9/26/2006 08:57:00 AM|W|P|loboinok|W|P|Crossposted from Stop The ACLU.Com:
S 3696 (PERA), sponsored by Sen. Brownback (R-Kan), a companion bill to H.R. 2679 (PERA), sponsored by Rep. Hostetter (R-Ind.), would amend all relevant federal laws to eliminate the authority of judges to award taxpayer-paid attorney fees to the ACLU, or anyone else, in lawsuits under the Establishment of Religion Clause of the First Amendment against veterans memorials, the Boy Scouts, or the public display of the Ten Commandments of other symbols of America’s history with a religious aspect.
This legislation will stop your taxes from paying the ACLU to attack our Christian heritage and symbols. Act now before it is too late.
It will be voted on today in the House.
NRB has learned that PERA, the Public Expression of Religion Act of 2005 (H.R. 2679) introduced by Rep. John Hostettler (R-IN), is expected to be considered for a floor vote in the House, tomorrow, Tuesday, September 26th. This critical legislation, which has been supported by NRB, would protect our government agencies and their civil servants from having to pay huge attorneys fees awards to groups like the ACLU when they sue over references to God and religion in public settings.
WHAT YOU CAN DO: Urge your listeners and viewers to contact their representatives in Congress and urge him/her to “vote for H.R. 2679, Public Expression in Religion Act of 2005, also known as PERA.”
CONSIDER THIS: This legislation would avoid the outrageous funding (through taxpayer dollars) of the ACLU, atheist organizations, and others who want to strip acknowledgements of God from the public square, and for that reason this bill is a major plus. But more than that, it would also force more of these cases to face the bright sunlight of a court of law, rather than the present situation of government officials being intimidated into capitulating through private settlements with these radical secularist law groups for fear of facing mammoth attorneys fee awards if they lose at trial.
WHY THE TIMING IS CRITICAL: PERA will be brought to the House Floor on the very challenging “suspension calendar,” which means that debate is limited, it is possible that amendments may be restricted, and the bill must pass with a 2/3-majority. Therefore it is critical that your audience contact Capitol Hill today!
I have already recieved a letter from my Representative and have been assured of his vote. I contacted him on the day the bill was approved by the House Committee on the Judiciary, so I got an old form letter. Nevertheless it was assuring.
Find your Representative here. |W|P|115928631115792856|W|P|Alert: Contact Your House Representatives Now To Pass Public Expression Of Religion Act|W|Pfirstname.lastname@example.org/26/2006 08:54:00 AM|W|P|loboinok|W|P|Crossposted from Stop The ACLU.Com:
Wow! This is quite interesting, especially since Stoptheaclu.com made the NY Times!
More than 30 longtime supporters of the American Civil Liberties Union are calling for the ouster of the organization’s leadership, saying it has failed to adhere to the principles it demands of others and thus jeopardized the organization’s effectiveness.
The new group is made up of donors, former board and staff members, and the lawyer who won what was perhaps the A.C.L.U.’s most famous legal battle, its defense of the right of Nazis to march through a predominantly Jewish suburb of Chicago.
“We come together now, reluctantly but resolutely, not to injure the A.C.L.U. but to restore its integrity and its consistency of principle,’’ the group said in a mission statement to be posted on its Web site, www.savetheaclu.org, which is to go live on Tuesday.
The statement does not name individual officials that the group wants to see removed, but in the past, criticism has been focused on Anthony D. Romero, the executive director, and Nadine Strossen, the board president, as well as members of the executive committee.
The Web site, which was first reported in The New York Sun in June, initially will feature letters from members and donors who have joined the effort, lists of articles about the A.C.L.U. and ways for readers to join the effort.
“It’s a home for A.C.L.U. loyalists who have been shut out of the organization,” said Ira Glasser, who was executive director of the organization from 1978 to 2001 and has signed the statement.
Mr. Glasser emphasized that the group, conceived by Alan Kahn, a retired Wall Street executive and longtime A.C.L.U. member, was an informal one.
“We’re not starting a new organization,” he said. “We’re a protest group, trying to get the board to exercise its fiduciary and governing responsibility in a way that it has not. We’re loyal to the existing organization and above all to the principles it is intended to advance.”
Emily Whitfield, an A.C.L.U. spokeswoman, defended the organization, saying it continued to fight aggressively for the principles of free speech.
“Our programs, both legal and legislative, have never been stronger,” Ms. Whitfield said, “and then there’s the phenomenal growth of the A.C.L.U., where we’ve nearly doubled staff, our revenues are higher, membership and donations are higher, and that, to us, tell us where we are right now, in terms of our organization. We’re proud of it.”
She added, “We’re proud to be the leading organization fighting for freedom of speech on the Internet,” noting that the A.C.L.U. would go to court next month to argue that federal efforts to limit access to certain kinds of content on the Web to protect children violated the free speech protection in the Constitution.
And she pointed out that other independent Web sites already reported and commented on the A.C.L.U., including acluprocon.org and stoptheaclu.com, among others.
Wow! I'm glad we are being noticed. Anyway, I'm even happier that those within the ACLU are waking up to its hypocrisy and are attempting to do something about it. I probably will not agree with all of the things this new organization is trying to accomplish, but one thing I can agree on is the ACLU's hypocrisy. If the organization could stand on real principles it would be much more difficult to critique. Hypocrisy is always the easiest thing to target the ACLU with.
I wish the group luck, but I think they have an uphill battle. I really think the ACLU are entirely too corrupt to be saved. Whatever people within the organization that stand up on principle have had efforts to silence them or they have been voted out.
From the savetheaclu website:
We reject the claim that the ACLU is injured not by its unprincipled, anti-libertarian actions, but by those who disclosed or criticized them. Repeated breaches of principle by the ACLU leadership have been fundamental and cannot simply be attributed to isolated lapses in judgment: they reflect basic disrespect for the values that the ACLU was created to defend.
This has gone on for so long, and has become so pervasive, that we now believe that only a change in leadership will preserve the ACLU and insure its future as the nation’s leading civil liberties group.
Hey, getting rid of the hypocrisy in the ACLU will not get rid of all of the ACLU's numerous problems, but it is a start.|W|P|115928617034806889|W|P|Supporters of A.C.L.U. Call for the Ouster of Its Leaders|W|Pemail@example.com