Thread: ACLU's 'Search and Destroy' Agenda

ACLU's 'Search and Destroy' Agenda

http://www.opinioneditorials.com/freedo ... 61209.html

Search and Destroy missions involve sending out a group of soldiers from a base camp to seek out and destroy the enemy. Often under the cover of darkness a squad or platoon is sent out to set up an ambush for any unsuspecting enemy that might come along. These soldiers conseal themselves and wait to spring the ambush if the enemy wanders into the trap. In a similar way the Bible gives an illustration of Satan laying in wait to ambush Christians. Paul says, “Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour.”

In that same vane, the American Civil Liberities Union (ACLU) is the ‘Devourer of Religion.’ The vast majority of Americans view the ACLU’s hit-squad as God-haters that desire to destroy all vestages of religion in the public square, and all Judeo-Christian values and beliefs. Why? Because religion gets in the way of their secular-progressive agenda. (See below) ACLU lawyers have done more to attack Christianty than any other organization in America today.

All of this is done under the guise of the alleged ‘wall of separation between church and state.’ This often used phrase is normally attributed to the Constitution. In actuality it came from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson in response to the Danbury Baptist’s concern over a rumor they had heard that the American government was going to set up a national church, much like the Angelican Church in England. In the letter, Jefferson explained to the clergymen that the Founding Fathers had set up a wall of separation between church and state to prevent that from happening in America.

“Thomas Jefferson had no intention of allowing the government to limit, restrict, regulate, or interfere with public religious practices. He believed, along with the other Founders, that the First Amendment had been enacted only to prevent the federal establishment of a national denomination-a fact he made clear in a letter to fellow-signer of the Declaration of Independence Benjamin Rush:
‘[T]he clause of the Constitution which, while it secured the freedom of the press, covered also the freedom of religion, had given to the clergy a very favorite hope of obtaining an establishment of a particular form of Christianity through the United States; and as every sect believes its own form the true one, every one perhaps hoped for his own, but especially the Episcopalians and Congregationalists. The returning good sense of our country threatens abortion to their hopes and they believe that any portion of power confided to me will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly.’
“Jefferson had committed himself as President to pursuing the purpose of the First Amendment: preventing the ‘establishment of a particular form of Christianity’ by the Episcopalians, Congregationalists, or any other denomination.” [1]

Jefferson, in his private letter to the Baptists, was not calling for absolute separation! Regardless, in 1947 the Supreme Court took a simple statement intended to imply that government wouldn’t interfere with the church and they distorted it. The court used Jefferson’s letter to create a new interpretation of the First Amendment. The result was an interpretation that went well beyond the Framer’s original intent.

The Framers believed that religious liberty was vital and requires a separation of church and state to protect churches and individuals from government intervention. In order to sustain a self-governing republic there must be a moral citizenry. The Framers, which included President George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, viewed religion as necessary for morality. In other words, morality is necessary for a republican government to survive.

Herein lies the problem. Christianity contends that morality does not depend on individual preferences. According to Charles W. Carter, “The Biblical morality is based upon a fourfold assumption, or faith. First, it assumes the existence of a personal, supreme and sovereign God, a God so absolutely sovereign that He can afford to allow a high degree of freedom within His realms. … Second, it assumes that God is Himself a moral being. In the third place it assumes that God has personally revealed His essential moral character and will to man. And, fourth, it assumes the ability of man to receive God's revelation of His moral character and will, and to act in accordance therewith.”

In his recent commentary Albert Mohler contends that America is in the midst of a great battle of worldviews. What he calls “a conflict over the most basic issues of truth and meaning. A worldview that starts with the existence and sovereign authority of the self-revealing God of the Bible will be diametrically opposed to worldviews that deny God or engage in what we might call 'defining divinity down.' At the heart of this controversy lies the irreducible obstacle of biblical authority. As a matter of fact, it may be impossible to overestimate the true depth of postmodern antipathy to the Bible--at least to the Bible as an authoritative revelation from God.” [2]

The ACLU vs. Christianity comes down to a collision between two opposing worldviews. Nancy Pearcy calls it the “secular and the sacred.” The conflict will never be resolved. How can it be when the Christian worldview is seen through the prisim of the Bible and the secular worldview is seen through the prisim of the Secular Humanist bible, the Humanist Manafesto. According to Christiananswers.net the Humanist Manafesto is a living growing faith,

“Not all humanists, though, want to be identified as ‘religious,’ because they understand that religion is (supposedly) not allowed in American public education. To identify Secular Humanism as a religion would eliminate the Humanists' main vehicle for the propagation of their faith. And it is a faith, by their own admission. The Humanist Manifestos declare:
‘These affirmations [in the Manifestos] are not a final credo or dogma but an expression of a living and growing faith.’” [3]

The Christian Apologetics & Research Ministery (CARM) describes a worldview thus:

“[It] is a set of presuppositions and beliefs that someone uses to interpret and form opinions about his humanity, purpose in life, duties in the world, responsibilities to family, interpretation of truth, social issues, etc.”

The Christian’s presuppositions and beliefs come from the pages of Scripture, nowhere else. CARM continues,

“The Bible has much to say about the nature of man, the world, purpose, truth, morality, etc., and so does the world. More often than not, the secular world view is in conflict with the biblical one. For example: Where the world asserts that man evolved, the Bible says he was created and ultimately responsible to God. Where the world says that morals are relative, the Bible says they are absolute. Where the world says that there is no need of salvation and redemption, the Bible clearly states that all people are in need of deliverance from their sin. The contrast is obvious and profound. Both cannot be true.” [3]

The battle continues to rage between moral relativism and absolute truth. The Bible tells us that ultimately Truth will win out. In the meantime the worldview battle is becoming uglier and uglier, largely due to the constant barrage of attacks against religion by the secular humanist liberals on the ACLU’s payroll.

Just what is the Secular Humanist worldview? First and foremost Secular Humanists are naturalists. A naturalist believes that nature is all that exists. “The Cosmos is all there is, or was, or ever will be.” This was the late Carl Sagan’s opening line on the television series “Cosmos.” Sagan was a noted astronomer and a proud secular humanist. Sagan maintained that the God of the Bible was nonexistent. (Imagine Sagan’s astonishment when he came face to face with his Maker.)

A Secular Humanist presupposes that man was not supernaturally created; he is an evolved species. To put it another way, more complex life forms have evolved from less complex life forms. CARM gives this explanation:

“The secular world exalts man to the apex of evolutionary development, the sovereign over all he dominates, though only another animal. God is relegated to the belief systems of the uneducated and superstitious. Such opposing views will clash.”

ChristianAnswers.net sums it up like this: “Secular Humanism…can be defined as a religious worldview based on atheism, naturalism, evolution, and ethical relativism.” [4]

Secular and Sacred. Darkness and Light. Two conflicting worldviews. “What do darkness and light have in common?” asked the Apostle Paul. His answer? Nothing! Darkness (secular-progressives) will always toil to smother the Light (Judeo/Christian religion). The Light will crack through the Darkness.

Edwin Meese, Fellow of Public Policy at the Heritage Foundation, warns that liberal extremists and their special-interest backers wield enormous power in this country. “[T]hey increasingly turn to the courts to advance their agenda. Their words and deeds continue to undermine our society, confound the rule of law and leave America measurably weaker against the most barbaric of enemies. Worst of all, these radicals push us ever further from the timeless principles of government and society set forth in the Constitution more than two centuries ago.”

Meese believes in the rule of law and the Constitution and has expressed concerns over some of the Supreme Courts recent rulings, particularly on eminent domain. “[I]t was just over a year ago,” says Meese, “that the Supreme Court undermined one of civilization’s most basic rights, the right to keep property, by ruling that the government may take your property from you and give it to someone else for their private use.”

As I type these words the freedom of Christian people to express their faith is under attack by Americans United for Separation of Church and State. They want any mention of religion purged from the public square. They’re determined to rid America of any evidence of religious faith. It’s disturbing that the ACLU opposes public displays of the Moral Lawgiver (God) but supports partial-birth abortion. The Judeo/Christian religion has no place in the public square, yet the religion of Secular Humanism does? Scientist David Menton asks these intriguing questions,

“Why is it then that so many public schools in our country manage to get away with teaching the religions of Scientism and Secular Humanism even in the face of widespread efforts to erect a ‘wall of separation’ between church and state? Where is the indignation and litigation of the American Civil Liberties Union who seem to fancy themselves as the ‘watch dog’ against the inroads of religion in our public schools? Has the ACLU decided that there are acceptable and unacceptable religions for our public schools? Can, indeed, any teacher discuss the origin of the universe, and particularly the origin of man and his ‘values’, with out teaching or discussing religion? It seems unlikely that there can be such a thing as ‘value free’ or ‘religion free’ education on many of those subjects that most intrigue man. We are led to conclude that all schools are to at least some degree ‘religious schools’, it is only a question of which religion is being taught.” [5]

Following are some of the things the ACLU opposes and supports,

Opposes:
Abstenence before marriage sex education
“God bless America” banners in schools
Christian home schooling
Education vouchers
Legalized school prayer
Federal faith-based drug treatment programs
Medical safety reporting of AIDS cases
Mandatory sentencing laws for crack-cocaine possession
The use of drug sniffing dogs
9/11 security measures
Parental cosent laws
Religious displays in public
Religious symbols for historical reasons
Denying drivers licenses to illegal aliens

Supports:
Government services for illegal aliens
Abortion on demand
Partial-birth abortion
Adoption by homosexuals
Same-sex marriage
Hate crime laws
Po-homosexual school curriculums
Censorship of the Ten Commandments and the Bible
Extended constitutional protection for enemy soldiers while bearing arms
Access to pornography, including Internet pornography access for children
The right of an organization (NAMBLA) to help pedophiles learn how to seduce children, molest them sexually, and hide their activities from authorities
There’s more…http://wallbuilders.com/resources/se...ResourceID=142

To be fair the ACLU attorneys represent people of faith on occasion. They’ve even represented a second grader whose public school barred him from singing “Awesome God” in a talent show. There are also ACLU attorneys who say they’re Christians. However, that’s the exception not the rule. The rule is that the ACLU is hostile toward religion. The ACLU does not represent the average American’s values. In fact, they dispise Judeo/Christian values. Their current lawsuits include opposing prayer at public meetings, opposing tax exemptions for all churches, and preventing the free speech of pro-life protesters.

Something most Americans aren’t aware of is that the American Civil Liberties Union was founded by Roger Nash Baldwin who, at the time of its founding, was knee-deep in the communist movement. Eventually he became disillusioned with the movement and removed the communists from the board of the ACLU. But Baldwin remained a staunch socialist until his death in 1981. Baldwin’s advice to Louis Lochner of the socialist People’s Council in Minnesota, 191,

“Do steer away from making it look like a Socialist enterprise…We want also to look like patriots in everything we do. We want to get a good lot of flags, talk a good deal about the Constitution and what our forefathers wanted to make of this country, and to show that we are really the folks that really stand for the spirit of our institutions.”

Like the military’s search and destroy missions, the ACLU has set up an ambush and are laying in wait for their unsuspecting enemy. They must conseal their mission, which is to remove religion from the public square.

Be alert!

I do not believe that we have groups like ACLU/La Raza etc., in our country, the United States of America, we have laws and that should be it, go by the LAW period. If we don't close these group's then we should find representive's who will.

Originally Posted by robinen

I do not believe that we have groups like ACLU/La Raza etc., in our country, the United States of America, we have laws and that should be it, go by the LAW period. If we don't close these group's then we should find representive's who will.

The ACLU should have been outlawed by the People of the United States long ago. Is is a disease!

Anti-American Communist Liberties Union