Thursday, September 06, 2007

In Support of a Website that Serves America

Cross-posted from this great website:

Stop The ACLU was started on February 9th, 2004. We started with high hopes, and we realized we were facing a goliath. There were many reasons why we thought the ACLU needed to be countered, and they are numerous. We wanted to provide a way to inform the public of the ACLU’s agenda, as the MSM sugar coated it. We wanted to be a central database for people to gather, exchange ideas, and get actively involved in real ways of stopping them. It is a monumental task, exhausting, time consuming, and often frustrating. But it is a fight worth fighting.

We would be nothing without our supporters. To all of you, we appreciate the continued support. We have called you to action and you have answered.

There are many reasons to stop the ACLU. For this blogburst I decided to list my top ten list.

10. The [2] ACLU was founded by Communist, with communist ideals, communist goals, and they continue to impose a Communist like agenda on America daily. The founder of the ACLU, Roger Baldwin stated clearly…

“My chief aversion is the system of greed, private profit, privilege and violence which makes up the control of the world today, and which has brought it to the tragic crisis of unprecedented hunger and unemployment. Therefore, I am for Socialism, disarmament and ultimately, for the abolishing of the State itself. I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal.”

9. [3] The ACLU does not believe in the Second Amendment.
ACLU POLICY The ACLU agrees with the Supreme Court’s long-standing interpretation of the Second Amendment [as set forth in the 1939 case, U.S. v. Miller] that the individual’s right to bear arms applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia. Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected. Therefore, there is no constitutional impediment to the regulation of firearms.[4] ACLU Policy #47

#8. [5] Their outright hatred of the Boyscouts. They are currently doing everything in their power to hurt this organization. They attacked their free speech right to exclude gays, and are threatening schools, and fighting in court to get their charters shut down. They oppose the military supporting them, and will sue the pants off any school that attempts to charter them.

#7. The ACLU are pro-death. Not only is the ACLU Pro-abortion, [6] it’s the ACLU’s top priority. It most definitely takes a backseat to free speech for the ACLU. As a matter of fact, the [7] ACLU has fought against the free speech rights of those that oppose it. If it’s abortion or [8] euthanasia, as long as it’s pro-death you can count on the ACLU to support it. The only exception to the ACLU’s pro-death stance, is if it is a convicted criminal; in this case they are against death.

#6. [9] The ACLU advocate open borders. Not only have the ACLU opposed the Minutemen, a group who are simply exercising their freedom of speech, protesting and stepping up where the government is failing, but they have [10] helped illegals cross the border.

#5. The ACLU is anti-Christian. The list is endless on this one. Under the guise of “separation of Church and State”, the ACLU have made a name for themselves by being rabidly anti-Christian. This is one area where they are most hypocritical.
[11] They oppose tax exemptions for all churches, but fight for them for Wiccans. They are against [12] Christianity in school, but oddly remain silent [13] as our children are taught to be Muslims. Whether its [14] baby Jesus, [15] ten commandments, [16] or tiny crosses on county seals, the ACLU will be there to secularize America, and rewrite our history.

#4. [17] The ACLU Opposes National Security. The ACLU have opposed almost every effort in the arena of national security. From the [18] bird flu to [19] bag searches, the ACLU have been against it. No matter what kind of search someone tries to do to protect people, the ACLU have proved they are [20] against them across the board. Its kind of ironic that [21] they don’t practice the principles they preach.
Take a walk into the NYCLU’s Manhattan headquarters - which it shares with other organizations - and you’ll find a sign warning visitors that all bags are subject to search.

#3. [22] The ACLU Defend the enemy. They have a long history of this one. [23] They defended the P.L.O. in 1985. They [24] defended Quadafi in the 1980’s. And they continue today. They [25] have told Gitmo detainees they have the right to remain silent, as in not talking to interrogators. One issue that really disturbs me is their [26] refusal of funds from organizations such as the United Way that were concerned the money would be used to support terrorism.
In October of 2004, the ACLU turned down $1.15 million in funding from two of it�s most generous and loyal contributors, the Ford and Rockefeller foundations, saying new anti-terrorism restrictions demanded by the institutions make it unable to accept their funds.

The Ford Foundation now bars recipients of its funds from engaging in any activity that promotes violence, terrorism, bigotry, or the destruction of any state.
The Rockefeller Foundation’s provisions state that recipients of its funds may not directly or indirectly engage in, promote, or support other organizations or individuals who engage in or promote terrorist activity.

#2. The ACLU supports [27] child porn distribution and [28] child molesters like NAMBLA.
As legislative counsel for the ACLU in 1985, Barry Lynn told the U.S. Attorney General’s Commission on Pornography (of which Focus on the Family President Dr. James C. Dobson was a member) that child pornography was protected by the First Amendment. While production of child porn could be prevented by law, he argued, its distribution could not be.

There is no doubt the [29] The ACLU are perverting the Constitution.
#1. [30] The ACLU fulfills its agenda using my tax money. What more can I say on this one?”

Note: this last refers to the incredible and unfortunate fact that when the ACLU sues a community for allowing prayers or displays, it collects huge attorneys’ fees from the federal government.


AddThis Social Bookmark Button


At 8:50 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama, UCC Draw IRS Complaint
By Jeffrey Lord
Published 9/7/2007 12:08:08 AM

A June 23 appearance by Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama at the General Synod of the United Church of Christ is now the subject of a formal complaint filed with the Internal Revenue Service on August 2.

Portions of the redacted documents obtained by the website UCC Truths, a growing online gathering for dissenters from the church leadership's rigid left-wing political orthodoxy, were published August 27. Those redacted documents have now been obtained by The American Spectator.

The complaint, addressed to Lois Lerner, the Director of the Exempt Organizations Division of the Internal Revenue Service, formally asks the IRS to "investigate the United Church of Christ," identified in the complaint as "a 501 (3) (c) non-profit religious entity" for violating "federal tax law banning political campaign intervention." The redaction has blacked out the name of the filer.

The complaint alleges the UCC "violated every single point outlined in the IRS guidelines," in sponsoring the Illinois Senator's appearance at the church's bi-annual national gathering, which this year was held in the Hartford Civic Center in the Connecticut capital. It charges:

* "The United Church of Christ selectively provided the convention facilities for Sen. Obama to speak in support of his campaign."

* "The United Church of Christ and Sen. Obama referenced his candidacy before and during the speech."

* "Clear and deliberate campaign activity occurred in connection with the [sic] Sen. Obama's attendance and speech."

Specifically the complaint references guidelines that an individual addressing the church does so "only in a non-candidate capacity," that the individual makes no "mention of his or her candidacy or the election," and that "no campaign activity occurs in connection with the candidate's attendance." The complaint also cites a guideline that prohibits a church from mentioning an individual's political candidacy or the upcoming election in "the communications announcing the candidate's attendance at the event." Both a video and a transcript of Obama's speech are available on the UCC website and apparently will be present throughout the election.

The complaint is replete with citations and links directly to both the IRS guidelines themselves as well as the transcript of Obama's speech as presented on the UCC website. Also linked are communications from the UCC in the run-up to the event that focus on Obama's role not as a Senator but in his capacity as a presidential candidate.

Included with the complaint are photographs of tables set up by campaign volunteers for Obama at the entrance to the Civic Center. The tables are decorated with Obama campaign signs and literature. To further back up the charge of an IRS violation, the complaint links to stories covering the General Synod that were aired by New Haven's news channel WTNH-TV and written in Christian Century magazine. The news stories described Obama's UCC-sponsored appearance as a "political convention" and "political rally."

Now, as the comedienne Joan Rivers liked to say, "Can we talk???" This exact possibility was bearing down on both Obama and the church hierarchy with all the subtlety of a B-52 over Baghdad from the moment Obama announced his presidential candidacy. A UCC member, the Senator had already accepted the church's invitation to speak, according to the church leadership, well before he changed his mind and entered the race for the White House. At that moment Obama and the UCC had two viable options: cancel Obama's appearance entirely, or have him appear but talk about something other than his presidential campaign. Effectively thumbing their noses at the IRS, neither option was taken.

AT THE TIME OF THIS INCIDENT I predicted in this space that Obama's in-your-face decision would doubtless run the risk of just this sort of complaint being filed. As a (politically dissenting) member of the UCC myself, it seemed obvious that drawing the attention of the IRS through a filed complaint would be the inevitable result of mixing a rookie candidate with an arrogant church leadership determined to shut out all dissent. Now, rank-and-file members must endure the public relations black eye of an IRS investigation -- and the legal costs to fight it -- along with the accompanying threat of the denomination losing its tax-exempt status.

The irony is that IRS complaints of this nature have been lovingly crafted into a science by left-wing activist -- and UCC minister -- Barry Lynn, the head of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Lynn, quite famously, has made much of his tangles with conservative Christians, filing numerous IRS complaints designed to effectively shut down conservative religious activists such as the late Jerry Falwell. The goal, and a very serious goal it is, is to remove the tax-exempt status that the IRS gives to churches.

With the news of the filing of this complaint, both Lynn's previous actions and his language are turning around to take a bite out of both Obama and the UCC, Lynn's own denomination. "Falwell is thumbing his nose at the IRS," Lynn said in September of 2004 as the Bush-Kerry race was heating up. Falwell, Lynn said, "must not be permitted to use a tax-exempt ministry to engage in partisan politics. The vast majority of America's institutions play by the rules. He should too." When charges arose that this time it was the liberal UCC and Obama which ran the risk of an IRS complaint, Lynn dismissed the possibility

Strikingly, the language in a Lynn complaint to the IRS against Falwell is close to that in the complaint filed against the UCC.

Lynn complaint language: "I believe this is intervention in a political campaign on behalf of a candidate in clear violation of federal tax law. I urge you to take appropriate action to correct this abuse of law."

UCC complaint language: "The evidence that the United Church of Christ violated IRS guidelines is clear and plain....I urge you to take action promptly to address this issue."

IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING OBAMA'S appearance, Lynn was quick to issue a pass for his own church, saying neither Obama nor the UCC had "run afoul of federal tax law." Obviously, the filing of an official complaint signals there is a different opinion about the issue, and unfortunately for UCC members it is their offering dollars that must now be used to fight the complaint. To make matters more interesting, Lynn has issued a public defense of the liberal Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson, who drew attention when he publicly endorsed Obama. Robinson, Lynn stressed of the Bishop who ignited controversy by becoming the first openly gay bishop in that denomination's history, was doing so as an individual. He approvingly quotes Robinson as saying: "I will not be speaking about the campaign from the pulpit or at any church function. That is completely inappropriate."

But allow Obama to speak "at any church function" and "from the pulpit" is precisely what UCC President John Thomas did. By refusing either to cancel Obama's appearance as a candidate at the General Synod ("any church function") or to insist that Obama refrain from discussing his campaign, Thomas did what Lynn praises Robinson for not doing. As the complaint against the UCC also specifically says, the UCC-owned website, clearly an Internet pulpit that is every bit as much church property as a physical pulpit, deliberately headlined a story from the Religion News Service trumpeting Obama's speech to the UCC as Obama's "first major address on faith and politics as presidential candidate." There too, Lynn praised Robinson for not doing exactly this kind of thing.

As Lynn is the first to say, the results of this kind of complaint can indeed be serious. Lynn's website cites his seemingly endless chase after Falwell as proof. After much televised back and forth with Falwell over whether the IRS had indeed punished the conservative religious leader and his church for their political activity, Lynn came across a May 1993 issue of a publication called the Exempt Organization Tax Review. In it he found this statement by Jerry Falwell: "The Old Time Gospel announced that the IRS has revoked its tax exempt status for 1986 and 1987 for improper political activities....As a condition of reinstatement of Federal tax-exempt status, OTGH said it agreed to pay $50,000 in tax for two years and to change its organizational structure to ensure that no future political campaign intervention activities will occur." In an August, 2004 joint appearance on Fox News Live, with Lynn waving the report on air, Falwell angrily put his experience this way: "We went through four and a half years of audits and our attorneys and the IRS attorneys agreed that they would settle if we would pay $50,000 in taxes rather than a million dollars continuing legal fees."

Predictably, a search of the UCC website for "IRS" reveals nothing about the IRS being asked to investigate the UCC. (Nor has Obama's website commented on his role in bringing the attention of the IRS to his own denomination.) No wonder. What the search for "IRS" on the UCC site does retrieve is a March 2006 speech by UCC President Thomas complaining of the kind of tactics used by Barry Lynn. But surprise, surprise, the UCC's Reverend Lynn is not even mentioned. No, the filing of an IRS complaint is not about shutting down conservatives, it is the other way around. And who is to blame for these kind of tactics? According to Thomas -- are you ready? -- filing IRS complaints against liberal churches "reeks of Karl Rove."

Sure. And Sponge Bob is gay.

THIS IS ONE UCC MEMBER who believes that churches should be able to invite anybody they wish to address their members. Candidate or not. (And opening up UCC forums to the apparently terrifying idea of intellectual and political diversity by inviting non-liberals would surely help a denominational leadership seemingly determined to drive the church into oblivion.) But in considerable measure because of the activities of one of the UCC's own ministers, we are where we are.

"Complaints to the IRS are not lodged on a whim," the UCC's Rev. Karl Rove -- uh -- Barry Lynn - sniffed when dismissing the importance of Obama's UCC appearance.

Just so.

Jeffrey Lord is the creator, co-founder and CEO of QubeTV. A former Reagan White House political director and an author, he writes from Pennsylvania.


Post a Comment

<< Home