Stop The ACLU Blogburst 4-6-06
Apr 6, 2006 Stop the ACLU
Stop The ACLU Blogburst
crossposted from Stop The ACLU
Via BP News
A new congressional effort to police advertising by crisis pregnancy centers is unnecessary, pro-life advocates said, and unconstitutional, free-speech defenders charged.
The American Civil Liberties Union, which has long promoted itself as the leading defender of freedom of speech and civil rights, is right in the middle of the controversy, promoting the new legislation to the surprise of some.
However, this is not suprising to us at all. The ACLU have a long history of being selective in defending free speech, especially when it comes to pro-lifers. Besides, defending the first amendment is only third on the ACLU’s list of priorities, abortion is their number one priority.
Rep. Carolyn Maloney, a New York Democrat, introduced March 30 the Stop Deceptive Advertising for Women’s Services Act (SDAWS), which calls on the Federal Trade Commission to bar organizations from advertising that they provide abortion services when they do not. Just 12 House of Representatives members have cosponsored Maloney’s bill, but leading abortion rights organizations, including NARAL Pro-choice America and the National Abortion Federation, are behind it.
The ACLU also endorsed it, and that stunned some who have defended the organization’s work in the past.
“[W]hat about the First Amendment?†asked Nat Hentoff, a syndicated columnist and a former ACLU board member, according to The New York Sun. “When you have the state, with its power, deciding what is deceptive on something as thoroughly controversial as this, it goes against the very core, it seems to me, of the First Amendment.â€
Hentoff called the ACLU endorsement “a really extraordinary mistake.†The ACLU advocacy for abortion rights has eclipsed its support for free speech, he told The Sun. “It’s the problem the ACLU has had for years,†Hentoff said.
And its not likely to change anytime soon. After all, some of the ACLU’s most lucrative donations are from pro-abortion groups. Its a much more profitable business than milking taxpayers over prayer and such. It is a $90 billion dollar industry. No wonder the ACLU thinks teaching abstinence is harmful. Its harmful to their pocketbook.
The proposal is unneeded, representatives of crisis pregnancy centers said.
“This legislation is unnecessary, as it aims to cure an ill that doesn’t exist,†Care Net President Kurt Entsminger said in a written release. Care Net is a nationwide network of about 900 evangelical Christian, pregnancy help centers. “This is nothing more than a routine attack on pregnancy centers by organizations seeking to limit their competition. We find it particularly curious that in her announcement Rep. Maloney did not cite one example of a pregnancy center that is engaging in deceptive advertising.â€
Tom Glessner, president of the National Institute of Family Life Advocates (NIFLA), said in a written statement that crisis pregnancy centers “are providing accurate, truthful and complete information to empower women to choose life. The only fraudulent activity in this area comes from those in the abortion industry who want to withhold truthful information from abortion-vulnerable women.â€
Amen to that! I’ve always thought abortion advocates were the ones that were deceptively named. Planned Parenthood? How deceptive is that? It has absolutely nothing to do with parenthood, or planning. Here is the straight talk on the deceptive business of abortion.
So-called “counseling” in Planned Parenthood clinics is really marketing, providing few facts and is heavily biased in favor of abortion.25
• Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) was started by a racist, Margaret Sanger, who drew upon writings from socialists and eugenicists. She even published articles from Adolf Hitler’s director of eugenic sterilization, Ernst Rudin, and spawned “The Negro Project,” her strategy for eliminating the black population. In the last week of July 2002, a lawyer in Missouri filed a federal lawsuit against PFFA for their failure to fully inform women about abortion. The lawyer also agreed that PP is a racist organization that targets minority women.
• “If a girl decides to carry her baby to term, … clinics don’t make any money. They make money only if she has an abortion. So, inevitably, clinics put pressure on women to abort.” — Carol Everett, who once owned and operated four lucrative abortion clinics.
• “Nita Whitten, who once worked in an abortion clinic, says she was trained by a professional marketing firm in how to sell abortion over the phone. The main tactic abortion clinics use is fear. The phone operator asks the girl how late her period is and then tells her, ‘You’re pregnant.’ Not ‘You might be pregnant,’ but ‘You are pregnant.’ When a girl calls, Nita says, the object is not to help her; it’s to ‘hook the sale.'”
• After the abortion, the girl is given free birth-control pills since, on the pill, she’s more likely to be sexually active. But since young people often do not remember to take pills consistently, there’s a good chance the girl will return to the clinic pregnant again. As Carol Everett puts it, “birth control sells abortions. Abortion is a business. A big business that uses slick marketing tools.” read more
In announcing the introduction of her bill, Maloney said in a written release that some crisis pregnancy centers “should be called ‘Counterfeit Pregnancy Centers.’ They have the right to exist, but they shouldn’t have the right to deceive in order to advance their particular beliefs.â€
Maloney’s bill is H.R. 5052. There is not a companion bill in the Senate.
Counterfeit Pregnancy Centers? This bill is garbage! Can you imagine the reaction if we were to create legislation forcing abortion providers to label their places “Baby Killing shops?” I’m sure we all could come up with some creative ones.
Trackback:
A Lady’s Ruminations | New Trommetter Times | Random Thoughts of Yet Another Military Member | Adam’s Blog | Interested Participant | Stuck on Stupid | Pro Life Blogs | Pirate’s Cove | California Conservative | Third World County | Conservative Thinking | Museum of Left Wing Lunacy
This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay or Gribbit. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 180 blogs already on-board
[tags]ACLU, Freedom of Speech, Civil Rights, Pro-Life, Abortion, Planned Parenthood, Communism, Socialism[/tags]
Abstinence Is Harmful? News To Us
Mar 23, 2006 Stop the ACLU
Today the American Civil Liberties Union issued a press release which is featured on their website’s “Newsroom” page that is titled, “ACLU Hails Rhode Island Department of Education Efforts to Stop the Use of Harmful “Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage” Curriculum in Public Schools“. Only the ACLU and a liberal state like Rhode Island could find abstaining from sexual activity harmful.
The fact is that abstinence is the only form of birth control and STD prevention that works 100% of the time it is practiced. By practicing the ultimate in safe sex, NO SEX, no children are unnecessarily slaughtered in the name of choice, no drugs are being used in order to prevent pregnancy for the sake of promiscuity, and no one will need to be treated for sexually transmitted diseases. So what is the ACLU’s difficulty with teaching this effective form of birth control? Homosexuals in this nation cannot be married in any other state than Massachusetts. And no other state except Massachusetts recognizes marriages performed to same sex couples. If abstinence is taught as it should be, as the ONLY effective form of birth control and STD prevention, homosexuals will not be receiving the indoctrination that the ACLU believes that they should.
By accepting that teenagers are going to have sex before marriage and taking a position of defeatism in the war to prevent this from occurring, we are then telling teenagers to go ahead and have sex. This is akin to telling your child not to shop lift but if they are going to anyway to not get caught. Then teaching them methods on not getting caught as opposed to teaching them to just plain not do it.
Abstinence is not harmful; it is the only truly safe and healthy program out there. Condoms don’t protect against Human Papilloma Virus or Herpes. Hormonal birth control doesn’t protect against STDs and is only 92% effective (this means if you have sex 100 times, you have an 8% chance of getting pregnant even with the pill when taken as directed.). And we all know how many women forget to take the pills. Add to that the dangers when artificially changing the hormonal balance in a woman’s system can lead to increased chances of cancer and heart disease.
Fact – Condoms break, leak, and do not protect against HPV or Herpes. Some people have allergies to latex.
Fact – Birth Control Pills don’t protect against STDs and mess with the hormonal balance in the woman’s body.
Fact – Herpes is transmitted by skin contact and requires no fluid transfer.
Fact – A fetus is a living being called a baby not tissue or a parasite.
Fact – Abortion has been linked to increased occurrences of Breast Cancer.
Fact – Post abortive women experience a high rate of depression and repeat abortions.
Fact – Some risks associated with abortion include internal bleeding and infection.
Fact – The only way to avoid these complications is to not have sex and the ACLU calls teaching this fact harmful.
This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay or Gribbit. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 180 blogs already on-board
Trackback:
Hyscience | Stuck on Stupid | Jo’s Cafe
ACLU Takes Another One On The Chin
Mar 17, 2006 Stop the ACLU
The American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee previously won a ruling from a lower court that said the tag illegally promoted only one side of the abortion debate.
“Although this exercise of government one-sidedness with respect to a very contentious political issue may be ill-advised, we are unable to conclude that the Tennessee statute contravenes the First Amendment,” Judge John M. Rogers said in a 2-1 ruling by a three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati.
The ACLU needs to keep its nose out of a state’s business and for that matter out of the federal government’s business. We do not need this organization slithering around imposing its ideas on the courts and threatening lawsuits in tactics that rival the KGB. This communist organization needs to be thrown out of our country and we can start by eliminating taxpayer money being paid to them in the name of civil rights. If they are so wonderful they can use their own money.
They only exist for two reasons; Convert this country to communism and suck money from the US taxpayer. Well here is another loss for them, and I hope it is one of many.
Source: Breitbart
…Of The UNITED STATES
Mar 16, 2006 Political, Stop the ACLU
From Stop the ACLU:
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Ginsburg gave a speech in South Africa last month, which, for some reason, is just now being publicized. Ginsburg’s speech was titled “A Decent Respect for the Opinions of [Human]kind.†In it, Ginsburg argued explicitly for the relevance of foreign law and court decisions to interpretation of the American Constitution. Ginsburg did not try to hide the partisan nature of this issue; at one point, she referred to “the perspective I share with four of my current colleagues,†and she specifically criticized Justice Antonin Scalia, Judge Richard Posner, and the two bills that were introduced in Congress in 2004 and were broadly supported by Republicans. And she indulged in an outrageous bit of demagoguery, suggesting that those who disagree with her are somehow aligned with Justice Taney’s infamous defense of slavery in the Dred Scott case.
Go to Stop the ACLU to read the rest of this interesting story. Ginsburg sleeps through court sessions, perhaps she should stay awake and she might actually learn something.
Trackback:
Small Town Veteran
Tags: Political
Is A Moment of Silence Prayer?
Mar 16, 2006 Stop the ACLU
From Gribbit at Stop the ACLU
The ACLU has consistently opposed having prayer in public schools. But what truly constitutes prayer? How about a moment of silence where a student can say a Hail Mary or a small prayer, internally reflect, meditate, sleep, do homework, or just plain decompress and prepare for their day? Does this constitute prayer? I wouldn’t think so.
Having a 2 -3 minute forced moment of silence at the beginning of the day to accommodate the personal religious convictions of children, or to allow them to do whatever they feel the need to do silently, is something that I think would be a good compromise to those who condemn the idea of prayer in schools.
Also keep in mind that the major objection to prayer in schools is the leftist idea of Separation of Church and State. There is NO mention of separation of church and state in the entire Constitution. It appears NO WHERE. And if you try to mention the establishment clause I’ll slap your stupid ass. Pay attention to the wording. And don’t you dare mention interpretation of anything, it’s written in English for the Love of Mike.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I am convinced everyone who looks at that and thinks that a public school requiring children to stand for the pledge of alliegance and claims that this is a state endorsement of religion is on crack. Didn’t anyone teach these people how to read?!?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion , or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Punctuation means something people. The founders didn’t put that comma in there for it to look pretty. They also didn’t mention Congress specifically in order apply this restriction to other governmental bodies. In the George Mason draft of the Bill of Rights, the establishment clause was better defined.
That Religion or the Duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by Reason and Conviction, not by Force or violence, and therefore all men have an equal, natural, and unalienable Right to the free Exercise of Religion according to the Dictates of Conscience, and that no particular religious Sect or Society of Christians ought to be favored or established by Law in preference to others.
To this point, no one arguing for the other side has successfully answered the question as to when a decision to allow a nativity scene in a public park or a school permitting a prayer at the opening of classes for the day constitutes action by the Congress. The Constitution specifically states that “Congress shall make no law…”. It doesn’t say that the Ashtabula City School District shall make no law or Millcreek Public School or the City of N. Platte, Nebraska, it says “Congress shall make no law… “.
So what constitutes prayer? I don’t think a 2 -3 minute moment of silence or the Pledge of Allegiance are prayers.
This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay or Gribbit. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 150 blogs already on-board