For the past forty years the ACLU has used every legal machination to make the display of Christmas trees illegal if placed in a public institution or on property where there is even the remotest connection to a tax dollar. They’ve bludgeoned America with their claim that such displays violate the separation of church and state. The display of the Ten Commandments? Illegal, they say. Prayer in school? Prohibited, they charge. The mere mention of God at a graduation ceremony --- grounds for a law suit. The display of a Menorah -- the next morning the ACLU is at the court steps already litigating.
How strict are they in their interpretation of separation of church and state? In Pittsburgh they went so far as to demand that a municipal parking lot be off limits to those parking there to visit a local Christmas display at a nearby church.
So when the University of Michigan decided to fund $25,000 worth of ritual foot-washers for Islamic students wishing to pray, one assumed the ACLU would yell foul. After all, it is a public institution, receiving federal and state taxes and using that money for a religious device whose purpose is to facilitate prayer. Not only did the ACLU not object but it also supported the expenditure as “reasonable,” something it can never bring itself to say when activities are for Judeo-Christian expression or symbols.
The Byron Union school district in California has decided that its public schools should set aside days and assignments where all students choose a Muslim name, recite passages from the Koran, and periodically give up certain comforts as “forms of fasting” that correspond to Ramadan. Has the ACLU brought this school district to court as it has hundreds of times when schools simply mention something involving Christianity or when a student reads her own Bible on her own time at recess or when a student chooses a religious theme for an essay topic? The ACLU has been silent. To the ACLU, the non-invasive, mere presence of anything Christian in school is far more “dangerous” than the actual, coerced undertaking of Islamic religious activities and beliefs in America's public schools.
For those of us who have for years diligently observed the selective inconsistencies and overt hypocrisy of the ACLU, none of this comes as a surprise. Rather, it is a verification. For we know what motivates the ACLU and what is its ultimate goal. Long ago it decided to do what ever it takes to expunge America of its affinity to Christianity and strip our society of its Judeo-Christian touchstone and foundation. It expanded the context of separation of church and state to accomplish this goal, and a good-willed citizenry acquiesced for they did not wish to question what they assumed were the pure, constitutional motivations behind the ACLU’s campaign. Who wants to question an organization with beguiling head-banners such as American and Civil Liberties.
The ACLU has manipulated church/state issues and used it selectively when it furthered its own anti-Christian agenda. Evidently, separation of church from state is not the inviolable principle we were led to believe given the ACLU’s own brushing aside of it if standing in the way of Islamic desires. For, truthfully, nothing would give the ACLU more pleasure than forcing upon America -- and its students -- a multi-culturalism and multi-religionism that would effectively diminish the influence and identity of America as a Judeo-Christian society.
Why does this organization with the high-sounding, patriotic name have as its purpose the destruction of the Judeo-Christian, American belief system? It was founded by Roger Baldwin, an avowed communist, who knew that what prevents America from being taken over by communism are precisely its Judeo-Christian beliefs. A religious society will not give its allegiance to the state but to God only. It will support only that form of government that subscribes to In God We Trust, not one rooted in atheism, as is the communist state.
It was Baldwin who remarked how "America must follow the example of Stalin's Soviet Union where greater freedoms exist than anywhere else in the world". Baldwin is dead, reunited with his patron saint Marx in the non-spiritual unknown where all dead communist believers congregate. But in the mid 60s, his organization was taken over by a caste of privileged elites who, though not economic communists per se, are heirs to his anti-Americanism and his goal of transforming America by using our own legal system to marginalize and demonize our Judeo-Christian ethos, undermine our penchant for local control, and eviscerate the traditions and values that have made America unique and thereby beyond the clutch of socialism.
The ACLU is led today by cultural marxists who will partner with Islamic forces if by so doing it can bring about legal decisions that demoralize the believing Christian community and sap their will to fight for their heritage. More so, in pushing Islam on the rest of us by granting them special rights not allowed the rest of society, the cultural and public face of America will change, be transformed. A transformed America, one no longer sure of who it is and what it is allowed to believe and express, is one so confused and weakened that it looses its will. That’s what the ACLU wants.
Hard as it is to believe, there are people here -- an enemy within -- who hate this country. They are not nationalists but trans-nationalists. Ironically, they come from those who have prospered here and now believe they are better than the average Christian of Faith who is White. Their loyalties are not to America but a cosmopolitan, very secular set of beliefs. Historic America stands in the way they wish to go -- they want it gone and replaced with a totally different set of standards, which they will impose. Those harboring this pernicious mindset often gravitate to and find their natural home in the ACLU.
Most are wealthy and live and play segregated from minorities but champion any minority cause, no matter how odious and destructive, as a way to lessen the standing and comfort of the majority and its "corny" values. When looking at the cases and causes they select, most often it is that which will upset the average Joe’s apple cart. They love representing terrorists wishing to harm America, rarely loyal soldiers sacrificing to defend her. They remain immune, however, for most live a protected, gilded life.
ACLU lawyers specifically seek legal opportunities designed to upend that which we cherish and which makes us who we are: our traditions, habits, sexual discipline and our belief in parental rights and the integrity of the nuclear family. Repeatedly, they argue for the broadest allowance when it comes to supporting the "rights" of those wishing to challenge and undermine historic American norms but insist on the stingiest, most limiting parameters for those with traditional values. Case in point: They have spent years working to outlaw any form of prayer, even silent prayer, in schools when it involved a Judeo-Christian motif but are now utterly silent in a San Diego case (Carver Elementary Public School ) where the superintendent is granting a daily 15 minute prayer slot requested by Moslems that corresponds to that time of day when Moslems pray. It is an intellectual hypocrisy reflecting where their sentiments lie. They have chosen sides, and they are not on our side.
There are many in the ACLU who have rebelled against their Christian upbringing and see Christianity as the ultimate enemy, and there are many who are not Christian and inhere a sociology that views society through the singular prism of minority versus majority: minority good, majority bad. Though they have become wildly successful and wealthy -- due to the tolerance of America’s majority class -- they still see themselves as a minority and find nobility in any cause brought by a non-white or a non-Christian and insist on portraying America’s majority group as racist and one that “must be brought down."
Right after 9/11, an old-time, keen observer of the American political scene remarked: “Now that they’ve attacked us, we’ll soon be giving them special rights, a form of religious affirmative action”. I disagreed, saying there is no domestic historical sin or guilt for which we must make atonement." I forgot about the ACLU. Its loathing of mainstream America spurs it to do the unconscionable.