WTF?
So, I was reading Dispatches from the Culture Wars, one of my favorite blogs. Mr. Brayton pointed to this article on World'z Nutz Daily.
I thought I'd throw my two cents into the ring. I don't usually bother, but this should be good for a laugh.
After sucking city dry, ACLU 'hate machine' to be honored?
Council members considering proposal for day praising activists
Posted: March 24, 2008
9:32 pm Eastern
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
Let's face it, I've browsed both sites and found World'z Nutz Daily's articles to be a much more efficent hate machine. I realize this evidence is purely anectodal, but it's true none-the-less. World'z Nutz Daily articles villify homosexuals, leftists, non-Christians (particularly Pagans and Atheists, both of which, in clear violation of Christians' free speech rights, demand that our arguements make sense before we use them) and a few others.
The ACLU, on the other hand, likes to stay out of the way until they find out about somebody's rights being violated. Then, they spring into action. While they do try being as pro-active as possible, it's much like an exterminator's pro-activity. They might see you have a roach problem, but they can't start spraying on their own; they have to wait until you call them. But, they can throw an ad your way.
The ACLU at times has battled San Diego in court over a historic cross on a veterans' memorial and the use of city facilities by the Boy Scouts, collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars of money from city taxpayers for its efforts.
Let's start by defining our terms, here. Exactly how "historic" is the cross (known incidentally, as the "Mt. Soledad Easter Cross")? One hundred years? Two?
Nope. It was erected in 1954, replacing another cross that had been there since 1934, which replaced another cross. . .and so on back to 1913. I haven't been able to find out what happened to the previous crosses; perhaps they weren't maintained and eventually, had to be demolished. Just guessing.
Now the city is considering a plan to honor the organization.
"San Diego City Councilwoman Toni Atkins and Council President Scott Peters have placed on the city council docket one of the most despicable and anti-Christian items in recent years. They are planning to declare American Civil Liberties Union Day in the city of San Diego," warned James Hartline, who himself is a candidate for the city council this year.
Seems to me that two councilmembers are considering a plan to honor the organization. Has it come up before the council yet?
And what makes this item "despicable and anti-Christian," let alone "one of the most"? The ACLU isn't anti-Christian. The ACLU has a history, for example, of suing on behalf of Christian students told they couldn't reflect their religion at school (by wearing crosses and the like). You don't hear about this sort of thing very often because it doesn't happen very often. When somebody's religious rights are violated, it's usually not a Christian.
"The American Civil Liberties Union has done everything possible to destroy Christianity in the American culture and government. From tearing down crosses on public property to removing crosses and the Ten Commandments from governmental buildings, there has been no greater hate machine against our constitutional right to free religious expression in America than the ACLU!" Hartline said.
Well, ain't that just stupid? Just imagine, taking crosses and Ten Commandments statues from governmental buildings inhibits people from going to church or praying on their own! It's so simple, I'm shocked I didn't see it before.
I mean, it's not as though, I, going into a government building festooned with crosses and with a two ton monument to the Ten Commandments in the lobby, am going to be one hundred percent sure of getting a fair shake, am I? I mean, I'm not Christian; I've never been Christian and I probably will never be Christian. I am, none-the-less, a citizen of this great nation of ours which guarantees freedom of religion.
"The idea that radical lesbian San Diego City Councilwoman Toni Atkins and her leftist council partner Scott Peters want to honor the ACLU by declaring a day of honor IN OUR NAME in the city of San Diego is just plain evil," he said.
I've parsed that sentance several times and it still doesn't make sense. At a guess, he's objecting to the city honoring the ACLU because they are his ideological opponents ("equal rights for everybody vs. special rights for me and my friends" seems to be his arguement). Maybe there can be a compromise in the title: "San Diego (less James Hartline) presents: ACLU Day!"
Hartline, a longtime activist for family values in his city, said the ACLU has a history there of running a long-term battle to kick Boy Scouts off public property in Balboa Park that other organizations are allowed to use, forcing homosexual marriage on society, attacking pro-life protesters at abortion clinics and restricting the rights of school children to have Bible studies or pray on school grounds.
The Boy Scouts thing refers to the local Boy Scouts headquarters in Balboa Park, rented from the city for one dollar per year. The ACLU demanded that either the Boy Scouts stop their discriminatory practices or start paying market value for their rent. Poor, poor Boy Scouts.
When I was a Scout, our troop would not have been party to discriminatory practices.
Hartline said the meeting is tomorrow, in an apparent effort by city officials to load the item onto a council agenda and adopt it with little public notice.
"We cannot ignore this terrible attack on our faith and values by allowing our name to be used to honor the horrific and hateful ACLU," Hartline said.
In the words of Mr. Brayton: "hyperbolic screed." I love that phrase.
He told WND the issue is so important because it "institutionalizes the organization from a positive perspective."
"What's problematic from a legal perspective is the fact that the ACLU has gotten hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal settlements, so if they sue the city again, it gets hard for opposition to go against them," he said.
Bear in mind that the city only has to pay the ACLU if the city is in the wrong.
"Naming a day in their honor is entering into very dangerous ground," he said.
How so?
Not only did the city pay the ACLU about $900,000 in one of its settlements, the ACLU has been on the opposite side of 80 percent of San Diego's residents on issues such as the Mt. Soledad Cross, he said.
"Here we have a council member wanting to honor a group that's going against the will of the majority of San Diegans," he said.
That has yet to be shown.
I thought I'd throw my two cents into the ring. I don't usually bother, but this should be good for a laugh.
After sucking city dry, ACLU 'hate machine' to be honored?
Council members considering proposal for day praising activists
Posted: March 24, 2008
9:32 pm Eastern
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
Let's face it, I've browsed both sites and found World'z Nutz Daily's articles to be a much more efficent hate machine. I realize this evidence is purely anectodal, but it's true none-the-less. World'z Nutz Daily articles villify homosexuals, leftists, non-Christians (particularly Pagans and Atheists, both of which, in clear violation of Christians' free speech rights, demand that our arguements make sense before we use them) and a few others.
The ACLU, on the other hand, likes to stay out of the way until they find out about somebody's rights being violated. Then, they spring into action. While they do try being as pro-active as possible, it's much like an exterminator's pro-activity. They might see you have a roach problem, but they can't start spraying on their own; they have to wait until you call them. But, they can throw an ad your way.
The ACLU at times has battled San Diego in court over a historic cross on a veterans' memorial and the use of city facilities by the Boy Scouts, collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars of money from city taxpayers for its efforts.
Let's start by defining our terms, here. Exactly how "historic" is the cross (known incidentally, as the "Mt. Soledad Easter Cross")? One hundred years? Two?
Nope. It was erected in 1954, replacing another cross that had been there since 1934, which replaced another cross. . .and so on back to 1913. I haven't been able to find out what happened to the previous crosses; perhaps they weren't maintained and eventually, had to be demolished. Just guessing.
Now the city is considering a plan to honor the organization.
"San Diego City Councilwoman Toni Atkins and Council President Scott Peters have placed on the city council docket one of the most despicable and anti-Christian items in recent years. They are planning to declare American Civil Liberties Union Day in the city of San Diego," warned James Hartline, who himself is a candidate for the city council this year.
Seems to me that two councilmembers are considering a plan to honor the organization. Has it come up before the council yet?
And what makes this item "despicable and anti-Christian," let alone "one of the most"? The ACLU isn't anti-Christian. The ACLU has a history, for example, of suing on behalf of Christian students told they couldn't reflect their religion at school (by wearing crosses and the like). You don't hear about this sort of thing very often because it doesn't happen very often. When somebody's religious rights are violated, it's usually not a Christian.
"The American Civil Liberties Union has done everything possible to destroy Christianity in the American culture and government. From tearing down crosses on public property to removing crosses and the Ten Commandments from governmental buildings, there has been no greater hate machine against our constitutional right to free religious expression in America than the ACLU!" Hartline said.
Well, ain't that just stupid? Just imagine, taking crosses and Ten Commandments statues from governmental buildings inhibits people from going to church or praying on their own! It's so simple, I'm shocked I didn't see it before.
I mean, it's not as though, I, going into a government building festooned with crosses and with a two ton monument to the Ten Commandments in the lobby, am going to be one hundred percent sure of getting a fair shake, am I? I mean, I'm not Christian; I've never been Christian and I probably will never be Christian. I am, none-the-less, a citizen of this great nation of ours which guarantees freedom of religion.
"The idea that radical lesbian San Diego City Councilwoman Toni Atkins and her leftist council partner Scott Peters want to honor the ACLU by declaring a day of honor IN OUR NAME in the city of San Diego is just plain evil," he said.
I've parsed that sentance several times and it still doesn't make sense. At a guess, he's objecting to the city honoring the ACLU because they are his ideological opponents ("equal rights for everybody vs. special rights for me and my friends" seems to be his arguement). Maybe there can be a compromise in the title: "San Diego (less James Hartline) presents: ACLU Day!"
Hartline, a longtime activist for family values in his city, said the ACLU has a history there of running a long-term battle to kick Boy Scouts off public property in Balboa Park that other organizations are allowed to use, forcing homosexual marriage on society, attacking pro-life protesters at abortion clinics and restricting the rights of school children to have Bible studies or pray on school grounds.
The Boy Scouts thing refers to the local Boy Scouts headquarters in Balboa Park, rented from the city for one dollar per year. The ACLU demanded that either the Boy Scouts stop their discriminatory practices or start paying market value for their rent. Poor, poor Boy Scouts.
When I was a Scout, our troop would not have been party to discriminatory practices.
Hartline said the meeting is tomorrow, in an apparent effort by city officials to load the item onto a council agenda and adopt it with little public notice.
"We cannot ignore this terrible attack on our faith and values by allowing our name to be used to honor the horrific and hateful ACLU," Hartline said.
In the words of Mr. Brayton: "hyperbolic screed." I love that phrase.
He told WND the issue is so important because it "institutionalizes the organization from a positive perspective."
"What's problematic from a legal perspective is the fact that the ACLU has gotten hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal settlements, so if they sue the city again, it gets hard for opposition to go against them," he said.
Bear in mind that the city only has to pay the ACLU if the city is in the wrong.
"Naming a day in their honor is entering into very dangerous ground," he said.
How so?
Not only did the city pay the ACLU about $900,000 in one of its settlements, the ACLU has been on the opposite side of 80 percent of San Diego's residents on issues such as the Mt. Soledad Cross, he said.
"Here we have a council member wanting to honor a group that's going against the will of the majority of San Diegans," he said.
That has yet to be shown.