISIONAL BALLOT- If an individual does not present the identification required under subparagraph (A), the individual shall be permitted to cast a provisional ballot with respect to the election under section 302(a), except that the appropriate State or local election official may not make a determination under section 302(a)(4) that the individual is eligible under State law to vote in the election unless the individual presents the identification required under subparagraph (A) to the official not later than 48 hours after casting the provisional ballot.

            `(2) INDIVIDUALS VOTING OTHER THAN IN PERSON-

                  `(A) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of law and except as provided in subparagraph (B), the appropriate State or local election official may not accept any ballot for an election for Federal office provided by an individual who votes other than in person unless the individual submits with the ballot--

                        `(i) a copy of a government-issued, current, and valid photo identification; or

                        `(ii) in the case of the regularly scheduled general election for Federal office held in November 2010 and each subsequent election for Federal office, a copy of a government-issued, current, and valid photo identification for which the individual was required to provide proof of United States citizenship as a condition for the issuance of the identification.

                  `(B) EXCEPTION FOR OVERSEAS MILITARY VOTERS- Subparagraph (A) does not apply with respect to a ballot provided by an absent uniformed services voter who, by reason of active duty or service, is absent from the United States on the date of the election involved. In this subparagraph, the term `absent uniformed services voter' has the meaning given such term in section 107(1) of the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (42 U.S.C. 1973ff--6(1)), other than an individual described in section 107(1)(C) of such Act.

            `(3) SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR IDENTIFICATIONS- For purposes of paragraphs (1) and (2)--

                  `(A) an identification is `government-issued' if it is issued by the Federal Government or by the government of a State; and

                  `(B) an identification is one for which an individual was required to provide proof of United States citizenship as a condition for issuance if the identification displays an official marking or other indication that the individual is a United States citizen.'.

      (b) Conforming Amendments- Section 303 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 15483) is amended--

            (1) in the heading, by striking `for voters who register by mail' and inserting `for providing photo identification'; and

            (2) in subsection (c), by striking `subsections (a)(5)(A)(i)(II) and (b)(3)(B)(i)(II)' and inserting `subsection (a)(5)(A)(i)(II)'.

      (c) Clerical Amendment- The table of contents of such Act is amended by amending the item relating to section 303 to read as follows:

            `Sec. 303. Computerized statewide voter registration list requirements and requirements for providing photo identification.'.

      (d) Effective Date-

            (1) IN GENERAL- This section and the amendments made by this section shall apply with respect to the regularly scheduled general election for Federal office held in November 2008 and each subsequent election for Federal office.

            (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 303(d)(2) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 15483(d)(2)) is amended to read as follows:

            `(2) REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE PHOTO IDENTIFICATION- Paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (b) shall apply with respect to the regularly scheduled general election for Federal office held in November 2008 and each subsequent election for Federal office.'.

SEC. 3. MAKING PHOTO IDENTIFICATIONS AVAILABLE.

      (a) Requiring States to Make Identification Available- Section 303(b) of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 15483(b)), as amended by section 2(a)(2), is amended--

            (1) by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs (5) and (6); and

            (2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new paragraph:

            `(4) MAKING PHOTO IDENTIFICATIONS AVAILABLE-

                  `(A) IN GENERAL- During fiscal year 2008 and each succeeding fiscal year, each State shall establish a program to provide photo identifications which may be used to meet the requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2) by individuals who desire to vote in elections held in the State but who do not otherwise possess a government-issued photo identification.

                  `(B) IDENTIFICATIONS PROVIDED AT NO COST TO INDIGENT INDIVIDUALS- If a State charges an individual a fee for providing a photo identification under the program established under subparagraph (A)--

                        `(i) the fee charged may not exceed the reasonable cost to the State of providing the identification to the individual; and

                        `(ii) the State may not charge a fee to any individual who provides an attestation that the individual is unable to afford the fee.

                  `(C) IDENTIFICATIONS NOT TO BE USED FOR OTHER PURPOSES- Any photo identification provided under the program established under subparagraph (A) may not serve as a government-issued photo identification for purposes of any program or function of a State or local government other than the administration of elections.'.

      (b) Payments to States to Cover Costs- Subtitle D of title II of such Act (42 U.S.C. 15321 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new part:

`PART 7--PAYMENTS TO COVER COSTS OF PROVIDING PHOTO IDENTIFICATIONS TO INDIGENT INDIVIDUALS

`SEC. 297. PAYMENTS TO COVER COSTS TO STATES OF PROVIDING PHOTO IDENTIFICATIONS FOR VOTING TO INDIGENT INDIVIDUALS.

      `(a) Payments to States- The Commission shall make payments to States to cover the costs incurred in providing photo identifications under the program established under section 303(b)(4) to individuals who are unable to afford the fee that would otherwise be charged under the program.

      `(b) Amount of Payment- The amount of the payment made to a State under this part for any year shall be equal to the amount of fees which would have been collected by the State during the year under the program established under section 303(b)(4) but for the application of section 303(b)(4)(B)(ii), as determined on the basis of information furnished to the Commission by the State at such time and in such form as the Commission may require.

`SEC. 297A. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

      `There are authorized to be appropriated for payments under this part such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2008 and each succeeding fiscal year.'.

      (c) Clerical Amendment- The table of contents of such Act is amended by adding at the end of the item relating to subtitle D of title II the following:

`Part 7--Payments to Cover Costs of Providing Photo Identifications to Indigent Individuals

            `Sec. 297. Payments to cover costs to States of providing photo identifications for voting to indigent individuals.

            `Sec. 297A. Authorization of appropriations.'.

      (d) Effective Date- This section and the amendments made by this section shall take effect October 1, 2007.

Passed the House of Representatives September 20, 2006.

Attest:

Clerk.

109th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. R. 4844

AN ACT

To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require each individual who desires to vote in an election for Federal office to provide the appropriate election official with a government-issued photo identification, and for other purposes.

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU Ends Legal Challenge Against Ohio “Choose Life” License Plate


    The ACLU, on behalf of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), voluntarily dismissed its case against the “Choose Life” license plate in Ohio, ending all legal challenges against the license plate. The case was NARAL v. Taft which sought to block the sale of the “Choose Life” specialty license plate, along with the entire system of specialty and vanity license plates for Ohio. Liberty Counsel intervened in the case on behalf of “Choose Life” license plate owners and pregnancy and adoption services providers.

    Anyone who purchases a “Choose Life” plate pays an additional fee to obtain the plate. Those funds are used to support local crisis pregnancy centers or other organizations that promote adoption. The law prohibits funds generated from the proceeds of the plate to go to any entity that provides, promotes, or refers for abortion.

    A district court had earlier dismissed the ACLU’s case against the license plate, finding that the lawsuit was barred by the Tax Injunction Act, meaning that the ACLU should have brought its case in the state and not federal court. The ACLU appealed the case to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. While the case was on appeal, the Sixth Circuit decided the case of ACLU v. Bredesen which was a challenge to Tennessee’s “Choose Life” license plate. Liberty Counsel filed a brief before the Sixth Circuit in the Bredesen case, arguing that the Tennessee “Choose Life” plate was constitutional. The Sixth Circuit agreed that the “Choose Life” plate was constitutional, and the Tennessee lawsuit was not barred by the Tax Injunction Act. Recognizing that its Ohio lawsuit was doomed to the same fate before the same court, the ACLU dismissed its challenge against the Ohio “Choose Life” license plate.

    Mathew D. Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel, is pleased the ACLU dismissed the appeal. “The ACLU realized that it didn’t have a prayer in its case against the Ohio “Choose Life” license plate. Dismissing the case against the “Choose Life” license plate was the first sound legal strategy move the ACLU made in this case. “Choose Life” license plates have raised millions of dollars for adoption and pregnancy services across the country. This is a vital and constitutional program.”

    Liberty Counsel has successfully defended “Choose Life” license plates across the nation, including Florida’s “Choose Life” license plate. Liberty Counsel also defended “Choose Life” license plates in Arkansas and Tennessee.

[Soldier4Christ]

Tribunal/Interogation Bill Is A Good Deal, Why? The ACLU Has Just Condemned It


A press release just in from the American Civil Liberties Union:

    New Military Commissions Compromise Gives License to Abuse Prisoners,
    ACLU Says Dangerous Proposal Must Be Rejected

    WASHINGTON - Following announcements that an agreement has been reached between the White House and Senators John Warner (R-VA), John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) on military commissions, the American Civil Liberties Union today said the compromise agreement does not protect due process, fails to meet international treaty obligations and urged lawmakers to reject the deal.

    The following may be attributed to Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office:

    “This is a compromise of America’s commitment to the rule of law. The proposal would make the core protections of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions irrelevant and unenforceable. It deliberately provides a ‘get out of jail free card’ to the administration’s top torture officials, and backdates that card nine years. These are tactics expected of repressive regimes, not the American government.

    “Also under the proposal, the president would have the authority to declare what is - and what is not - a grave breach of the War Crimes Act, making the president his own judge and jury. This provision would give him unilateral authority to declare certain torture and abuse legal and sound. In a telling move, during a call with reporters today, National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley would not even answer a question about whether waterboarding would be permitted under the agreement.

    “The agreement would also violate time-honored American due process standards by permitting the use of evidence coerced through cruel and abusive treatment. We urge lawmakers to stand firm in their commitment to American values and reject this charade of a compromise.”

[Soldier4Christ]

Missouri State, ACLU settle lawsuit over women's program

Missouri State University and the American Civil Liberties Union on Thursday settled a lawsuit filed on behalf of four female tennis players whose team was eliminated for the 2006-07 school year in a budget-cutting move.

Maja Stanojevic, Paty Manzur, Eleonora Kuruc and Monika Musilova will each be paid between $1,000 and $4,000 by the university under the settlement. Each side will be responsible for its own legal fees.

The university last December eliminated women's tennis, along with men's indoor and outdoor track, men's cross country and men's tennis. The cuts are expected to save at least $350,000 annually in a budget that receives about $5 million from the university's general fund.

Anthony Rothert, ACLU legal director of eastern Missouri, said the lawsuit sought to emphasize the importance of Title IX, the 1972 law that prohibits sex discrimination in any educational program that receives federal funds.

"We believe we raised the issue in a responsible way and we believe the university has responded in a responsible way," he said. "Now the four student-athletes can continue with their education and their lives."

The ACLU filed suit in U.S. District Court in April, asking for the women's tennis program to be reinstated. It also asked for an injunction that was denied in May.

University attorney John Black said school officials "agonized over the decision to reduce the number of sports teams. But with the current financial situation, they didn't have much choice."

Most schools meet Title IX requirements by demonstrating that the percentages of male and female athletes are substantially proportionate with the percentages of male and female students enrolled.