Not Just Religion but Christianity Is ACLU's Issue

Not Just Religion but Christianity Is ACLU's Issue

Dear Editor:

The ACLU continues its never ending warfare against Christianity. One by one they are succeeding in stamping out all mention of God, Christ and the Bible in public places and forums. They work to ban such references in any place where government funds are used. Since government money is invested in so many places, under this broad umbrella they can effectively restrict the voice of Christians. Two recent local cases involve the Arizona Civil Liberties Union: the plaques containing quotes from the Psalms at the Grand Canyon and the Plaque displaying the Ten Commands in Bolin Plaza in Phoenix, AZ. Eleanor Eisenberg head of the local ACLU has written to assure us that they "do not wish to ban religion or God or prayer in public places." Those who read this should make the mental mental note, "At least not now." She insists the ACLU is not "anti-Christian." That is kind of like the KKK saying they are not against Blacks, or the Nazis saying they were not against Jews.

She believes the Christian majority must be held in check for the benefit of Bahais, Unitarians, Sikhs, atheists, Muslims, Jews, agnostics and Rastifarians who live in America. It is impressive to me that we never read of any attempts by ACLU to block public activities of these other religious groups. In fact the agenda of humanistic and atheistic groups is to hobble and cripple churches in the exercise of their faith. Thus each victory won by the ACLU against Christians and churches by advances the cause of secularism and unbelief.

Ms. Eisenberg tells us that ACLU "would zealously protect the right of an individual to display such a monument on their private property." How very nice of them to allow us to do that! Those who wrote and adopted our Declaration of Independence thought that the Creator endowed us with liberty, but now we know that ACLU will grant us a small bit of liberty to express our faith on our private property. I suspect the unspoken caveat is, we may do so until it offends one of that list of minority religious and non-religious groups she mentioned and we would see ACLU back with their legal wrecking crew.

She tells us that she receives many "hate calls and death threats" from Christians. This is because of her heroic work in taking away their freedom to express their faith in a non-violent and non-threatening way. It would be interesting to see a breakdown of the calls she has received and just how many could be truly classed as "hate calls" or threatening. I suspect the report is greatly exaggerated to elicit sympathy for a bad cause.

She insists that the country is not based on the Christian faith and principles and thus is in no way a Christian nation. Could it be that in Ms. Eisenberg's school the pilgrims were atheists who came here to found a secular state? The Mayflower Compact was a declaration of unbelief and that Roger Williams, William Penn and Baron Baltimore all established havens for persecuted atheists?

Our founding fathers wisely erected a barrier to a state church, but the ACLU is striving with much success to make us a secular people. Those two goals are oceans apart. It would be most interesting to see a list of those who comprise the Arizona Civil Liberties Union and what their religious preferences might be. That would likely help all of us better understand ACLU's agenda.

Back -- or go -- Home