Ban Celeb Marrianges

[Island_Oak]

Perhaps the example I should have given is…the next time you want to affirm your right to appear shirtless in your public profile photo,you’ll need the ACLU’s help–that might be beyond the expertise of either of the institutions you mention.

 

[Trelow]

Perhaps the example I should have given is…the next time you want to affirm your right to appear shirtless in your public profile photo,you’ll need the ACLU’s help–that might be beyond the expertise of either of the institutions you mention.

Probably so.

I’ll get a new pic on there after deer season, I’m always the one with the camera, so I never get my picture taken. Consider yourselves lucky.

 

[onmywayagain]

Are you serious?

You see no value in an organization that protects civil rights?

Are you “okay” with racial, sexual, ethnic and religious discrimination?

I am serious. Explain to me what is so good about them. If someone feels offended by something look the other way. If an atheist does not like the site of a cross at a monument don’t go to the monument. Give me a break. The ACLU is so anti-christian it is pathetic.

What religious discrimination? I don’t see the ACLU defending Christianity. Why is that? They defend people of other faiths but not Christianity. Isn’t that religious discrimination?

 

[VociMike]

Given the fact celebs do adultry despite their marriage, then why not ban celeb marriages altogether?

We’d be doing them a much greater favor if we banned celeb sinning. Any ideas? If it works out well, we can then work on the ordinary sinners too.

 

[Neo_Canaan]

We’d be doing them a much greater favor if we banned celeb sinning. Any ideas? If it works out well, we can then work on the ordinary sinners too.

OK, let do that too.

 

[Island_Oak]

I am serious. Explain to me what is so good about them…

The attorneys employed by the ACLU work very hard, for very little compensation in the midst of lots of animosity to remind people that living in a democracy means sometimes tolerating the existence and public declaration of beliefs that are different than your own and even at times conflict with your own. Without the protections written into our Constitution, which they defend so vigorosly, our ability as Catholics to freely practice and profess our beliefs would be in jeopardy. If you don’t recognize this very simple truth you must have no appreciation of either history or current events.

 

[paramedicgirl]

Ordinary people can marry, but NOT celebs.

Like* that *will prevent the sin of fornication.

 

[BillP]

IThe ACLU is so anti-christian it is pathetic.

onmywayagain,

For the good thigns the ACLU does please see Island Oak’s reply just above.

I’ll make you this deal. If you can find me one instance of the ACLU acting to prevent a Christian from freely practicing their religion I will donate $50 to this forum (or any other charity of your choice).

In return I ask that if you fail to find such an instance, you donate $50 to the ACLU.

If the ACLU is so “pathetically anti-Christian” it should be an easy $50 for you, right?

 

[BillP]

Here’s one example:

ACLU of New Jersey Defends Second-Grader’s Right to Sing Religious Song (6/5/2006)

NEWARK, NJ – The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey today filed a friend-of-the-court brief in a case seeking to uphold an elementary school student’s right to religious expression.

The Frenchtown Elementary School student, whose initials are O.T., wanted to sing the song “Awesome God” in a voluntary, after-school talent show. School officials refused to allow the student to sing her song, saying it would give the impression that the school favored religion. “O.T.” remains anonymous to protect her privacy.

 

[Trelow]

onmywayagain,

For the good thigns the ACLU does please see Island Oak’s reply just above.

I’ll make you this deal. If you can find me one instance of the ACLU acting to prevent a Christian from freely practicing their religion I will donate $50 to this forum (or any other charity of your choice).

In return I ask that if you fail to find such an instance, you donate $50 to the ACLU.

If the ACLU is so “pathetically anti-Christian” it should be an easy $50 for you, right?

Only one?

ACLU Applauds South Dakotans’ Efforts to Protect Women’s Health and Safety in Light of Extreme Abortion Ban (5/30/2006)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: media@aclu.org
PIERRE, SD – The American Civil Liberties Union today applauded the efforts of South Dakotans to protect women’s health and safety in light of an extreme and dangerous abortion ban. The South Dakota Campaign for Health Families brought petitions with over 37,800 signatures today to the state capitol in order to place a repeal of the ban on the November ballot.

“South Dakotans want families to be able to make personal decisions about health care without government intrusion,” said Jennifer Ring, Executive Director of the ACLU of the Dakotas. “The thousands of signatures delivered to the state capitol today reflect the values of families across the state and come November will give every South Dakotan the chance to tell lawmakers that women’s health matters.”

The ban, which was passed by the South Dakota legislature in February and signed by Governor Mike Rounds on March 6th, is scheduled to take effect on July 1, 2006. Today’s action suspends the effective date pending the outcome of November’s election. The ban outlaws nearly all abortions in South Dakota.

“If lawmakers cared about women’s health, they would put resources into reducing unintended pregnancies by promoting education and ensuring access to birth control,” said Louise Melling, Director of the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project.

The South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families is an organization made up of concerned individuals and more than 10 organizations.

For more information visit www.acludakotas.org

For more information on the South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families, visit www.sdhealthyfamilies.com

aclu.org/reproductiverights/abortionbans/25705prs20060530.html

 

[BillP]

Only one?

aclu.org/reproductiverights/abortionbans/25705prs20060530.html

Perhaps I’m being dense., but I don’t see Christians being denied the right to practice their religon here, perhaps you could clarify it for me?

If you’re taking the challenge, feel free to keep trying, but when you do finally give up, please do let me know when you send the check.

 

[BillP]

The ACLU has gone to court in the past few years:

To protect the right of a nurse in a publicly funded hospital to wear a small cross on her uniform

To ensure the right of a student to wear a Star of David to school,

To protect a Muslim girl who was harassed when her fifth-grade class was handed Bibles by the principal

To protect a Presbyterian church from being evicted from its property by the city of Lincoln, Neb.

Far from having an agenda of eliminating God from public life, the ACLU fights to ensure that everyone has the right to worship as he or she sees fit.”

 

[onmywayagain]

I understand that everyone has the right to practice their own religion, but, was it not the ACLU who spearheaded the removal of the Cross at a monument in California. The Cross is a symbol of Christianity and Christianity is the biggest religion in the US. Why was God removed from public schools? Who spearheaded that campaign? I do believe the ACLU is behind all of the opposers of Christianity. Our country was founded on Christianity, so for the people who have other beliefs, they can practice it but why are crosses being taken down or trying to be taken down all over the place. In Hawaii they helped remove to crosses which represent the sacrifices that the soldiers made for the country. Doesn’t the cross represent sacrifice? I do believe the same cross that are at monuments, represent, the same cross that Jesus carried and sacrificed Himself on. You don’t have to make any type of bet with me. I’ll make a donation to charity that I feel will go to the good of all people. If you want me to make a donation just ask, don’t challenge. I’ll be glad to make a donation to the ACLU, if you will be glad to make a donation to Catholic Charities?

 

[onmywayagain]

The ACLU has gone to court in the past few years:

To protect the right of a nurse in a publicly funded hospital to wear a small cross on her uniform

To ensure the right of a student to wear a Star of David to school,

To protect a Muslim girl who was harassed when her fifth-grade class was handed Bibles by the principal

To protect a Presbyterian church from being evicted from its property by the city of Lincoln, Neb.

Far from having an agenda of eliminating God from public life, the ACLU fights to ensure that everyone has the right to worship as he or she sees fit.”

Every example you gave represents “a” person. You just proved my point. Because “a” person is offended by the site of a cross, millions of Christians suffer.

 

[BillP]

I understand that everyone has the right to practice their own religion

Our country was founded on Christianity

I think this is your difficulty. First of all you can’t have it both way. If “everyone has the right to practice their own religion”, then there can be no official religion.

Second, it is simply untrue to say that our country was “founded on Christianity”. Our country was founded on secular authority with freedom of religon. Thats why the First Amendment says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Look at a bit of past history. Catholic were religiously persecuted for years in this country BECAUSE there wasn’t an organization like the ACLU preventing governments at all levels from imposing religious (usually Protestant) practices and observences on the population at large (including Catholics).

Have a look at the “Know-Nothing” polictical party the Nativist movement and the KKK (who were vehemetly anti-Catholic!) infiltration of state and local governments in the 19teens and 20s, look at the Catholic Public School revolts in Boston.

If you want me to make a donation just ask, don’t challenge.

I wasn’t tryign to solicit donations. I was refuting your assertion that the ACLU was “anti-Christian” simply because it sought to ensure religious freedom for everyone.

 

[BillP]

Every example you gave represents “a” person.

I’m not sure what you mean. Religous freedom is ALWAYS about the freedom of individuals, of people.

You just proved my point. Because “a” person is offended by the site of a cross, millions of Christians suffer.

As far as the famous cross on Mt Soledad, you do realize that the complaint was made by the Jewish War Veterns organization don’t you?

Dr. Richard Smith, a named plaintiff in the case, is a San Diego physician who has lived near Mt. Soledad for nearly 40 years. Having served as a Lieutenant Commander in the Navy from 1969 – 1971, he said he welcomes the idea of a war memorial, but added: “I feel that the government’s use of a single religious symbol devalues the service and sacrifices of Americans of all religious backgrounds.”

Aren’t Jews entitled to have their sacrifices commemorated by the US Government? What about Muslims? Native American? the Shintos and Budhists of the 442d RCT? To say nothing of the atheists and agnostics.

How would you feel if the Goverment decided to commemorate the Sept 11 attacks by a religious display that promoted Mainstream Protestantism but was inimical to Catholicism. Wouldn’t you say “hey! Catholics died there too!”

Tell me how YOUR religious liberty, YOUR freedom to worship as you want is compromised by the US Government being requried to replace that cross on Mt Soledad with something more reflective of the faiths of ALL Americans who sacraficed their lives.

 

[BLB_Oregon]

Given the fact celebs do adultry despite their marriage, then why not ban celeb marriages altogether?

You can really ask a question like that with a straight face?

Do you have any direct knowledge of any particular celebrity who has committed adultery? If you are like most people, you “know” what you “know” entirely on hearsay. If you did some investigation, you would know that there are celebrities who, in spite of the stresses of being the target for year after year of unrelenting gossip and the expectation that they never go out in public without appearing “sexy” or “glamorous”–or allowing their bodies show that they are aging!–in order to keep their job still manage to have long-lasting and faithful marriages. That is inspirational, don’t you think?

Which of us thinks that it is a bad thing that there are actors and athletes? Entertainment and professional sports are two professions that put unrealistic expectations on people who want to make what are otherwise useful contributions to society. They are given lots of money, but they are also handed a much harder path when it comes to finding a good spouse and keeping their marriages and families intact and healthy. There really aren’t many of us who would live their lives for a year and come away envying them. Yet they, unlike us, have a need to share their talent and express themselves in that particular way. I don’t think we should begrudge them that. We should not make their lives more difficult by fueling the gossip or treating them as some sort of different being before God than we are.

Pray for the entertainers of this world. They need it. Besides, when they are examples of what a healthy life can look like, it is an example that can have a positive influence on millions. Let us wish that for them, and not a life handed over without question to sin and degradation. We should not want that for anyone we love.

The same goes for the ACLU: Love your enemies, and pray for them. There are some extremely committed individuals in that organization. When they are pointed in the right direction–they do defend religious freedom, too–they do some real good.

 

[Trelow]

Perhaps I’m being dense., but I don’t see Christians being denied the right to practice their religon here, perhaps you could clarify it for me?

If you’re taking the challenge, feel free to keep trying, but when you do finally give up, please do let me know when you send the check.

Whoever isn’t for the Lord, is against Him.

aclu.org/religion/tencomm/index.html
aclu.org/religion/schools/26063prs20060628.html
aclu.org/religion/vouchers/index.html
aclu.org/religion/gen/26783prs20060918.html
aclu.org/religion/govtfunding/26521prs20060824.html
aclu.org/lgbt/parenting/index.html
aclu.org/lgbt/marriage/index.html
aclu.org/lgbt/relationships/index.html
aclu.org/reproductiverights/index.html

Wonder which side they are rooting for?

 

[BillP]

Whoever isn’t for the Lord, is against Him.

aclu.org/religion/tencomm/index.html
aclu.org/religion/schools/26063prs20060628.html
aclu.org/religion/vouchers/index.html
aclu.org/religion/gen/26783prs20060918.html
aclu.org/religion/govtfunding/26521prs20060824.html
aclu.org/lgbt/parenting/index.html
aclu.org/lgbt/marriage/index.html
aclu.org/lgbt/relationships/index.html
aclu.org/reproductiverights/index.html

Wonder which side they are rooting for?

So you’re conceding that the ACLU doesn’t interfere with PERSONAL practice of religion but simply attempts to prevent the government from promoting one religion over another?

 

[Trelow]

huh?

If I recall I said

The ACLU is a wicked little puppet of Satan.

Just proving my point.

Sheep or goat. Pick one.