Another ACLU outrage

[Guest History Teacher]

You're a history teacher? Really? What grade level? Your remarks sound just like Paszkiewicz. Are there really two of you who don't understand a damned thing about the Constitution and its relation to religion?

What about the Fourteenth Amendment, Mr. or Ms. "History Teacher?" Does that have anything to do with the current law regarding church and state? Please justify your answer. It will be graded.

If you can answer the first question, try this one. What do you think "respecting an establishment of religion" means? That pretty broad language. Everything government does is based on its laws. So what's left out? Again, justify your answer.

No points for unsupported claims. In fact, you'll be marked off for them.

You're late for your Remedial English class, better get going.

[Guest Guest]

You're late for your Remedial English class, better get going.

You forgot "Oh yeah?!"

[Guest Guest]

Apparently you Loony Lefties can't handle the truth. In Oct. 2006, Bush signed into law , an order transferring

the Mt. Soledad Memorial into federal property. That was designed to protect the site from further lawsuits of

the Loony atheists.

Pretty stupid plan, then, considering that making it federal property doesn't change a damned thing when it comes to the church/state issue. Idiot.

The case is not finished--it was just moved to the appropriate jurisdiction.

One of the organizations protesting the cross are JEWS, you retard. Jews are not atheist.

[Guest *Autonomous*]

Apparently you Loony Lefties can't handle the truth. In Oct. 2006, Bush signed into law , an order transferring

the Mt. Soledad Memorial into federal property. That was designed to protect the site from further lawsuits of

the Loony atheists. Just as Arlington Cemetery, with all it's crosses, is protected, so now will Mt. Soledad be

protected. I can't make this any simpler. I know you Loonys are intellectually challenged, so if you don't

understand this ask a republican to explain it to you.

The case is still pending. Seriously-look it up. You're either ignorant of the case or lying. Heck-here's a link to the Mount Soledad Memorial Association's own website: http://www.soledadmemorial.com/web/pages/m...ross_update.htm

I mean seriously-can you even read? Note the following:

Although the original lawsuit has concluded, the ACLU and the National Jewish War Veterans Association continued the litigation by suing the Department of Defense. The new lawsuit is in its early stages and will more than likely takes years to resolve.

As I've said, it isn't about atheists. The current plaintiffs are a Muslim, the Jewish War Veterans, and 17 citizens of San Diego. Some of which may be atheists.

Here's a link to the Wikipedia page on Arlington: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arlington_National_Cemetery

Note the pictures. Now note that the only crosses you see are on the markers themselves. That is perfectly legal, as it is a memorial for that particular person and not a group that may include non-Christians.

This controversy has caused the defenders of the idol to lie and try to skirt the law on numerous occasions. Great Christian witness there, isn't it? You yourself have proclaimed Bush a patriot for defending it. But the original plaintiff was a Vietnam veteran. Unlike Bush, he actually fought for his country. Anyone who fights for their country is a patriot whether or not you agree with their religious beliefs.

The fact is, you are desperate for your side to win one. The religious extremists keep losing, which is why you can't teach my kids creationism, can't force them to pray, and (regardless of what Bryan thinks) can't preach to them in class.

[Guest Patriot]

The case is still pending. Seriously-look it up. You're either ignorant of the case or lying. Heck-here's a link to the Mount Soledad Memorial Association's own website: http://www.soledadmemorial.com/web/pages/m...ross_update.htm

I mean seriously-can you even read? Note the following:

As I've said, it isn't about atheists. The current plaintiffs are a Muslim, the Jewish War Veterans, and 17 citizens of San Diego. Some of which may be atheists.

Here's a link to the Wikipedia page on Arlington: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arlington_National_Cemetery

Note the pictures. Now note that the only crosses you see are on the markers themselves. That is perfectly legal, as it is a memorial for that particular person and not a group that may include non-Christians.

This controversy has caused the defenders of the idol to lie and try to skirt the law on numerous occasions. Great Christian witness there, isn't it? You yourself have proclaimed Bush a patriot for defending it. But the original plaintiff was a Vietnam veteran. Unlike Bush, he actually fought for his country. Anyone who fights for their country is a patriot whether or not you agree with their religious beliefs.

The fact is, you are desperate for your side to win one. The religious extremists keep losing, which is why you can't teach my kids creationism, can't force them to pray, and (regardless of what Bryan thinks) can't preach to them in class.

Since conservatives now have the edge on the Supreme Court, the ACLU is going nowhere on this one. The Mt.

Soledad memorial is now on protected federal property and the Supremes will defend it.

Since the ACLU is losing this one, I think they should file a lawsuit against the Washington Monument, it has a

religious plaque mounted on it's peak. That must be offensive to Loony Left atheists somewhere.

[Guest Studies and Observations]

Since conservatives now have the edge on the Supreme Court, the ACLU is going nowhere on this one. The Mt.

Soledad memorial is now on protected federal property and the Supremes will defend it.

Since the ACLU is losing this one, I think they should file a lawsuit against the Washington Monument, it has a

religious plaque mounted on it's peak. That must be offensive to Loony Left atheists somewhere.

And let's not foget the Bas-relif of the Ten Commandments on the door of the Supreme Court Chambers as well.... Some of these folks havent ever taken a GOOD look at our Govt Buildings down in Sodom-on-Potomac methinks Patriot..or they'd be absolutely FROTHING..of course for my own amusment it would be quite a treat to watch.

[Guest Guest]

Since conservatives now have the edge on the Supreme Court, the ACLU is going nowhere on this one. The Mt.

Soledad memorial is now on protected federal property and the Supremes will defend it.

Since the ACLU is losing this one, I think they should file a lawsuit against the Washington Monument, it has a

religious plaque mounted on it's peak. That must be offensive to Loony Left atheists somewhere.

YOUR GODDAMN RIGHT IT'S OFFENSIVE!

[Guest Truth Squad]

And let's not foget the Bas-relif of the Ten Commandments on the door of the Supreme Court Chambers as well.... Some of these folks havent ever taken a GOOD look at our Govt Buildings down in Sodom-on-Potomac methinks Patriot..or they'd be absolutely FROTHING..of course for my own amusment it would be quite a treat to watch.

The people who'd be frothing there would be the fundies, because their religious symbols aren't exclusive. It's bad enough you don't care about keeping government out of religion. You don't even understand what's involved.

[Guest *Autonomous*]

Since conservatives now have the edge on the Supreme Court, the ACLU is going nowhere on this one. The Mt.

Soledad memorial is now on protected federal property and the Supremes will defend it.

Since the ACLU is losing this one, I think they should file a lawsuit against the Washington Monument, it has a

religious plaque mounted on it's peak. That must be offensive to Loony Left atheists somewhere.

Nice of you to totally ignore that I've already proved you wrong on what you've been saying.

This may come as a shock, but judges don't make decisions based on personal whims. Remember, the judge in the Dover ID case was a conservative apointed by your hero. They have to think of the consequences of their decision, as it will establish precedent for future decisions. Would you like a crescent of Islam raised at Ground Zero? On what grounds could you throw it out?

You obviously don't understand the fine distinctions here. The problem with the cross is that the individuals buried there might not all be Christian. The cross as a memorial equates US military action with Christianity, but not all who serve are Christian.

The inscription on the Washington Monument is on the East facing, btw. It says Laus Deo. So what? The fact is, only relgious wingnuts like yourself think that atheists are offended by every expression of faith. The Washington Monument is a monument to George Washington, who was at least nominally Christian. It is not a monument to the American people and does not in any way entangle the government with religion.

[Guest *Autonomous*]

And let's not foget the Bas-relif of the Ten Commandments on the door of the Supreme Court Chambers as well.... Some of these folks havent ever taken a GOOD look at our Govt Buildings down in Sodom-on-Potomac methinks Patriot..or they'd be absolutely FROTHING..of course for my own amusment it would be quite a treat to watch.

http://www.oyez.org/tour/exterior/top_of_steps/

There's the door, doofus. Quite a few things on there. The only image of the Ten Commandments only shows the secular ones. Also, it isn't a religious expression but a history of law-many other historic lawgiver-figures are also depicted on the building. Mohammed is also depicted-does that mean we're a Muslim country? Answer this-how many of the Ten Commandments are actually illegal?

Like I said before-atheists aren't enraged by every expression of religious sentiment. That is just your bigotry talking.

[Guest Guest]

Since conservatives now have the edge on the Supreme Court,

Just like they did on the Dover trial on "Intelligent Design," right?

the ACLU is going nowhere on this one. The Mt.

Soledad memorial is now on protected federal property

Federal property is not above the Constitution, stupid. Never was.

and the Supremes will defend it.

Since the ACLU is losing this one,

The federal case hasn't even started yet, retard. Is this like your presidential pick?

I think they should file a lawsuit against the Washington Monument, it has a

religious plaque mounted on it's peak. That must be offensive to Loony Left atheists somewhere.

The irony is that I bet anything you'd shit your pants if there was a plaque on some monument that said there was no God.

[Guest 2smart4u]

Since conservatives now have the edge on the Supreme Court, the ACLU is going nowhere on this one. The Mt.

Soledad memorial is now on protected federal property and the Supremes will defend it.

Since the ACLU is losing this one, I think they should file a lawsuit against the Washington Monument, it has a

religious plaque mounted on it's peak. That must be offensive to Loony Left atheists somewhere.

Very interesting. After reading your post, I Googled "Washington Monument" to read the history of the

monument. It's something I never knew, on the east-facing cap stone is the inscription "Laus Deo" (Glory

To God) and on the steps leading to the top are various biblical inscriptions.

Clearly, the Congess in the 1800's recognized that we are a nation under God and were proud of that

fact. It's also clear that Congress in the 1800's didn't misinterpret the First Amendment.

[Guest *Autonomous*]

Very interesting. After reading your post, I Googled "Washington Monument" to read the history of the

monument. It's something I never knew, on the east-facing cap stone is the inscription "Laus Deo" (Glory

To God) and on the steps leading to the top are various biblical inscriptions.

Clearly, the Congess in the 1800's recognized that we are a nation under God and were proud of that

fact. It's also clear that Congress in the 1800's didn't misinterpret the First Amendment.

Responding to yourself again I see. The inscription on the steps is actually Welsh and isn't religious. Here's the thing-America is made up of Christians, atheists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, pagans, and many other belief systems. Christians only want their faith to be acknowledged and indeed given primacy. Those of us who aren't Christian oppose that for rather obvious reasons.

[Guest Guest]

the Congess in the 1800's recognized that we are a nation under God

That's funny, considering that there was a treaty passed UNANIMOUSLY by Congress in the late 1700s (much closer to the actual founding of the country) which specifically states that "the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion". And unlike the Declaration of Independence, this treaty represented U.S. law as all treaties do according to the Constitution (see Article VI, Sect. 2).

Not a single vote against it. Not one. Wrong as always; better lay off the fool-aid.

[Guest 2smart4u]

http://www.oyez.org/tour/exterior/top_of_steps/

There's the door, doofus. Quite a few things on there. The only image of the Ten Commandments only shows the secular ones. Also, it isn't a religious expression but a history of law-many other historic lawgiver-figures are also depicted on the building. Mohammed is also depicted-does that mean we're a Muslim country? Answer this-how many of the Ten Commandments are actually illegal?

Like I said before-atheists aren't enraged by every expression of religious sentiment. That is just your bigotry talking.

Interesting, you can speak authoritatively on the thoughts of all atheists.

[Guest Guest]

Very interesting. After reading your post, I Googled "Washington Monument" to read the history of the

monument. It's something I never knew, on the east-facing cap stone is the inscription "Laus Deo" (Glory

To God) and on the steps leading to the top are various biblical inscriptions.

Clearly, the Congess in the 1800's recognized that we are a nation under God and were proud of that

fact. It's also clear that Congress in the 1800's didn't misinterpret the First Amendment.

the big difference is "Under God" identifies no specifiv god as a cross does, "Under God" can be taken to refer to any of the more than 5000 gods in recorded history, take your pick.

[Guest Loki]

Responding to yourself again I see. The inscription on the steps is actually Welsh and isn't religious. Here's the thing-America is made up of Christians, atheists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, pagans, and many other belief systems. Christians only want their faith to be acknowledged and indeed given primacy. Those of us who aren't Christian oppose that for rather obvious reasons.

Not at all. I just don't want my religion openly attacked. The only ones who need to give Christianity primacy is themselves.

That holds true for Jews w/ Judaism, Muslims w/Islam, and atheists with whatever they hold most dear. The Constitution prohibits the government from establishing a national religion, not the presence of ANY sort of religious symbol. By its mere existence, does not prove government endorsement.

[Guest Guest]

That's funny, considering that there was a treaty passed UNANIMOUSLY by Congress in the late 1700s (much closer to the actual founding of the country) which specifically states that "the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion". And unlike the Declaration of Independence, this treaty represented U.S. law as all treaties do according to the Constitution (see Article VI, Sect. 2).

Not a single vote against it. Not one. Wrong as always; better lay off the fool-aid.

Balderdash. So typical of the Loony Left.

[Guest Patriot]

Responding to yourself again I see. The inscription on the steps is actually Welsh and isn't religious. Here's the thing-America is made up of Christians, atheists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, pagans, and many other belief systems. Christians only want their faith to be acknowledged and indeed given primacy. Those of us who aren't Christian oppose that for rather obvious reasons.

Since we are a Christian nation of course we set the rules. That's why our currency reads "In God We Trust" not

"In Allah We Trust". As far as you "opposing that for rather obvious reasons" is concerned, tell it to someone who

may care.

[Guest Guest]

Since we are a Christian nation of course we set the rules. That's why our currency reads "In God We Trust" not

"In Allah We Trust". As far as you "opposing that for rather obvious reasons" is concerned, tell it to someone who

may care.

WHAT a Wanker!

It reads "In God We Trust", NOT "In Christ We Trust"

America is a Christian nation only in your delusional, weak little mind.

[Guest Guest]

Since we are a Christian nation

That's funny, considering that there was a treaty passed UNANIMOUSLY by Congress in the late 1700s (just a few decades after the country was FOUNDED) which specifically states that "the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion". And unlike the Declaration of Independence, this treaty represented U.S. law as all treaties do according to the Constitution (see Article VI, Sect. 2).

Not a single vote against it. Not one. Wrong as always; better lay off the fool-aid.

[Guest Atheist]

Interesting, you can speak authoritatively on the thoughts of all atheists.

The typical atheist is more in favor of true religious freedom than your bigoted, lying, ignorant ass will ever be.

[Guest Truth Squad]

the big difference is "Under God" identifies no specifiv god as a cross does, "Under God" can be taken to refer to any of the more than 5000 gods in recorded history, take your pick.

I know a lot of good people would like "under God" to be neutral, but it isn't. It promotes a religious view, and therefore has no place on our currency. It's really very simple. There isn't the slightest need for it, and when you look at the way it gets defended, it's very obvious that it's being used to taunt and diminish people who do not believe in a "god."

[Guest Truth Squad]

Since we are a Christian nation of course we set the rules. That's why our currency reads "In God We Trust" not "In Allah We Trust". As far as you "opposing that for rather obvious reasons" is concerned, tell it to someone who may care.

See what I mean?

[Guest *Autonomous*]

Interesting, you can speak authoritatively on the thoughts of all atheists.

Responding to prejudice isn't "speaking for all atheists." If you had read the quote I was responding to, you would have seen that atheists were depicted as frothing at the mouth over any mention of God. That is just as prejudiced as your statement that minorities only vote for Democrats because they're uneducated.

Not at all. I just don't want my religion openly attacked. The only ones who need to give Christianity primacy is themselves.

That holds true for Jews w/ Judaism, Muslims w/Islam, and atheists with whatever they hold most dear. The Constitution prohibits the government from establishing a national religion, not the presence of ANY sort of religious symbol. By its mere existence, does not prove government endorsement.

I apologize. I've tried to be careful to make it clear that I only diagree with the Dominionist theories of people like Patriot. It was not clear there.

I agree with your second point. I have no problem with the plaque on the Washington Monument or similar displays. However, using a Christian cross as a memorial for war veterans is offensive to veterans who aren't Christian such as myself, my grandfather (Jewish), and many others.

Balderdash. So typical of the Loony Left.

Text of the Treaty of Tripoli:

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/diplomac...ry/bar1796t.htm

Note especially:

As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

As already noted, by the Constitution treaties are in fact law. We are legally not a Christian nation.

Since we are a Christian nation of course we set the rules. That's why our currency reads "In God We Trust" not

"In Allah We Trust". As far as you "opposing that for rather obvious reasons" is concerned, tell it to someone who

may care.

God and Allah are the same word in two different languages, doofus. As noted, we are not a Christian nation. We are a mostly Christian nation. In the 60s the exact same argument was made for us being a white nation. Which side would you have been on I wonder?

As far as you caring, I am well aware that you don't. That is why I consider you an evil person. Character is standing up for the rights of people other than yourself. Something you obviously wouldn't understand.

The fact is, your side is losing. The Christian Barna Group has found that atheism is on the rise. The citizens of Dover threw out the people who decided to teach their kids ID. The Republicans have selected the one Republican opposed to Bush's policies. McCain will be the next president-and Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter hate it. Finally my party is being taken away from ideological idiots like yourself. Go crawl under a rock with the other discredited ideologies-the neocon movement is over and conservatives are back.