The ACLU

[MidnightBlue]

ACLU has a history of handling cases that are in opposition to Christian beliefs.

No, they don't. They defend the liberty of all people. That offends some Christians, who feel they should have the right to impose their beliefs on the public at government expense. That feeling, however, is hardly rooted in the teachings of Jesus.

 

[Corey]

ACLU has a history of handling cases that are in opposition to Christian beliefs. I don't think there is any hatred, but certainly some concern from christians, about what the ACLU is defending.

The ACLU handles all cases where rights have been violated, including Christians. There was a case a few years...in NJ I think...where a girl was not being allowed to distribute Christian literature at school...on her own time...and wasn't being disruptive. The ACLU stepped and forced the school to back down.

That's right. The ACLU.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

It seems that among some christians there's a great deal of hostility toward the ACLU. In recent threads, I've seen accusations such as that the ACLU:

- readily defend having a copy of "Playboy" or "Hustler" in plain view of children in a library
- fight to remove the Bible claiming separation of church and state.
- defend someones right to scream defamation, slander and obscenities from any public place.
- defend the supposed right of grown men to sodomized young boys through the North American Boy-Love Association (NAMBLA).
- fight to the teeth against someone speaking their mind if they invoke the name of God in a positive way or read from His Word in the same public arena.

Of course, none of them are true.

Of course, it doesn't really matter if someone else's reasons are based on untrue premises for my reasons to be valid with not being supportive of any particular group.
That and most people require more than a simple "none of them are true" or "some or all of them are true".

So my question is, why so much hostility to an organisation that acts to proctect the rights of all Americans?

There seems to be an oversight or assumption missed in that. As if the rights of one person may or may not interfere with the rights of another. Assuming that a mixture of various beliefs, rights, values, etc. can be brought under one umbrella and there wouldn't be any conflict between them is a bit naive for most.
They have a reputation based on what they fight for and against; in many instances, that places them against Christian values. Then the taxpayers (which would include Christians) have to reimburse their effort whether it is a correct cause or not, whether it was a win or loss. It's not too complicated as to why someone would not approve of a group that at times fights against one's beliefs only to later have to pay them for it through Title 42 of the Civil Rights Act.

That and any group that continually harasses through the judiciary the Boy Scouts of America is simply a leech of society that needs some salt thrown on it.

 

[Corey]

That and any group that continually harasses through the judiciary the Boy Scouts of America is simply a leech of society that needs some salt thrown on it.

The BSA wants to be acknowledged a private group (so they can discriminate) but at the same time wants special privileges from government agencies that only can be give to nondiscriminatory groups. The BSA has to choose one or the other.

I'll note that I'm an Eagle Scout and had many great experiences in the Scouts. I am also completely against their current policies foisted upon the local Councils by the fundamentalist professional leadership. My children...if I have any...will be in 4H or some other service club.

 

[knightlight72]

No, they don't. They defend the liberty of all people. That offends some Christians, who feel they should have the right to impose their beliefs on the public at government expense. That feeling, however, is hardly rooted in the teachings of Jesus.

If the ACLU handles cases which go against the beliefs of christians, then the answer is yes, they do.

While I understand that the ACLU does defend numerous beliefs, that the they handle cases which support various issues that go against christian beliefs, then that is not forgotten becuase of the other stuff.

 

[TeddyKGB]

Of course, it doesn't really matter if someone else's reasons are based on untrue premises for my reasons to be valid with not being supportive of any particular group.
That and most people require more than a simple "none of them are true" or "some or all of them are true".

You are correct, however, I would point out that the OP is a rehash of points covered in another thread.

There seems to be an oversight or assumption missed in that. As if the rights of one person may or may not interfere with the rights of another. Assuming that a mixture of various beliefs, rights, values, etc. can be brought under one umbrella and there wouldn't be any conflict between them is a bit naive for most.

Except the ACLU's positions usually involve Constitutional principles, not simply rights vs. rights.

They have a reputation based on what they fight for and against; in many instances, that places them against Christian values. Then the taxpayers (which would include Christians) have to reimburse their effort whether it is a correct cause or not, whether it was a win or loss. It's not too complicated as to why someone would not approve of a group that at times fights against one's beliefs only to later have to pay them for it through Title 42 of the Civil Rights Act.

You realize, of course, that not all Christians value the restrictions on free speech and priveleges of religion that the ACLU opposes?

That and any group that continually harasses through the judiciary the Boy Scouts of America is simply a leech of society that needs some salt thrown on it.

You complain about having to fund the ACLU's legal activities through federal law but disregard the fact that the BSA receives federal money and retains the right to flaunt federal law?

 

[knightlight72]

The ACLU handles all cases where rights have been violated, including Christians. There was a case a few years...in NJ I think...where a girl was not being allowed to distribute Christian literature at school...on her own time...and wasn't being disruptive. The ACLU stepped and forced the school to back down.

That's right. The ACLU.

The question was why christians seem to have issues with the ACLU. I was pointing out that the ACLU does defend issues which are in opposition to christian values.

 

[Corey]

The question was why christians seem to have issues with the ACLU. I was pointing out that the ACLU does defend issues which are in opposition to christian values.

So? Christian values are not the law of the land. The ACLU defends the Constitution and our nherent civil rights.

 

[TeddyKGB]

The question was why christians seem to have issues with the ACLU. I was pointing out that the ACLU does defend issues which are in opposition to christian values.

They are not "Christian values"; they are "things valued by some Christians."

 

[knightlight72]

So? Christian values are not the law of the land. The ACLU defends the Constitution and our nherent civil rights.

Just as you are allowed to not agree with what I say, christian are allowed to not agree with what the ACLU do.

I was pointing out the why there were any issues as the first post in this thread was asking.

 

[knightlight72]

They are not "Christian values"; they are "things valued by some Christians."

Let me rephrase then. The ACLU works on things that is sometimes in opposition to what Jesus and God have spoken against.

I'm not trying to tell you your beliefs. I was just trying to point out why christians have issues with the ACLU.

 

[TeddyKGB]

Let me rephrase then. The ACLU works on things that is sometimes in opposition to what Jesus and God have spoken against.

That is more misleading than your original phrasing.

I'm not trying to tell you your beliefs. I was just trying to point out why christians have issues with the ACLU.

I know why some Christians have issues with the ACLU. They value things that the ACLU opposes. That does not make those things "Christian values."

 

[ChristianCenturion]

The BSA wants to be acknowledged a private group (so they can discriminate) but at the same time wants special privileges from government agencies that only can be give to nondiscriminatory groups. The BSA has to choose one or the other.

I'll note that I'm an Eagle Scout and had many great experiences in the Scouts. I am also completely against their current policies foisted upon the local Councils by the fundamentalist professional leadership. My children...if I have any...will be in 4H or some other service club.

This simply underlines my point. Not all values and interests coexist and are by default conflict free.

The Boy Scouts of America are and always have been a religious organization. For government or people manipulating the government to dictate their secularist or opposing ideology upon them would violate the First Amendment of religious expression. For government to deny access to public facilities and government forums solely on the grounds of religious belief(s) is likewise a violation of the First amendment. Any exclusion must be done on a neutral viewpoint basis. Any exclusion based on the speaker’s viewpoint or groups religious belief is unconstitutional.
Feel free to look at The Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act, 20 U.S.C. § 7905 (2003). Your declaration that the BSA seek "special" privileges is not supported.

Also try looking at:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=508&page=384

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=530&invol=640

 

[knightlight72]

To TeddyKGB

I don't think it is misleading. The ACLU have worked on some issues that Jeus and God have spoken against. You feel that Jesus and God have not spoken against things that the ACLU have worked on? (not a single issue?)

I'm not suggesting everything that the ACLU does in opposition to God, and I pointed that out already by saying only some issues. I understand that "christians" can be confusing to some people. Some there are those who claim their christian, and then do things that Jeuss himself spoke against. So that is why I clarified the issue was not what christians oppose, but what Jesus and God opposed.

Maybe you could clarify why you feel that is misleading?

 

[ChristianCenturion]

You are correct, however, I would point out that the OP is a rehash of points covered in another thread.

No; I was not aware of another thread, but the issues involved and the talking points are usually a rehash dating years back in my experience.

Except the ACLU's positions usually involve Constitutional principles, not simply rights vs. rights.

I don't disagree, but I also don't forget that the Constitutional Amendments is called the Bill of Rights.

You realize, of course, that not all Christians value the restrictions on free speech and priveleges of religion that the ACLU opposes?

Yes, I do realize this; perhaps my position would be best described in saying that there is a limit to the level of contamination I accept in my drinking water before I refuse to drink it.
Of course, pending the contamination, some limits of one may be lower than others i.e. dirt vs. dung.
I hope that wasn't too crass, I felt it expressed the sentiment well.

You complain about having to fund the ACLU's legal activities through federal law but disregard the fact that the BSA receives federal money and retains the right to flaunt federal law?

Apples and Oranges in my opinion.
I would have to admit that I am ignorant in the amount of funds given to each per year. But regardless of amount, if the BSA proved to be against my values in discernable part or whole and were funded regardless of result or commonly agreeable benefit, then I would equally be against them wasting funds as well.
In my observations, that does not apply regarding the BSA.

I would also point out that the ACLU is directly tied to and is centered around the judicial whereas the BSA is simply a group that by their very existence gets dragged into or takes their case to the judicial arena. It still comes back to the conditions where rights of one may conflict with the rights of another and being a former Boy Scout and being a Christian, I think it would be obvious with which of those two groups my values would best align.

 

[levi501]

Quickest way to tell if you're wrong about something... see if the ACLU disagrees.

 

[TeddyKGB]

I don't think it is misleading. The ACLU have worked on some issues that Jeus and God have spoken against. You feel that Jesus and God have not spoken against things that the ACLU have worked on? (not a single issue?)

I'm not suggesting everything that the ACLU does in opposition to God, and I pointed that out already by saying only some issues. I understand that "christians" can be confusing to some people. Some there are those who claim their christian, and then do things that Jeuss himself spoke against. So that is why I clarified the issue was not what christians oppose, but what Jesus and God opposed.

Maybe you could clarify why you feel that is misleading?

I do not think it needs to be repeated that there are some serious disagreements among Christians about what Jesus and God might have said, but I find my self repeating it nonetheless.

In any case, Jesus had much more to say about how an individual should behave than how a state should govern.

 

[MidnightBlue]

I don't think it is misleading. The ACLU have worked on some issues that Jeus and God have spoken against. You feel that Jesus and God have not spoken against things that the ACLU have worked on? (not a single issue?)

Like what? On what issues, specifically, has the ACLU opposed the teachings of Jesus?

 

[knightlight72]

I do not think it needs to be repeated that there are some serious disagreements among Christians about what Jesus and God might have said, but I find my self repeating it nonetheless.

In any case, Jesus had much more to say about how an individual should behave than how a state should govern.

Hi Teddy, I'm not sure what you mean. I think you were disagreeing with my post, but I'm not sure which or how it disagreed. Are you saying that the ACLU doesn't not handle anything that Jesus or God spoke against? I was trying to be sure in my last post that you were being forward, and saying that there is not a single issue. But I think you are saying that any issues the ACLU handle are actually in disagreement between christians, and therefore God has not spoken against any issues the ACLU have worked on? Did I make a mistake inwhat you meant?

 

[charityagape]

Quickest way to tell if you're wrong about something... see if the ACLU disagrees.

Not that anyone would ever take what a certain group says and agree with it simply because that group said it. We are all independent thinkers here.