Kelnozz - I agree with you wholeheartedly. We do our country no favors when we attach labels to those who don't share our point of view. This is a major part of the trouble in Washington and the MSM. Rather than finding common ground as a startng point for negotiation, we see flaming personal attacks and utter contempt over areas of disagreement. We see childish and divisive behavior modeled on both sides of the aisle. It's time that we dettermine to send adults to Washington, not oversized children.

So that is why they seek to remove Christianity from every public site be it private or public land...they fight for removal of moral standards of society

It's not "freedom of religion" its "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"...the ACLU fights to eliminate all aspects of Christianity


The rest is all attorneys will fight for yet ACLU fights for "Sharia Law" why would a law group fight to circumvent laws and punishment of laws outside the constitutional laws of the United States??? special agenda. Why would they fight for immorality within a society to become immoral with pedifiles, homosexuality, illegal immigration, and many other laws outside the constitutional values setforth for America citizens? Outside the normal realm of social fabric you will find the ACLU fighting to destroy the United States along with the Obama administration and state department

Well said. Our country is experiencing a tower of Babel-like phenomenon where the terms we throw around in the vernacular sometimes carry different meanings and weights with different people. The powers that be are using this, from my observation, to control us. Why else would a term such as "The War on Terror" become so popular? That phrase makes 0 sense. You can't eliminate fear - it's an emotion - so wtf are we fighting for?

Despite the fact that the ACLU has routinely defended christians from persecution and attack? http://www.aclu.org/aclu-defens...-practice-and-expressionhttp://www.aclufightsforchristians.com/Keep in mind that most of these cases are fairly recent(from the past decade)and many of them involve the ALCU defending christians rights to practice their religion in the public square.(which is what they're being criticized for not doing here)There are also cases of them supporting the free speech rights of christians when it comes to conservative issues like being anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage,(and just homosexuality in general)and anti-witchcraft(refusing to promote Harry Potter)Which kind of contradicts your specific claim that they're fighting to remove christian moral standards from society.



Which is freedom of religion. It says the Congress cannot make any law establishing a state religion, and it also can't prohibit anyone from excercising their right to practice whatever religion they want. Thats freedom of religion.






A couple things here. First of all when you say "Sharia Law" you really should be more specific as you're talking about multiple schools of thought, not just one. Hanbali is an interpretation of Sharia(the most conservative)as is Hanifi(the most liberal)Maliki, (which emphasizes what the Muslims practiced in Medina in the time of Muhhamad)and Shafi.(which emphasizes only the pratices of Muhhamads companions) Also, although theres recently been a disturbing trend of certain governments in certain places forcing these laws on non-Muslim inhabitants of a given region this is not the norm, nor is it something thats supported by any of the major Islamic schools stated above. Shariah law is a law that is meant for Muslims alone, it cannot be applied in any area that does not have a democratically elected government grounded in the Quran and Sunnah, and any Muslim that doesn't accept this is going against his own faiths established legal structures. The only place for the Shariah in the United States, and anywhere else thats not ruled by an proper Islamic government is in the personal lives of Muslims.

This concept makes sense when one looks at what the purpose of Shariah is in the first place. Shariah to Muslims(contrary to popular belief)is not merely a set of legal principles, but rather a path to a completely holy way of living. Its supposed to inform their daily life in the same way that the christian "walk" is supposed to completely influence and direct the beliefs and actions of christians. Theres no theological justification for forcing US christians, Jews, atheists, Buddhists, Hindus etc to comply with their law if they choose not to. The idea that thousands of Muslims are going to rise up, and through the courts force Shariah law on people who aren't Muslims seems to be not much more than a scare tactic used by radical anti-Islamists who don't want Muslims or their religion here period. Now I'm not accusing you specifically of this as I don't know you and have no way of knowing whether you support such people yourself, but your argument can certainly be used to aid them in their fear building efforts, and thus it needed to be addressed.