• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

ACLU Origins

Mike

Well-known member
Roger Nash Baldwin, founder of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), leftist, anarchist, and Communist, was born in Wellesley, Massachusetts to comfortably situated parents, in 1884. He was educated at Harvard College, where he earned an M.A. degree, and then moved to St. Louis, where he taught Social Work at Washington University.

At the approach of World War I, Baldwin, a pacifist, co-founded the Fellowship of Reconciliation, which opposed the use of warfare in the settlement of international disputes. Among his colleagues in this endeavor were Norman Thomas, perennial Socialist candidate for President; the pacifist/Marxist A. J. Muste; and radical journalist Oswarld Garrison Villard, Editor of The Nation.

As World War I progressed, Baldwin co-founded the American Union Against Militarism (AUAM), again with the aim of promoting a pacifist, internationalist agenda. In 1920 he joined with several of his colleagues in the American Left to establish the ACLU. Baldwin was named the organization's first Executive Director, a position he would hold until 1950.

The ACLU soon became enmeshed in a variety of high-profile causes; the Scopes Trial; the Sacco and Vanzetti case, which has long been a cause celebre of the Left; and the publication of James Joyce's Ulysses.

Baldwin showed much sympathy to the Soviet economic system in his statement in his Harvard classbook, and in the foreword he wrote to Letters from Russian Prisons (1924). He embraced the view that the Russia of his day was "a great laboratory of social experimentation of incalculable value to the development of the world.”

In the 1930s Baldwin and the ACLU became linked to the Popular Front movement, which was engendered by Stalin to strengthen the Communist Party by allowing it to make common cause with socialists and other leftist groups. Baldwin himself made two trips to the Soviet Union, and in 1928 published a book entitled Liberty Under the Soviets, which contained effusive praise for the USSR.

In 1934 Baldwin authored a piece titled "Freedom in the USA and the USSR." He wrote: "The class struggle is the central conflict of the world; all others are incidental. When that power of the working class is once achieved, as it has been only in the Soviet Union, I am for maintaining it by any means whatever. Dictatorship is the obvious means in a world of enemies at home and abroad. I dislike it in principle as dangerous to its own objects. But the Soviet Union has already created liberties far greater than exist elsewhere in the world. … [There] I saw ... fresh, vigorous expressions of free living by workers and peasants all over the land. And further, no champion of a socialist society could fail to see that some suppression was necessary to achieve it. It could not all be done by persuasion. … f American champions of civil liberty could all think in terms of economic freedom as the goal of their labors, they too would accept 'workers' democracy' as far superior to what the capitalist world offers to any but a small minority. Yes, and they would accept — regretfully, of course — the necessity of dictatorship while the job of reorganizing society on a socialist basis is being done."

Baldwin altered his stance on the Soviet Union in 1939, when the German-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact was signed. Angry that the Soviets had betrayed all principles by signing an accord with Hitler, Baldwin promptly sought to have all Communists removed from the ACLU board; the Communist labor organizer, Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, was among those purged from the organization.

After the War, Baldwin was sent to Japan by General Douglas MacArthur, who wanted him to assist the Japanese in developing a concept of egalitarian government and civil liberties. Also in the postwar period, Baldwin was a co-founder of the International League for the Rights of Man (later the International League for Human Rights.)

Baldwin retired as Executive Director of the ACLU in 1950 but remained active in the organization. He traveled extensively after his retirement, especially to Asia, where he condemned the regime of Ngo Dinh Diem in South Vietnam, even as he embraced the Communist dictator Ho Chi Minh as a member of the Vietnamese-American Friendship Association. He cultivated the friendship of convicted terrorist Pedro Albizu Campos in Puerto Rico. He also joined SANE (the Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy), which argued for unilateral nuclear disarmament by the United States.

Reflecting on his early years as the ACLU's Executive Director, Baldwin candidly revealed his original motives and objectives: "I am for socialism, disarmament, and ultimately, for abolishing the state itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek social ownership of property, the abolition of the properties class, and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal. It all sums up into one single purpose -- the abolition of dog-eat-dog under which we live. I don't regret being part of the communist tactic. I knew what I was doing. I was not an innocent liberal. I wanted what the communists wanted and I traveled the United Front road to get it."

Baldwin maintained an office in the United Nations after his retirement from the ACLU, working as a consultant for the International League for Human Rights. He died in 1981.
 

fff

Well-known member
The ACLU vigorously defends the right of Americans to practice religion. But because the ACLU is often better known for its work preventing the government from promoting and funding selected religious activities, it is often wrongly assumed that the ACLU does not zealously defend the rights of religious believers, including Christians, to practice their religion. The cases below - including several where the ACLU even defended the rights of religious believers to condemn homosexuality or abortion - reveal just how mistaken such assumptions are.

Although the cases described below emphasize "the free exercise of religion," the guarantees of the Establishment Clause also protect the rights of religious believers (and non-believers) from having the government promote some religious beliefs over others.

The following selected recent cases (mostly since 1995) show that the ACLU defends the rights of those who identify themselves as Christians (Part I) and as well as those who have other beliefs (Part II).

Part I: Defending the Rights of Those Identifying Themselves as Christian

The ACLU of Florida (2007) argued in favor of the right of Christians to protest against a gay pride event held in the City of St. Petersburg. The City had proposed limiting opposition speech, including speech motivated by religious beliefs, to restricted "free speech zones." After receiving the ACLU's letter, the City revised its proposed ordinance.
www.aclufl.org/pdfs/StPeteLetter.pdf
http://www.tampabays10.com/news/local/article.aspx?storyid=57665

The ACLU of Oregon (2007) defended the right of students at a private religious school not to be pressured to violate their Sabbath day by playing in a state basketball tournament. The Oregon School Activities Association scheduled state tournament games on Saturdays, the recognized Sabbath of students and faculty of the Portland Adventist Academy. The ACLU argued that the school's team, having successfully made it to the tournament, should not be required to violate their religious beliefs in order to participate.
www.aclu-or.org/site/PageServer?pagename=Lit_tp_nak
http://www.aclu-or.org/site/DocServer/Lit_OSAA_mtgmry_3_07.pdf?docID=1861

The ACLU of West Virginia (2007) sued on behalf of a Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon) university student who won a prestigious scholarship to West Virginia University. Although the state scholarship board provided leaves of absence for military, medical, and family reasons, it denied the ACLU's client a leave of absence to serve on a 2-year mission for his church. The ACLU filed a religious freedom claim in federal court.
www.aclu-wv.org/Newsroom/PressReleases/07_19_07.html

The ACLU of Eastern Missouri (2007) represents Shirley L. Phelps-Roper, a member of the Westboro Baptist Church, whose religious beliefs lead her to condemn homosexuality as a sin and insist that God is punishing the United States. The protests in which she has been involved have been confrontational and have involved funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq. While the ACLU does not endorse her message, it does believe that she has both religious and free-speech rights to express her viewpoint criticizing homosexuality.
www.aclu.org/freespeech/protest/26265prs20060721.html

The ACLU of Wisconsin (2007) filed a friend-of-the-court brief arguing that individual pharmacists should be able to refuse to fill prescriptions that violate their religious scruples, provided that patients can obtain prescriptions from willing providers in a safe and timely manner.
www.aclu-wi.org/wisconsin/rights_of_women/ 20070201_Pharm_Refusal_amicus_complete.pdf

The ACLU of New Jersey (2007) defended the right of an elementary school student who was prohibited from singing "Awesome God" in a voluntary, after-school talent show for which students selected their own material. The ACLU submitted a friend-of-the-Court brief. After a favorable settlement was reached for the student, the federal lawsuit was dismissed.
www.aclu.org/religion/schools/25799prs20060605.html

The ACLU and the ACLU of Pennsylvania (2007) prevailed in their case on behalf of an Egyptian Coptic Christian who had been detained and who claimed he had been tortured by the Egyptian government because he refused to convert to Islam. After permitting Sameh Khouzam to stay in the United States for nine years based on evidence that he would probably be tortured if he returned to Egypt, the U.S. government changed its position in 2007 and sought to deport Mr. Khouzam based on diplomatic assurances from the Egyptian government that Mr. Khouzam would not be tortured upon return. As a result of the ACLU's advocacy, a federal court granted Mr. Khouzam an indefinite stay of deportation to Egypt.
www.aclupa.org/legal/legaldocket/egyptiantorture.htm

The ACLU of North Carolina (2007) wrote a letter to the Dismas Charities Community Correction Center on behalf of a former resident who was not allowed to consume wine during communion services while staying at the Center. After the ACLU advised the Center of its obligations under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000, the Center revised its policy to comply with federal law.

The ACLU of North Carolina (2007) challenged a North Carolina Department of Corrections policy making all religious services in prison English-only, thereby denying access to many inmates. The North Carolina Division of Prisons agreed to review the policy and the need for religious services in languages other than English in the state correctional system.

The ACLU of Delaware (2007) prevailed in a lawsuit brought on behalf of Christians, pagans, and Wiccans, alleging that a department store violated a Delaware public accommodations law by canceling community courses after individuals complained about the religious beliefs that were being taught in the centers.
(This case is also listed in Part II.)

The ACLU of North Carolina (2007) assisted with the naturalization of a Jehovah's Witness who had been told he could not obtain United States citizenship because of his conscientious refusal to swear an oath that he would be willing to bear arms on behalf of the country.

The ACLU of Rhode Island (2007) prevailed in its arguments on behalf of a Christian inmate, Wesley Spratt, who had been preaching in prison for over seven years before administrators told him to stop based on vague and unsubstantiated security concerns. After the ACLU prevailed in the First Circuit, the parties reached a settlement under which Mr. Spratt is free to preach again.
www.projo.com/news/content/ Preacher_07-31-07_T76IHBQ.34294dd.html

The ACLU of the National Capital Area (2007) brought suit on behalf of Christian, Muslim, and Jewish firefighters and paramedics who wear beards as a matter of religious observance. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia agreed with the ACLU that the District of Columbia's policy prohibiting these individuals from wearing beards violated their religious freedom rights.
www.aclu-nca.org/boxSub.asp?id=84
(This case is also listed in Part II.)

The ACLU of Louisiana (2006) reached a favorable settlement after filing a federal suit against the Department of Corrections on behalf of an inmate who was a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon). The inmate, Norman Sanders, was denied access to religious services and religious texts including The Book of Mormon.
www.laaclu.org/News/2005/Aug26SandersvCain.htm

The ACLU of Texas (2006) filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of a Christian pastor and his faith-based rehabilitation facility in Sinton, Texas. The ACLU of Texas urged the court to reverse a decision that prohibited the pastor from operating his rehabilitation program near his church and also sharply limited the reach of the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).
www.aclutx.org/article.php?aid=391

The ACLU of Louisiana (2006) filed a lawsuit defending the right of a Christian who wished to exercise both religious and speech rights by protesting against homosexuality in front of a Wal-Mart store with a sign that read: "Christians: Wal-Mart Supports Gay Marriage and Gay Lifestyles. Don't Shop There."
www.aclu.org/freespeech/protest/27266prs20061027.html

The ACLU of Georgia (2006) filed a federal lawsuit to help obtain a zoning permit for a house of worship on behalf of the Tabernacle Community Baptist Church after the city of East Point denied the request.
www.aclu.org/religion/discrim/25518prs20060419.html

The ACLU of Nevada (2006) defended the free exercise and free speech rights of evangelical Christians to preach on the sidewalks of Las Vegas. When the County government refused to change its unconstitutional policy, the ACLU filed suit in federal court.
www.kvbc.com/Global/story.asp?S=3379553&nav=15MVaB2T

The ACLU of Louisiana (2006) reached a favorable settlement on behalf of a student teacher at a public school who objected to classroom prayers led by her supervising teacher. After disagreeing with her supervisor's unconstitutional practice of telling children how to pray, the student teacher received a failing grade and was not permitted to graduate from the teaching program. Under the settlement obtained by the ACLU of Louisiana, the university removed the failing grade and allowed the student to reenroll and complete her graduation requirements.
www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=17478
www.laaclu.org/News/2006/ aclu_settlement_ThompsonvSLU_Oct0306.htm

The ACLU and its affiliates (1999-2006) have been instrumental supporters of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), which gives religious organizations added protection in erecting religious buildings and enhances the religious freedom rights of prisoners and other institutionalized persons. The ACLU worked with a broad coalition of organizations to secure the law's passage in 2000. After the law was enacted, the ACLU (2005) defended its constitutionality in a friend-of-the-court brief before the United States Supreme Court and the ACLU of Virginia (2006) opposed a challenge to the law before the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.
www.aclu.org/scotus/2004/ 20956res20041230039877/20956res20041230.html
www.aclu.org/religion/frb/26018prs20060612.html

The Iowa Civil Liberties Union (2005) defended the rights of two teenage girls who, for religious reasons, sought to wear anti-abortion t-shirts to school after school officials threatened to punish them.
http://www.aclu.org/studentsrights/expression/12852prs20050429.html

The ACLU of New Mexico (2005) helped release a street preacher who had been incarcerated in Roosevelt County jail for 109 days. The case was brought to the ACLU by the preacher's wife and was supported by the American Family Association.
www.aclu.org/religion/gen/19918prs20050804.html

The ACLU of Michigan (2005) filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Joseph Hanas, a Roman Catholic who was punished for not completing a drug rehabilitation program run by a Pentecostal group whose religious beliefs he did not share. Part of the program required reading the Bible for seven hours a day, proclaiming one's salvation at the altar, and being tested on Pentecostal principles. The staff confiscated Mr. Hanas's rosary beads and told him Catholicism was witchcraft.
www.aclu.org/religion/govtfunding/22354prs20051206.html

The ACLU of Southern California (2005) defended an evangelical scholar who monitored the fundraising practices of several ministries and their leaders after a defamation suit was brought against him in order to silence him.
www.aclu-sc.org/News/Releases/2005/101364/

The ACLU of Pennsylvania (2004-2005) won two cases on behalf of predominantly African-American churches that were denied permits to worship in churches previously occupied by white congregations. In 2005, the ACLU of Pennsylvania settled a case against Turtle Creek Borough brought on behalf of Ekklesia church. After the ACLU of Pennsylvania's advocacy, the Borough of West Mifflin granted Second Baptist Church of Homestead an occupancy permit in 2002 and, in 2004, agreed to pay it damages and compensate it for its losses.
http://www.post-gazette.com/neigh_south/20021029churchsuitsouth2p2.asp
www.post-gazette.com/localnews/20021116aclureg6p6.asp
www.post-gazette.com/pg/04111/303298.stm
http://www.aclu.org/RacialEquality/RacialEquality.cfm?ID=11083&c=28

The ACLU of New Jersey (2004) appeared as amicus curiae to argue that a prosecutor violated the New Jersey Constitution by striking individuals from a jury pool after deciding that they were "demonstrative about their religion." One potential juror was a missionary; the other was wearing Muslim religious garb, including a skull cap. The ACLU-NJ also argued that permitting strikes based on jurors' display of their religion would often amount to discrimination against identifiable religious minorities.
http://www.aclu-nj.org/legal/closedcasearchive/statevlloydfuller.htm
(This case is also listed in Part II.)

The ACLU of Nebraska (2004) defended the Church of the Awesome God, a Presbyterian church, from forced eviction under the city of Lincoln's zoning laws. The ACLU of Nebraska also challenged city ordinances requiring religious organizations to meet safety standards not imposed on non-religious groups.
www.aclu.org/religion/frb/16347prs20040811.html

The ACLU of Pennsylvania (2004) prevailed in its arguments that the government had to allow Amish drivers to use highly reflective gray tape on their buggies instead of orange triangles, to which the drivers objected for religious reasons.
www.post-gazette.com/localnews/20021020amish1020p6.asp

The ACLU of Virginia (2004) threatened to file suit against the Fredericksburg-Stafford Park Authority after the Park Authority enacted an unconstitutional policy prohibiting religious activity in the park and the Park Manager stopped a Cornerstone Baptist Church minister from conducting baptisms in the park. Under pressure from the ACLU, the Park Authority revoked the prohibition and allowed baptisms in the park.
www.aclu.org/religion/discrim/16230prs20040603.html
www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A16839-2004Jun4
http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=15897&c=141

The ACLU of Washington (2004) reached a favorable settlement on behalf of Donald Ausderau, a Christian minister, who wanted to preach to the public and distribute leaflets on the sidewalks around a downtown bus station in Spokane, WA.
www.aclu-wa.org/detail.cfm?id=57

With the help of the ACLU of Pennsylvania, Greater Pittsburgh Chapter (2004), an Episcopal social services group was able to keep its program of feeding the homeless running. The County Health Department reversed its decision that meals served to homeless people in a church must be cooked on the premises, as opposed to in individual homes. Had the decision not been reversed, the ministry would have been forced to cease the program.

The ACLU of Virginia (2004) told the city of Richmond that it would file suit unless Richmond officials reconsidered their decision to close a Sunday meal program for the homeless at a local church because of zoning violations. "[T]he right of a church to perform a core function of its religious mission," the ACLU wrote, "is protected by the free exercise clause of the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993."
web.archive.org/web/20040109051557/archive.aclu.org/news/ w091196b.html

The ACLU of Nevada (2004) represented a Mormon high school student, Kim Jacobs, whom school authorities suspended and then attempted to expel for wearing T-shirts with religious messages. Jacobs won a preliminary victory in court when a judge ruled that the school could not expel her for not complying with the dress code.
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/text/2004/sep/09/517482854.html

The ACLU of Michigan (2004) represented Abby Moler, a student at Sterling Stevenson High School, whose yearbook entry, a Bible verse, was deleted because of its religious content. A settlement was reached under which the school placed a sticker with Moler's original entry in the yearbooks and agreed not to censor students' yearbook entries based on their religious or political viewpoints in the future.
www.aclu.org/religion/gen/16093prs20031222.html

The Indiana Civil Liberties Union (2004) filed suit on behalf of the Old Paths Baptist Church against the City of Scottsburg after the city repeatedly threatened to cite or arrest members who held demonstrations regarding various subjects dealing with their religious beliefs.
www.aclu.org/freespeech/protest/11484prs20040716.html

The ACLU of Massachusetts (2003) intervened on behalf of a group of students at Westfield High School who were suspended for distributing candy canes and a religious message in school. The ACLU succeeded in having the suspensions revoked and filed an amicus brief in a lawsuit brought on behalf of the students against the school district.
http://www.aclu.org/StudentRights/StudentRights.cfm?ID=11876&c=159

The ACLU of Rhode Island (2003) interceded on behalf of an interdenominational group of carolers who were told they could not sing Christmas carols on Christmas Eve to inmates at the women's prison in Cranston, Rhode Island.

The ACLU of Virginia (2002) and the late Rev. Jerry Falwell prevailed in a lawsuit arguing that a Virginia constitutional provision banning religious organizations from incorporating was unconstitutional.
www.aclu.org/religion/frb/16040prs20020417.html

The ACLU of Ohio (2002) filed a brief in support of preacher who wanted to protest abortion at a parade, but was prohibited from doing so in an Akron suburb.
http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=16471

The Iowa Civil Liberties Union (2002) filed a friend-of-the court brief supporting a group of Christian students who filed a lawsuit against Davenport Schools asserting their right to distribute religious literature during non-instructional time.
http://www.aclu.org/studentsrights/religion/12811prs20020711.html

The ACLU of Nebraska (2002) filed a friend of the court brief in a lawsuit challenging the Nebraska Liquor Control Commission's definition of a church as excluding religious organizations that do not own property. ACLU lawyer Amy Miller said the "definition of a church established by the Liquor Control Commission violated the rights of members of the House of Faith to the free exercise of their religion."
http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=16114

The ACLU of Massachusetts (2002) filed a brief supporting the right of the Church of the Good News to run ads criticizing the secularization of Christmas and promoting Christianity as the "one true religion." The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority had refused to allow the paid advertisements to be posted and refused to sell additional advertising space to the church.
www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=10206&c=42

The ACLU of Virginia (2000) represented Charles D. Johnson, a street preacher who was convicted under Richmond's noise ordinance. The Virginia Court of Appeals reversed his conviction in 2000.

The ACLU of Massachusetts (2000) defended inmate Peter Kane's right to exercise his religious beliefs after prison officials confiscated his rosary beads. The rosary beads were black and white and prison rules allowed only solid-colored beads.
www.firmstand.org/news/rosary.html

The ACLU of Virginia (1999) represented Rita Warren and her right to erect a crèche on Fairfax County government space that had been set aside as a public forum. The ACLU argued that restricting the use of the public forum to county residents only was an unreasonable restriction. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed. http://www.providence.edu/polisci/cammarano/article-Masters.htm
www.catholicherald.com/eddesk/97ed/ed971211.htm

The ACLU of Eastern Missouri (1999) secured a favorable settlement for a nurse, Miki M. Cain, who was fired for wearing a cross-shaped lapel pin on her uniform.

The ACLU of Virginia (1999) filed suit against the Department of Defense and the Office of Personnel Management on behalf of Michelle Hall, a Jehovah's Witness who was fired from her job as a produce worker at the Fort Belvoir commissary because she refused to sign a loyalty oath. Ms. Hall objected to a phrase in the oath, that she would "bear true faith and allegiance to" the Constitution, because it contradicted her undivided allegiance and faithfulness to Jehovah. In a settlement, Ms. Hall was reinstated and given back pay.
http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=8521

The ACLU of Florida (1999) filed the first case under Florida's Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The suit sought to prevent the removal and destruction of religious symbols, including crosses, stars of David, and other religious symbols placed on the gravesites of the plaintiffs' family members.
www.aclu.org/temp/pr1999/13603prs19990322.html
(This case is also listed in Part II.)

The ACLU of West Virginia (1999) represented a minister in the Church of the Firstborn at New Jerusalem in his suit seeking a religious exemption to the state's requirement that he take a photograph on his driver's license. The minister's religious beliefs prohibit the use of "graven images," including photographs.
www.aclu.org/religion/discrim/16173prs19990720.html

The ACLU of Pennsylvania, Greater Pittsburgh Chapter (1997) represented Carlyn Kline, a fundamentalist Christian woman who challenged the legality of a mandatory divorce-counseling program conducted by Catholic Charities. Her religious beliefs prohibited her from attending "non-Christian" counseling.

The ACLU of Iowa (1997) represented Conservative Christians in Clarke County and won the right to force a county referendum on gambling.
http://www.aclu.org/studentsrights/expression/12852prs20050429.html

The ACLU of Pennsylvania, Greater Pittsburgh Chapter (1997) intervened on behalf of a Mennonite nurse and prevented his state employer from firing him for refusing to shave his beard for religious reasons. The employer demanded the nurse shave his beard so the state-issued mask to guard against tuberculosis would fit tightly despite the employee's offer to purchase a more expensive mask approved for work with T.B. patients that would fit properly with his beard intact. After receiving telephone calls and letters from the ACLU, the employer agreed to accommodate his religion.

The Arizona Civil Liberties Union (1997) brought suit jointly with Children of the Rosary, a pro-life religious organization, challenging a Phoenix policy banning all non-commercial advertising on city transit buses.
web.archive.org/web/19971122003414/www.aclu.org/news/n012397b.html

The ACLU of Massachusetts (1996) filed a friend of the court brief in the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts on behalf of two women who were fired for refusing, on religious grounds, to work at a racetrack on Christmas Day.

The ACLU of Pennsylvania, Greater Pittsburgh Chapter (1995) represented a 17-year-old foster child who was being forced to attend her foster family's church. The foster child was Methodist and the church she was being forced to attend was not of the Methodist faith. After the ACLU threatened to sue the county allowed the child to attend a Methodist church and placed her in a different foster home.

The ACLU of Vermont (1995) brought suit on behalf of a family that held sincere religious beliefs preventing them from obtaining social security numbers for their children. The Vermont Human Services Board agreed with the ACLU of Vermont and ordered the Social Welfare Department to make an exception to its general rule requiring children who receive government benefits to have social security numbers.

The ACLU of Pennsylvania, Greater Pittsburgh Chapter (1995) secured the right of a minister from the United Methodist Church to hold meetings in the Harmony Township Borough building that was open for use by community groups.

The ACLU of Iowa (1995) represented and vindicated the free speech and religious expression of a conservative Christian activist, Elaine Jaquith of Waterloo, who had been denied access to broadcast her message on public television.
http://www.aclu.org/studentsrights/expression/12852prs20050429.html

Amish farmers benefited from the ACLU of Pennsylvania, Greater Pittsburgh Chapter's letter (1995) threatening a lawsuit if the Elk Lick Township failed to rescind a municipal ordinance prohibiting farm tractors with steel wheels from traveling on or over the township's roads. Amish religious beliefs dictate that they maintain steel wheels on their tractors; the ordinance prevented Amish farmers from moving their tractors from one farm to another, and in some cases from one part of their property to another. The township rescinded the ordinance in 1995 and dropped all charges against the various persons charged under the ordinance.

The ACLU of Idaho (1980) represented Evangelical Christian parents of public school students at North Fremont High School who disputed their school's decision to hold graduation ceremonies at a Mormon church (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints). Although the proposed church was larger than other available facilities and was air conditioned, the parents believed that their children should not be required to attend a public high school graduation in a Mormon facility. The federal judge agreed. (This case illustrates the same principle as the ACLU of New Jersey (2007) case (cited below) that was brought by a Muslim student who did want his graduation to be held at a church.)
http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/religion/reimannvfreemont_acluidaho.pdf

Part II: Defending the Rights of All Religious Believers

The ACLU of New Mexico (2007) represented four Muslim football players in their religious discrimination suit against New Mexico State University. The players received a favorable settlement after the ACLU of New Mexico argued in federal court that the University's head football coach violated the players' religious freedom rights by repeatedly asking them questions about al Qaeda, removing them from the University's team, and requiring all players to recite the Lord's Prayer at the end of each practice.
aclu-nm.org/News_Events/news_6_21_07.html
sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2204478

The ACLU of North Carolina (2007) won its lawsuit against the state of North Carolina to permit witnesses at trial to take oaths on the religious scriptures of their own religious beliefs (in this case Islam) rather than on those approved by the state.
www.aclu.org/religion/govtfunding/29872prs20070524.html

The ACLU (2007) argued that veterans and their families should be able to decide for themselves which religious symbol is placed on a deceased veteran's headstone at federal cemeteries. The ACLU challenged the constitutionality of a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs policy that had restricted religious symbols only to those that had been approved by government officials. The Department of Veterans Affairs settled the case by agreeing to allow a Wiccan five-pointed star encased in a circle included on the plaintiffs' loved ones' military headstones. (The ACLU has frequently, and inaccurately, been accused of attempting to eliminate religious symbols from federal cemeteries. To the contrary, the right of veterans and their families to choose how to represent their beliefs belongs to them and not the government.)
www.aclu.org/religion/discrim/26970prs20060929.html

The ACLU of West Virginia and the ACLU of the National Capital Area (2007) represented a Muslim Iranian-American couple, both of whom were terminated from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) because of their religion and without due process. The ACLU negotiated an agreement with NIOSH under which the husband and wife were reinstated to their previous positions with back pay, benefits, and damages.
www.aclu-wv.org/Newsroom/PressReleases/12_18_06.htm
www.aclu-wv.org/Slideshow/AfshariSlideshow.htm

The New York Civil Liberties Union (2007) successfully brought suit on behalf of a Muslim prison guard who was told that he had to remove his head covering (known as a kufi), while working, even though he had worn it while on duty for many years. A federal judge ordered the New York Department of Corrections to allow the guard to wear his head covering on the job again.
www.nyclu.org/node/1062

The ACLU of Alabama (2007) represented Native American inmates in their successful religious liberty suit requiring the state of Alabama to permit sacred sweat lodge ceremonies at designated correctional facilities on holy days. After winning that case, the ACLU of Alabama represented some of the inmates again when the State attempted to transfer them to a correctional facility in Louisiana that does not allow such religious ceremonies.

The ACLU of Delaware (2007) prevailed in a lawsuit brought on behalf of Christians, pagans, and Wiccans, alleging that a department store violated a Delaware public accommodations law by canceling community courses after individuals complained about the religious beliefs that were being taught in the centers.
(This case is also listed in Part I.)

The ACLU of Georgia (2007) wrote a letter to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on behalf of a Sikh physician. The doctor had been instructed that he must, contrary to his religious beliefs, shave his beard and remove his turban in order to work at the Public Health Commissioned Corporation of CDC. After receiving the ACLU of Georgia's letter, the CDC implemented a new, individualized process for requests for religious exemptions that creates a general presumption in favor of religious accommodation.
www.acluga.org/docket.html

The ACLU of the National Capital Area (2007) brought suit on behalf of Christian, Muslim, and Jewish firefighters and paramedics who wear beards as a matter of religious observance. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia agreed with the ACLU that the District of Columbia's policy prohibiting these individuals from wearing beards violated their religious freedom rights.
www.aclu-nca.org/boxSub.asp?id=84
(This case is also listed in Part I.)

The ACLU of West Virginia (2007) brought suit challenging a company's refusal to permit one of its employees to wear a skirt to work. The employee's religious beliefs prohibited her from wearing trousers. The employer refused to accommodate these beliefs despite the employee's offer to pay for a uniform skirt with her own funds.
www.aclu-wv.org/LegalProgram/Docket%20July19,2007.pdf

The ACLU of Missouri (2007) sent a letter to the Kansas City Water Department demanding that a Muslim employee be permitted to attend Friday prayers. The Department responded by extending the employee's Friday lunch to accommodate her religious observance.

The ACLU of Nevada (2007) appeared before the Nevada Equal Rights Commission (NERC) and the EEOC on behalf of a Jewish Orthodox employee of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department whose request to wear a trim beard and yarmulke while at his non-uniform, desk job was denied. When the Department still refused to grant the employee a religious accommodation, the ACLU brought suit in federal court.

The ACLU of Virginia (2007) filed a complaint under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act challenging a Virginia Department of Corrections policy requiring inmates to be clean-shaven and to keep their hair short. The policy infringed on the beliefs of Muslim and Rastafarian inmates who have religious objections to cutting their hair.
www.acluva.org/newsreleases2007/Jan6.html
www.acluva.org/newsreleases2006/May19.html

The ACLU of New Jersey (2007) filed a religious discrimination case on behalf of a Muslim student who otherwise had to choose between following his religious beliefs that forbid him from entering buildings with foreign religious symbols and attending his public high school graduation that was scheduled to be held in a church. The ACLU argued that the school's decision unlawfully forced the student to choose between attending his graduation and violating the religious beliefs. (This case illustrates the same principle as the ACLU of Idaho (1980) case cited above that was brought by Christian parents who did not want their high school children to attend graduation held at a Mormon church.)
www.aclu-nj.org/news/schoolviolatesreligiousfre.htm

The ACLU of Louisiana (2007) filed a Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act claim in federal court after the David Wade Correctional Facility refused to permit a Muslim inmate to receive a religious newspaper.
www.laaclu.org/News/2007/LeonardPR_050907.html

The ACLU of Massachusetts (2007) represents a Muslim man who lost his job with a communications contractor at the State Police headquarters for unspecified reasons (but presumably because he was Muslim). When the State Police Information Officer responded with highly redacted documents showing the real reason for the termination, the ACLU of Massachusetts filed an administrative appeal.

The ACLU of Maryland (2006) urged Howard County school officials to retain a school policy permitting Muslim students excused absences, such as those allowing students to leave for doctors' appointments and religious holidays, for prayer on Fridays.
www.aclu-md.org/aPress/News%202006/060806_HCT.html

The ACLU of Southern California (2006) filed suit on behalf of a Vietnamese Buddhist Temple (Quan Am Temple) against the City of Garden Grove and its officials for violating the congregation's First Amendment rights to free religious exercise and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000. The lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of the City's zoning codes, as well as the City's application of the zoning codes to Quan Am Temple. A federal judge issued a preliminary ruling requiring the City to allow "the Temple, the Abbot, and his congregation [to] peaceably practice their Buddhist faith at the Chapwood Property immediately."
www.aclu-sc.org/News/Releases/2006/102100/

The ACLU of Massachusetts (2006) helped a Rastafarian baggage screener wear his hair in accordance with his religion. The screener had been employed for three years by the Logan Airport for the Transportation Security Administration. The ACLU filed a complaint before the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission defending his religious rights.

The New York Civil Liberties Union (2006) filed a federal lawsuit in Manhattan defending the right of people wearing religious head coverings not to have them removed for identity photos. The case was brought with the New York University Law School Civil Rights Clinic against a Coast Guard regulation denying merchant marine licenses to those who would not remove the coverings for photographs.
www.aclu.org/religion/discrim/24780prs20060328.html

The ACLU of Virginia (2006) filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting an inmate's allegation that the Virginia Department of Corrections violated the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) by refusing to provide him with meals consistent with his religious beliefs.
www.acluva.org/newsreleases2006/Jun12.html

The ACLU of Nebraska (2006) brought a free exercise claim on behalf of followers of the Church of Scientology who alleged that Nebraska's mandatory testing of newborn infants for metabolic diseases violated their religious liberty by preventing them, as new parents, from exercising their belief that a newborn should be kept quiet and serene during the first days of life.

The New York Civil Liberties Union (2005) filed a federal lawsuit to stop the Department of Homeland Security from enforcing a policy of detaining, interrogating, fingerprinting, and photographing American citizens at the border solely because they attended Islamic conferences.
www.nyclu.org/node/1097

The ACLU of Washington (2005) represented The Islamic Education Center of Seattle, a small Muslim nonprofit organization that holds prayer services, education programs, and cultural activities, after the city of Mountlake Terrace denied the Center a conditional land use permit. The City denied the Center permission to operate even though it granted an allowance to a Christian church next door to the Center. With the aid of the ACLU, the Center eventually received its permit from the City.
www.aclu-wa.org/detail.cfm?id=294

The ACLU of New Jersey (2005) settled a lawsuit with the New Jersey Department of Corrections on behalf of Patrick Pantusco, an inmate who was denied religious books and other items while in prison. Although it permitted persons of other religions to obtain materials for their religious practices, it denied Mr. Pantusco's requests because it did not recognize Wicca as a legitimate religion. In the settlement, the state agreed to permit Mr. Pantusco access to all requested items and pay damages.
http://www.aclu-nj.org/legal/closedcasearchive/pantuscovmoore.htm

The ACLU of Northern California (2005) filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging restrictions on an asylum seeker's right to wear a religious head covering. The plaintiff, Harpal Singh Cheema, a devout Sikh, had been imprisoned since 1997, while awaiting a decision on his asylum application. The Sikh faith requires men to cover their heads at all times, but Yuba County jail authorities would not allow Mr. Cheema to leave his bed with his head covered.
www.aclu.org/immigrants/asylum/11736prs20050518.html

The ACLU of Wisconsin (2005) filed suit on behalf of a Muslim woman who had been required to remove her headscarf in front of male prison guards in order to visit her husband at the Columbia Correctional Institution. Ms. Rhouni offered to be searched by a female guard, but the prison would not accommodate her request and respect her religious belief that her head should not be uncovered in the presence of unrelated males.

The ACLU of Pennsylvania (2005) sued on behalf of a devout Muslim firefighter, Curtis DeVeaux, who was suspended for refusing, for religious reasons, to shave his beard as required by city regulations.
www.aclu.org/religion/gen/16268prs20050601.html

In response to a lawsuit filed by the ACLU of Colorado (2005), the Department of Corrections agreed to resume providing kosher meals to Timothy Sheline, an Orthodox Jewish inmate, whose kosher diet was revoked for one year as punishment for allegedly violating a dining hall rule.
www.aclu.org/prison/restrict/21226prs20051013.html

The ACLU of Nebraska (2005) settled a lawsuit against the city of Omaha on behalf of Lubna Hussein, a practicing Muslim woman who wore a headscarf and long sleeves for religious reasons. Hussein was twice denied entry to Deer Ridge pool property to watch her children swim because she refused to wear a swimsuit. The city changed its policy to allow for medical and religious exceptions.
www.aclu.org/religion/discrim/16248prs20050218.html
www.wowt.com/news/headlines/822012.html

The ACLU of Delaware (2005) filed a federal lawsuit after Muslim children in a public school suffered harassment and discrimination by teachers, administrators, and fellow students. Mrs. Doe and her children sought, among other things, a judgment requiring the defendants to cease their discriminatory activity, to develop policies to foster a peaceful learning environment, and to implement mandatory training programs for staff on issues of religious and cultural diversity.

The ACLU of Southern California (2005) represented a Native American inmate who refused, for religious reasons, to cut his hair. Prison officials punished the inmate by revoking his visitation rights and extending his time in prison. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the prison ban on long hair violated the prisoner's religious freedom and ordered the prisoner released immediately.
www.aclu.org/religion/frb/16223prs20040526.html
www.aclu.org/religion/gen/16235prs20040331.html

The ACLU of Southern California (2005) supported Jewish residents of Orange County after a special election was scheduled on the first day of the Jewish holiday Rosh Hashanah, called on the county to make accommodations for Jewish residents who wished to vote early in the election.
www.aclu-sc.org/News/Releases/2005/101281/

The ACLU of Virginia (2005) filed suit on behalf of Cynthia Simpson, a Wiccan woman whom county leaders refused to include in a list of religious leaders invited to give invocations at meetings of the Chesterfield County board of Supervisors. The Board's reason for refusing to add her to the list was that "Chesterfield's non-sectarian invocations are traditionally made to a divinity that is consistent with the Judeo-Christian tradition."
www.acluva.org/docket/simpson.html

The ACLU of Louisiana (2005) successfully represented a Rastafarian mother and her fourth grade son before the Lafayette Parish School Board. The Board seized the child's books and suspended him for having dreadlocks. The nine-year-old child was allowed to return to school.
www.laaclu.org/News/2005/Dec0705DreadlocksRapides.htm

The ACLU of New Jersey (2004) appeared as amicus curiae to argue that a prosecutor violated the New Jersey Constitution by striking individuals from a jury pool after deciding that they were "demonstrative about their religion." One potential juror was a missionary; the other was wearing Muslim religious garb, including a skull cap. The ACLU-NJ also argued that permitting strikes based on jurors' display of their religion would often amount to discrimination against identifiable religious minorities.
http://www.aclu-nj.org/legal/closedcasearchive/statevlloydfuller.htm
(This case is also listed in Part I.)

The ACLU of Nevada (2004) brought an action challenging religious discrimination against a Muslim high school student who wore her traditional hijab to school. The student suffered repeated harassment by her peers with school officials' knowledge and, at times, participation.

The ACLU of Alabama (2004) represented a Muslim inmate who was charged with creating a security hazard after he started a discussion about reparations for African-Americans during an Islamic service at a prison. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the ACLU that a lower court erred in dismissing the inmate's claims.
http://www.aclualabama.org/News/PressReleases/FreeSpeech/052604.htm

The ACLU of Florida (2003) represented a Muslim homemaker whose driver's license was revoked after she declined on religious grounds to remove her veil for a driver's license photo. Noting that the state allowed others to obtain driver's permits without photographs, the ACLU argued that the photograph requirement imposed a needless burden on the woman's exercise of her religion with no benefit to public safety.
www.aclu.org/religion/gen/16218prs20030527.html

The ACLU of Pennsylvania (2002) supported the members of Congregation Kol Ami in their fight to use a former Catholic convent as a synagogue. The ACLU of Pennsylvania argued that the Abington Township Board of Commissioners' opposition to the proposed use of the convent violated the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Person Act.
www.aclu.org/religion/discrim/16057prs20020107.html

The ACLU of Oklahoma (2000) filed a federal lawsuit against Union Public School District No. 9 on behalf of 15-year-old Brandi Blackbear, an honor student who was accused by school officials of making a teacher sick by casting a hex. School authorities forbade the student to wear or draw any Wiccan symbols and suspended her for 15 days for allegedly casting spells and 19 days for the content of her personal writings.
www.aclu.org/religion/schools/16295prs20001026.html

The ACLU of Maryland (2000) called on the Baltimore Police Department to rescind grooming rules prohibiting dreadlocks and to reinstate Rastafarian police officer Antoine Chambers who was suspended for refusing to cut off his dreadlocks in violation of his religious beliefs.
www.aclu.org/religion/discrim/16289prs20000711.html

The ACLU of Florida (1999) filed the first case under Florida's Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The suit sought to prevent the removal and destruction of religious symbols, including crosses, stars of David, and other religious symbols placed on the gravesites of the plaintiffs' family members.
www.aclu.org/temp/pr1999/13603prs19990322.html
(This case is also listed in Part I.)

The ACLU of Michigan (1999) obtained a favorable settlement on behalf of Crystal Seifferly with Lincoln Park High School. As part of the settlement, the school changed its policy prohibiting the wearing of pentacles, a symbol of the Wicca religion of which Seifferly is an adherent, and deleted the policy's provision that stated that pagans and witches are inappropriate in a school setting.
www.aclu.org/temp/pr1999/13596prs19990325.html

The ACLU of New Jersey (1999), the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, and the Anti-Defamation League won a lawsuit on behalf of Muslim police officers who were barred by department grooming standards from maintaining their beards, as required by their religious beliefs. The officers, Faruq Abdul-Aziz and Shakoor Mustafa, are devout Sunni Muslims.
http://www.aclu-nj.org/issues/policepractices/theacludefendscops.htm

The ACLU of Southern California (1996), together with the Native American Heritage Commission, filed a First Amendment challenge to a state university's plan to erect a mini-mall and parking lot on the sacred site of the birthplace of a Native American god. The California Court of Appeal held that the university could not pursue its development plan without taking mitigation measures, or, if none could be taken, showing that the public interest nonetheless requires development.

http://www.aclu.org/religion/govtfunding/26526res20060824.html
 

fff

Well-known member
"It's not every day that the liberal American Civil Liberties Union finds itself on the same side with the conservative Alliance Defense Fund," quips Fox's Brit Hume.

The ACLU has filed a brief on behalf of former student Heidi Zamecnik of Illinois in her lawsuit against Indian Prairie District 204. During the 2006 GSA-sponsored National Day of Silence, Zamecnik wore a T-shirt, reading "Be Happy, Not Gay," in protest. She was told to remove the shirt or leave, with some students and faculty calling it offensive.

"First," says an ACLU press release, "the school's speech policy is unlawful on its face, because it broadly prohibits all speech that disparages protected classes, rather than carefully distinguishing protected speech from unprotected harassment."

"Second," it continues, "the school last spring should have allowed two students on one day to wear the 'Be happy, not gay' T-shirts."

The Alliance Defense Fund will continue the effort to suspend the school policy, pending a decision in the outstanding suit.
 

Mike

Well-known member
ACLU & Communism: What’s the Difference?
Written by Nedd
Monday, 28 August 2006

If you read no other article from this web site ever again, I urge you to read this one.

If you read this one and cannot decisively conclude for yourself that the ACLU is not an arm or a front for the Communist Party or for Communism itself, I have to conclude that you are likely either a Communist sympathizer or gasp, a Communist itself.


The Congressional Record - Appendix, pages A34-35, as posted on this page, is the source by which we will cite and for sake of time, briefly but clearly make our compelling case. In 1963, a constituent of Florida Democrat Congressman A.S. Herlong urged the entry of 45 goals of Communism as identified in the book The Naked Communist.

So how many of these objectives would it take to convince you that ACLU backers are Communist sympathizers? Would 1-3 do it? Probably not. 4-6? Likely no but keep talking. 7-9? OK, Kareiva, you’re starting to get warm. 10-12? Now you’re beginning to make your case. 13-15? I can’t take the heat!

What if I laid out at least half of these 45 goals (22 to be exact) and did so using links from the ACLU’s web site? Would that convince you? I think it would convince all but those who intentionally want to continue their association with them.

In 1935, 15 years after the formulization of the ACLU, founder Roger Baldwin penned his immortal (or shall we say immoral?) words:


“I am for socialism, disarmament and ultimately for abolishing the state itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek social ownership of property, the abolition of the properties class and sole control by those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal.”


Less than 3 decades after those everlasting statements, Congressman Herlong entered a vast amount of the proof.

More than 4 decades after these entries, the ACLU continues to perpetuate the Communist agenda, perhaps not totally internationally (though its footprints are well known) but most definitely domestically.

Maybe we should get a good definition of Communism before proceeding. From Dictionary.com:

1.
a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.


2.
(often initial capital letter ) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.


Any quarrel that both of these definitions, particularly the second one, apply to the ACLU?

Ready to begin? Remember, I said I would be brief. Or at least I'll try.


* Goal 11: Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind.

Link here. You'd think the United States was a third world nation with massive violence and systematic civil rights abuses if you believe what this page says. While there is no doubt a need for improvement on the part of public officials in adhering to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the citizens they serve, there is no greater country in the world than the good old U.S.A. And that is not in doubt.

The question that needs to be asked is if America is such a terrible nation, why is the ACLU going to the UN to make its case? I thought the purveyors of the Bill of Rights would be the standard bearers in practicing what they preach. Doesn’t the 1st Amendment say that the people have a right to “petition the government for a redress of grievances”? I don’t see the ACLU going to the government for too much of anything, except to bring government officials to the courtroom.

The ACLU of Texas expressed its dismay of America’s immigration laws by once again going to the UN instead of our elected officials. The ACLU does not believe in the greatness and sovereignty of America.


* Goal 13: Do away with all loyalty oaths.

Perhaps the modern day ACLU would add “especially those with ‘God’ included”. Link here and here.

What more do I need to say? The evidence is there for you to see.


* Goal 15: Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

While one can argue that neither Communism nor specifically the ACLU holds one party hostage, it is not arguable that one party has elements substantially entrenched. I daresay most of you know which one I’m referring to.

The ACLU’s scorecard for the 108th & 109th Congresses is the barometer of evidence. Over half the House Democrats in the 108th Congress voted with the ACLU at least 80% of the time. 30 Democrats disagreed with the ACLU on only one issue (usually on the ban on the date rape drug Raves which the ACLU opposes) and 17 were 100% in agreement with the ACLU. The highest score a Republican achieved with the ACLU was 64%.

In the 109th Congress, a whopping 63 House Democrats had a 100% score while 39 Democrats disagreed with the ACLU only once, giving a total of half the members in Washington in line with them.

Is there any doubt which party is in the grip of the ACLU?


* Goal 16: Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

This one could fill a library. But we’ll provide one example, a significant one that has changed America for the last half century, the Everson vs. Board of Education which you can get a glimpse of by clicking here and here.

This was a technical decision in the sense that gave rise to the ACLU-like group in Americans “United” (www.au.org) and has largely changed the course America has chartered by interjecting a ban on religion in conjunction with public schools. This decision also gave rise to the bastardization of the metaphor “separation of church and state”, a term silent for nearly a century and a half, which, like the Everson decision, is continually misused and abused by the ACLU and AU.

Time and space does not permit me to address this further so use Google or your favorite search engine to research pursue it if you wish.

* Goal 17: Get control of the schools.

Again, there is much evidence of the ACLU using the schools to achieve its agenda. The courtroom is a favorite of theirs when schools are hesitant to support ACLU wishes. One example of that is their “Every Student, Every School” project which, the ACLU’s web site states, is for rural communities to require Gay/Straight Alliances in their schools (primarily at the behest of homosexual activist groups like the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network - www.glsen.org). Those who balk can expect to hear from the ACLU and be prepared to shell out major bucks in court.

”Every Student, Every School” is a chilling phrase, perhaps even including private, charter and Christian schools. Although the ACLU is not actively pursuing non-public schools to push its agenda, its ally in GLSEN has already made an impact in them. GLSEN’s Day of Silence (for the sexually confused) is already occurring in some private and religious schools across America – see here for proof.

The ACLU has removed much of the “Every Student, Every School” program off its site, despite its appearance on a Google search but it’s still on the ACLU of Georgia’s web site as well as here and mentioned elsewhere. And the ACLU spares no effort or expense in suing schools that balk on anything homosexually oriented. So does the ACLU control schools on this issue? The facts are not in doubt.


* Goal 18: Gain control of student newspapers.

This is evident in some locations. If a student wants to put something in a school paper that may be considered vulgar, homosexual, anti-war or something similar and the school hesitates, the ACLU is happy to strong arm the school into submission. Here is one example and here is another.

The ACLU of New Hampshire has a web page on this as well.


* Goal 19: Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.

The facts are not in doubt on this issue either. The ACLU has defended affirmative action protesters like By Any Means Necessary (www.bamn.com) as you can see by going here and here. The ACLU, however, is more noted for its lengthy support of anti-war groups. Here and here are a couple others.

Google has loads of stories on this one so if you want more, click here.


* Goal 20: Infiltrate the press.

The ACLU has done a thorough job of that through the years. Vast majorities of the mainstream media in newspapers, radio and TV are card-carrying ACLU members. These individuals are frequently censors in their reporting, heavily showing a one-sided bias in favor of ACLU positions on abortion, homosexuality and war protests with scant coverage to those most of us consider mainstream. One such reporter on our NBC TV affiliate here in Chicago, Renee Ferguson, proudly touts her association with the ACLU.

The ACLU has done an excellent job of not only getting favorable press coverage; they have well altered our vocabulary to make their evil sound good. For example, to describe abortion and partial-birth abortion, they use the words “disarticulate” and “privacy”. To describe acceptance of homosexuality, they use the words “equality” and “non-discrimination”. To describe the acceptance of pornography, they will use terms like “free speech” and “censorship”.

So as much as the ACLU says they support freedom of speech, they don’t practice that in reality and neither do most of the liberal media.


* Goal 21: Gain control of key positions in radio, TV and motion pictures.

Goal 20 covers the radio and TV aspects of that. However, they ACLU also has done their job to gain the support of those in motion pictures.

In an exclusive report obtained from the paid subscription publication National Journal, the ACLU was hemorrhaging money and memberships in the 1980s and frantically sought never revenue streams. ACLU National Director Ira Glasser proposed and engineered efforts to gain the support of the likes of Hollywood. This included campaigns to persuade actors and actresses to join the ACLU, not to mention pornographers like Larry Flynt, who sits on the board of directors of the Southern California ACLU. Since Hollywood has money to burn, this was considered an easy way to get donors and promote the ACLU’s social liberalism.

In part due to Glasser’s recruiting efforts of Hollywood and other filthy rich celebrities, the ACLU’s coffers went from approximately $55 million in 1990 to over $200 million by the time Glasser left the ACLU in 2001. The ACLU now had a key constituency in addition to the pornographers, abortionists and militant homosexuals. Here is a result of the ACLU coming to the aid of Hollywood.

The ACLU also acknowledges the support of the entertainment industry on their web page here. It is likely a major reason why the Northern and Southern California branches of the ACLU are key players in almost any issue in the state and why the politics of the state are as leftist as it is.


* Goals 22 & 23: Discrediting American Culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. Controlling art critics and directors of art museums, promoting “ugliness, repulsive and meaningless art”.

While you may not see the ACLU go to court against art museums and much of the private sector, the ACLU has traditionally supported vulgarity in the art field. Their web page has identified a few examples and they went out of their way to support materials repugnant to the majority of Americans in a brief in favor of Karen Finley vs. the National Endowment for the Arts.

Here is a fairly recent case where the ACLU defended something that many of us would be considered, as identified above, meaningless and possibly offensive.


* Goal 24: Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.

Oh, boy! You can write a book on this one. The ACLU is absolutely embedded in it You don’t have to look far at all to see the proof. The Internet is totally replete with such information. But let me provide you just one from the book ACLU vs. America.

In the chapter ACLU vs. Children, co-author Alan Sears, who served in the Reagan Administration under the Attorney General’s Commission on Pornography, worked with Focus on the Family’s founder Dr. James Dobson to produce a thorough report on the effects of pornography in America. One testimony in the report is as follows (certain elements considered graphic are minimized simply for the sake of this article):

I will never forget a particular set of photographs shown to us at our first hearing in Washington, D.C. It focused on a cute 9-year-old boy who had fallen into the hands of a molester. In the first picture, the blond lad was fully clothed smiling at the camera. But in the second, he was nude, dead and had a butcher knife protruding from his chest. I served for 14 years of a medical school faculty and thought I had seen it all. But my knees buckled and tears came to my eyes as those and hundreds of other children were presented…. showing pitiful boys and girls with their rectums enlarged….and their vaginas penetrated….Perhaps the reader can understand my anger and disbelief when a representative for the American Civil Liberties Union testified a few minutes later. He advocated the free exchange of pornography….in the marketplace….This man said with a straight face that it is the ACLU’s position that child pornography should not be produced but once it is in existence, there should be no restrictions on its sale and distribution.

Disgusting!

Want to know more? Go get the book. It’s worth every penny.


* Goal 25: Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio and TV.

Again, there is no shortage of finding ACLU suits in these areas. And if you’re lucky to get one, read their policy manual on porn. It is startling.

However, if you don’t have one, no sweat! Here is a link to ACLU Policy Number 4 as your evidence. Their policy positions and relentless lawsuits, either in defense or as a plaintiff, are chilling reminders of what this organization will due to promote evil and sugarcoat it in the process.


* Goal 26: Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as normal, natural and healthy.

We covered this in part with the ACLU support of Gay/Straight Alliances in the public schools. The rabid California ACLU is currently and very actively supporting the perpetuation of it in state public schools and using the most liberal Democratic legislature in the country to do so. Check their web sites, both for the Northern and Southern chapters, visit their archives, Google the information. It’s there for all to see.

Plus as many of you know, the ACLU is in state courts, actively seeking to overturn traditional marriage laws and fighting marriage amendments. They have largely been unsuccessful (outside of Massachusetts and to some extent in California) but they are relentless on this matter. Yet in the face of its losses (still continuing to this date), the ACLU launched a national same sex marriage campaign in May 2005 to continue their advocacy on this issue.

In addition, the ACLU’s fight in favor of promiscuity is brought to light by telling states to disregard abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, calling them “unsafe” and “dangerous” and in effect, promoting condom based education. Only the utterly absurd can buy that one but the ACLU has a couple guinea pigs to promote this nonsense – see here and here.

The ACLU could care less about the diseases and consequences promiscuity and sexual behavior, “normal” or aberrant, bring about. Sexual freedom trumps all else. After all, the ACLU’s president, Nadine Strossen, personally advocates porn in her book and watches it herself. Hence, why should the ACLU oppose it?


* Goal 27: Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social religion”. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch”.

You may not think the ACLU infiltrates churches but I assure you it does and not just a handful of them. Liberal denominations like the United Church of Christ, Episcopal Church, Presbyterian USA and others have bought into the ACLU’s agenda of homosexuality and abortion. The Metropolitan Community Church, a denomination all its own which actively marries homosexuals, is an entity all its own in support of the ACLU.

From these groups, the ACLU seeks their ministers and other church personnel who oppose traditional marriage and/or support homosexual marriage as allies and names on court documents. You can find them online in court filings and on a few ACLU web pages.

Perhaps no denomination or church has been more supportive of the ACLU than the Unitarian-Universalist Church. I invite you to read my friend and co-writer Debbie Smith’s column on this issue, the first of its kind on the web (that I’m aware of). See the ACLU’s ties with this movement that can be considered a cult at best and non-religious at worst.

Like the other liberal denominations above, the UCC actively promotes abortion and homosexuality as well as the teaching of evolution. And why does it? Because the ACLU conducts many of its meetings in these “churches”. A Google search will support this statement.


* Goal 28: Eliminate prayer or any phrase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state”.

We covered the “church and state” phrase earlier in this piece so we won’t rehash it here. The ACLU doesn’t use it quite as much as it used to and to the extent others like Americans “United”, Freedom from Religion Foundation (www.ffrf.org) and People for the “Anti” American Way (www.pfaw.org) do but they do practice it in their relentless pursuit to sanitize America of public prayer.

Like the proliferation of pornography, there is an endless array of items regarding the ACLU and prayer but perhaps one of the most egregious cases was when Joe Cook, director of the ACLU of Louisiana, likened a school board who allowed prayer in a Louisiana school parish to terrorists. More details about the suit (not the obnoxious and egregious comments) can be located here.

The ACLU’s position on prayer can be found here (note in this case the false claim of “constitutional principle of separation of church and state”). The ACLU in one breath says that “Every child in the United States already has the right to pray in school on a voluntary basis -- it's called the First Amendment” and then in another breath their policy manual states that it “opposes the infusion of other types of religious practices and standards into the public schools. These include such practices as baccalaureate exercises in the form of religious services, prayer meetings at athletic events, the taking of a religious census of pupils ... and the profession of religious observance or belief as a consideration in the evaluation and promotion of teachers." [1932, 1962] ”.

So a child can freely pray in school but not at a baccalaureate service or athletic event. What kind of gobbledygook is that? It’s called ACLU censorship, meaning the ACLU dictates when a kid in school can pray and when he or she can’t. And though there was no ACLU suit in this case, the ACLU supported such censorship in Nevada earlier this year.


* Goal 32: Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture – education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics.

While one may have difficulty seeing the ACLU in this arena, the ACLU is part and parcel to it in some areas. One of them is its support for homosexuals to adopt children. They cite all the usual sources – American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association and American Academy of Pediatrics – in promoting their position.

In a case where Florida’s ban on homosexual adoption law was challenged and upheld, the ACLU noted these groups (and other similar ones) in its brief.

In a similar case but which led to the striking down of Arkansas’ law, the ACLU once again quoted the same groups, notwithstanding other child groups that don’t have the same political connection that believe homosexuals should not adopt.

The entrance of groups like GLSEN also serves the ACLU’s purpose in public school that was addressed earlier.


* Goals 36 & 37: Infiltrate and gain control of more unions and big business.

The ACLU’s input in unions and business is striking. In terms of unions, like the militant abortion and homosexual groups as well as pornographers, the ACLU will file suits to achieve its purposes on behalf of them. Perhaps the teachers’ unions most come to mind since the schools are an ACLU stronghold. Whether promoting policy on homosexuality among children or in support of transsexual individuals, count on the ACLU to be at the forefront.

When it comes to businesses, the ACLU can be counted on to have an effect. Though the ACLU may not go after such with such zeal as they do the public sector, the ACLU will often use state or federal law to achieve its objectives. However, if a business touts a diverse workforce (read: promotion of homosexuality, transvestitism and transsexuality), the ACLU proudly touts it. And if a business promotes contraceptive or abortion coverage for its employees, bet on the ACLU praising it and proclaiming it as a role model for others.

More details on the ACLU infesting big business can be found in the section The Private Sector in the 90s book Twilight of Liberty by William Donohue.


* Goal 39: Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

While the ACLU may not be dominating the psychiatric and psychological fields, they have no doubt infiltrated their ranks as noted earlier in its support of homosexual adoption and for calling abstinence for teens “dangerous and unsafe”. The ACLU will support these agencies in saying that homosexuals cannot change their orientation, despite a recent statement of the American Psychological Association that they can.

And the ACLU says that transsexuals who don’t get their supposed hormone treatments or other “treatments” supposedly available to the gender misguided are no different than cancer patients not receiving chemo treatments and such amounts to “cruel and unusual punishment” under the 8th Amendment.

Can anyone sanely argue that is infiltrating the mental health profession by defending those who want sex change operations? And what legal firm wants their reputation soiled by representing such nutcases? Apparently the ACLU doesn’t care about its reputation.


* Goal 40 & 41: Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents.

Sure and why not? The ACLU opposes parental consent, let alone notification, for teen to have an abortion and opposes a California initiative to permit that. The most important decision a pregnant teen will have regarding will be denied by the ACLU. In fact, the ACLU bizarrely urges parents to tell legislators to oppose their rights to know these things, titling it “dangerous”.

The ACLU opposed the rights of the students of one Kentucky County to opt out of pro-homosexual indoctrination mandated earlier against them. So here is another example of the ACLU telling parents to stay out of the lives of their children.

Encourage promiscuity? We covered that earlier in the ACLU’s opposition to abstinence teaching in favor of condom based education. The facts are not in doubt when we say the ACLU promotes promiscuous sex among teens. And if a kid wants a homosexual club in his school and administration officials say no, it becomes financially perilous for the school and the district.

* Goal 42: Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use “united force” to solve economic, political or social problems.

We partially covered this earlier under Goal 19. But one area where there seems to be a serious insurrection of and that concerns illegal immigration.

Over the last few months, we have seen illegal immigrants, frequently in the form of students, marching all over America, particularly in big Hispanic cities like Los Angeles, New York, Miami and Chicago. The pictures have been plastered on hundreds, if not thousands, of web sites and blogs across the Internet. And despite the ACLU’s continual opposition to municipalities, states and Congress making laws to secure our borders and deport the illegals, Americans across the country are retaining a sustained voice in support of immigration reform laws and in support of making English as the official language.

Yet the ACLU continues to stand up for these lawbreakers, tacitly encouraging them to continue to do so. California has been arguably the biggest haven of the illegals, with the illegals claiming the state is their homeland and the ACLU ready to defend them in a heartbeat if the police arrest them or obstruct in any way.

And like the antiwar loose cannons, this is the newest constituency of the ACLU.

OK, so I wasn't as brief as I hoped. But did I make my case? I hope so.


How to Disarm ACLU supporters


If you know think you know someone who supports the ACLU, ask them. If he or she says no, you need go no further. But if yes, ask if he or she supports Communism. If he or she affirms so, you may as well stop as you are unlikely to have any impact. Thankfully, there aren’t likely to be too many of these folks as they will likely equate Communism with countries like China, Cuba or Russia.

However, if your friend or family member indicates his or her support for the ACLU but rejects Communism, print out this article and hand it to them. You can do so using either the printer friendly or PDF icon. If he or she is an Internet friend, e-mail this piece, using the tool on the site to do so or thru your favorite e-mail program. But before you do, be sure they see the 45 goals of Communism first. They may not agree with them all but if they are honest, they will be unable to argue with too many of them.

Next, be sure your friend or family member clicks to read the links provided, especially the ones linked to the ACLU’s web site. While some individuals may be skeptical on the application of some of the links, the ones leading back to the ACLU are fairly straightforward.

See if you can gain a consensus on a few items, perhaps with an emphasis on family matters. Most honest people, regardless of political persuasion, don’t want their families tampered with.

Each individual is different but if you can get a concession on anywhere between half (11) or 2/3rd (15) of the 22 goals, you may have won that person over.

Keep in mind that despite this seemingly long report, we have only provided a brief analysis of only half the goals of Communism, hence the ACLU. The first few pages of the first chapter of ACLU vs. America cover founder Baldwin’s roots, his ties to the Soviet Union and his admiration and yes, love for Communism. The whole book, however, is well worth your read.

I don’t know how many individuals will be won over by this piece but we need to persuade as many as we possibly can. Those individuals who seem to be generally good people but who view the ACLU as a civil rights organization need to examine the facts as outlined here. If they are honest with themselves, they will see the ACLU in a totally different light than they currently do. Perhaps an emphasis on patently absurd items like citing abstinence as unsafe and dangerous and opposing parental control of one’s children might do the trick.

Although the ACLU is no doubt a formidable organization, appearing in court more than any other person or group in America outside the federal government, and having seemingly bottomless pockets to push its agenda, I am very convinced it is a vulnerable organization. I do not believe a majority of ACLU supporters and donors want an immoral America with families divided, partial birth abortion and same sex marriage thrust on the people, homosexuality taught as normal in the public schools, pornography completely unregulated, and all vestiges of religious symbols, including the 10 Commandments and public crosses, removed.

I do not believe a majority of ACLU backers want our borders open to anyone and everyone, especially since border security appears to be the one bipartisan issue bringing Americans together. I cannot believe that many of them aren’t concerned about our national security and the threats to it by ACLU lawsuits defending terrorists and radical Islam. And I refuse to accept that a majority believes we are committing such systematic atrocities for Americans that we need to sacrifice our sovereignty to the UN.

I made my case to expose to you half the goals of Communism and its links to the ACLU. My goal now is to get you to agree and tell others. And if you are a contributor, my goal is to persuade you cease your donations.

If I am wrong about the ACLU, please make your case. I don’t, however, think you can make an intelligent one. But if I am right, please enable us to bring down the ACLU today. It’s our goal – to keep America safe and free from the ACLU.

And I hope yours as well.
 

Latest posts

Top