«
»

The ACLU Defending Christians

By Anthony | December 14th, 2006 | 9:33 pm

While we’re on the subject of the ACLU, I found this today in the comments on the News and Record’s Letters to the Editor blog – a website entitled “The ACLU Fights For Christians“. It lists and links to over two dozen instances of the ACLU “defending the right of a Christian to speak as a Christian or to practice Christianity”. I was really happy to see a list like this all in one place, since it’s something I was thinking about doing myself.

This provides even more evidence that the ACLU is not on a secular rampage, determined to wipe out Christianity or religion. It also argues against the ACLU being on any sort of liberal crusade, since in many of these cases they are actually on the side of people who espouse traditionally un-liberal viewpoints. Defense of the First Amendment should not be a partisan issue, and it’s distressing to see folks undeservedly demonize the ACLU.

This entry was posted on Thursday, December 14th, 2006 at 9:33 pm and is filed under Politics, Religion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

4 Responses to “The ACLU Defending Christians”

  1. meblogin Says:
    December 15th, 2006 at 6:42 am

    Hi,

    So are we sorta continuing the High Point thread?

    If so, maybe we need to start with the wording that the council is supposed to use. Can you find it?

    It would appear to me when government starts directing how prayer is said that a reverse conflict has happened.

    (glad to see ACLU not on a secular rampage)

    This is interesting stuff.

  2. PotatoStew Says:
    December 15th, 2006 at 8:47 am

    It’s a related topic, but I don’t see it as continuing the specifics of the High Point thread.

    As for wording – I don’t think there is specific wording for the prayer as a whole, per se. More a matter of using a more inclusive term for God, and not endorsing any specific theology.

    As Joel and others suggested, the best course may be to not have our city officials praying as a group as a part of their business activities.

  3. meblogin Says:
    December 18th, 2006 at 12:23 am

    I believe you are taking Joel out of context…though he is quite capable of correcting if needed.

    I believe Joel is saying clearly….if you are going to force me to pray a particular way…then the answer is no.

    Do you really believe he intended to say otherwise?

    thanks

  4. PotatoStew Says:
    December 18th, 2006 at 1:05 am

    You’re right, he was saying that. But I think he also suggested what I mentioned: When presented with the possibility of the prayers being opened up to other faiths, he said, “But given Roch’s good questions, I’d rather deal with a privatized religion that expose my children or those present at a city meeting to Hindu chants or slaughtered chickens or a Wiccan priest or whatever.” I took that to mean that he thought that under the circumstances it might be better to have no prayer at the meetings.