Originally posted by jibeho
The ACLU has clearly veered far away from their original intent. They have become just another mouthpiece for the Progressive Movement. Yes, they
have done some good but, with that good comes their politically charged agenda. Their hypocrisy is so blatant that they should not be eligible for
any federal funding whatsoever. Much like ACORN, they have strayed far away from the original flock of their respective foundations.
A prime example is the construction of footbath stations for Muslim students at the University of Michigan in Dearborn. Not even a whimper of
opposition from the ACLU on the issue. They were concerned but never opposed it. In another case in San Diego an extra recess period was granted at
Carver Elementary school for Muslim students to pray. The same school also spent $450,000 to alter the cafeteria menu and to alter class schedules to
include Arabic instruction and prayers.
Meanwhile, ACLU opposes nativity scenes, prayers at public school graduations and Christian clubs in high school. In my former public school, it was
called the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. It no longer exists there.
The ACLU only supports groups that fit within their agenda while blatantly going to extremes to exclude other groups. Civil Liberties and First
Amendment right protection?
Oddly, I'm not a progressive, in fact, I'm a very conservative (not neocon) Satanist, and I actually don't see an issue here from what you're
Here is what I'm seeing from these things:
The footbaths: While a concern over the public's money, it can be argues that the moneys for it came from tuition funds which go to grounds keeping,
etc. Furthermore, it would seem the baths are being provided as a courtesy to those students wishing to use them for the free practice of their faith,
of which I would imagine there to be a somewhat sizable population at that institution. I would be happier if the school would agree to provide and
maintain them if those students wishing to use them kicked in a buck or two, but i see it as an inclusionary policy vs an exclusionary one, which
could single out Muslims and violate their 1st amendment rights.
As for the menu and class schedules, as long as all students weren't being forced to partake, and if there is a sizable enough population, I don't
see any real issue. That's just catering to supply and demand.
On the cases of nativity scenes, clubs and class prayers.. those I can see them as being rightfully against, since this is essentially making all
students partake. Now, some will of course argue the ridiculous defense of 'well, they don't have to pray if they don't want to', which is not a
defense at all but a cop out because it does not supply an alternative, and forces them into a prayer session with those not of their faith.
The reverse would also be true. if a predominantly Muslim school had a few non-Muslims, and they had specialized recesses for prayer, those who do not
wish to pray should have that time as free time, and all is good, so long as they don't broadcast the prayers over the PA system (outside of any
specially designated prayer rooms)
Now to me, this all makes sense, since it provides and defends choice in either way, and allows for the free expression of speech and religion while
not in a way that hampers others freedom of their choice of expression. It may be complex at times, but it seems like there are methods to it all.