Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Login | What's Hot
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Monday, September 11, 2006
Alan Sears :: Townhall.com Columnist
Five years after 9/11, the ACLU considers Christians the terrorists
by Alan Sears
Forward Print Share Single Page
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


And so it goes, as the ACLU picks and chooses its battles. The group is demanding a Virginia Wiccan’s right to offer public prayers, even as it sues to stop a Virginia Christian from doing the same thing. In Bridgeport, West Virginia, it objects to a picture of Jesus that has been hanging in a high school hallway for decades. So far, a Great Awakening hasn’t broken out on campus, and students aren’t crowding in to genuflect before the Galilean. But depictions of divinity are the definition of danger, to the ACLU.

Why? For 2,000 years, Jesus Christ has been recognized as history’s most profound and compelling advocate of forgiveness, self-sacrifice, and moral self-discipline. He urged his followers to respect the government, honor its leaders, and put the needs of others before their own. Which of these principles is the ACLU afraid the Bridgeport teens or their teachers will emulate?

What if the picture was of George Washington or Abraham Lincoln? Wouldn’t most students understand that the school was saluting these presidents’ wise and courageous leadership? Would we really have to order the paintings removed, lest some youngster think he was being encouraged to own slaves or vote Republican?

Ironically, the very virulence of ACLU hostility underscores the importance of the man they would minimize. The group has shown little concern about public expressions of other faiths, post- 9/11. Yet just saying “Merry Christmas” sends them into fits.

A few weeks ago, the Bridgeport case came to a de facto end when a thief broke into the school one night, cut the picture of Jesus from its frame, and carried it off into the night.

The ACLU presumably had nothing to do with the theft. But one has to wonder if their sympathies aren’t with the thief.

After all, they’ve been trying to cut Jesus out of the picture for years.

Alan Sears, a former federal prosecutor who held various posts in the departments of Justice and Interior during the Reagan Administration, is president and CEO of the Alliance Defense Fund, a legal alliance defending the right to hear and speak the Truth through strategy, training, funding, and litigation. He is co-author with Craig Osten of the book The ACLU vs. America: Exposing the Agenda to Redefine Moral Values and The Homosexual Agenda: Exposing the Principal Threat to Religious Freedom.
1 2
| Full Article & Comments | < Previous
Share:
Forward Print Single Page
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Alan Sears, a former federal prosecutor in the Reagan Administration, is president and CEO of the Alliance Defense Fund, a legal alliance employing a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.

Be the first to read Alan Sears' column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Join The Debate!

Post Your Comment
(150 comments so Far)
View in ascending order     View in descending order
Reply # 1
Date: Sep 14, 2006 - 10:24 AM EST
Mike - Right At Last!
Finally, at long last and amid more rambling nonsense, you have happened upon a correct statement, in much the same way that a broken clock is right twice a day. I did indeed say earlier that it would be my last word. However, your twisted logic, false conclusions and sheer sand-pounding stupidity hold a strange fascination. But this will indeed be my last word; my earlier assessment of the time-wasting nature of this discussion hasn't changed.

If possible, your grasp of critical and deductive reasoning is even flimsier than your understanding of free speech concepts. Let's break down your childish attempt at logic:

It actually all falls apart with your first statement: "1) If everyone (not just me) who disagrees with JohnGalt is a liberal, according to JohnGalt .... then that presumes no CONSERVATIVE can disagree with JohnGalt." There are several major errors in this house of cards--

1) As I've already stated, we have no disagreement--this would require us to hold differing opinions about some substantive issue. Instead, I find myself in the tiresome position of "proving" that I don't hold opinions or beliefs that you falsely claim I do, based on your own weak logic. If I have an opinion about an issue differing from yours, I'll be happy to debate it. If you wrongly assign me opinions I don't hold, I normally see no need to go through detailed proof that I don't hold those opinions; an assertion that you are wrong should be enough.

2) I don't actually believe that you are a liberal. As you apparently missed it the last 2 times-- It. Was. A. Joke. I believe that you are an obnoxious fool, but not a liberal. And before you play "gotcha" games, I held the same belief in my earlier posts. In case you missed it again, it was a joke.

3) Even in my joking assessment of you as a liberal, I cited traits you share with liberals as a basis for that assessment. Your statement that my assessment relied only on my disagreement with you is therefore demonstrably false, or, as you would say, a lie.

4) Even if we did disagree and I did believe you were a liberal based only on that disagreement, you have no evidence that I have falsely labeled others who disagree with me as liberals. This would require that you had read all my other posts, and in fact you admitted to reading none of them. So your statement "everyone (not just me) who disagrees with JohnGalt is a liberal" is what you call a mere assertion. But unlike my assertion, which was based on personal knowledge of my own opinions, your assertion is an absurd non sequiter. As you are probably unaware, an absolute statement such as "John Galt believes that everyone who disagrees with him is a liberal" requires only a single contrary example to be proven false. We'll leave aside the example of GWB (if given only 2 choices, liberal and conservative, Bush would HAVE to be labeled a conservative, even if not all of his actions or beliefs are conservative) I have had numerous arguments on TH on the subject of free global trade, which I am in favor of, without labeling my opponents as liberal. So since you probably still don't understand, let me state it clearly in the form of an example: I believe that Pat Buchanan's isolationism is wrong headed, but I don't believe Pat Buchanan is a liberal. Therefore your assertion that I believe everyone who disagrees with me to be a liberal is false, or, as you would put it, a lie.

Needless to say (except maybe to you) any conclusions derived from this pile of falsehoods are also erroneous.

Unlike you, I don't claim the authority to speak for any author or philosophy. So I'll leave it to anyone who has waded through your muddled collection of bald assertions, twisted logic and odious accusations to determine who is the disgrace.



Flag as Offensive

Reply # 2
Date: Sep 14, 2006 - 1:49 AM EST
Logic Lesson
Unlike JohnGalt, who said several messages ago that that would be his last one ... this will be MY last one, so he can get the last word.

As most of you know Ayn Rand was big on logic. As we see here, THIS JohnGalt knows nothing about THAT either.

If you haven't seen it yest -- I guarantee HE hasn't -- then I'll show you.

But first, an apology. I was wrong. I stated that I had not protested JohnGalt's choice of an penname. I checked the wrong post of mine. I did indeed protest his choice of a penname.

And do so again, when we see how he cannot grasp even elementary logic.

So I'll expose a new lie to keep things in balance.

JohnGalt writes: Thursday, September, 14, 2006 1:07 AM
"Mike Hihn - wrong yet again
You've proven nothing a first or second time, let alone a third, except for your bulldog tenacity in holding onto flawed assumptions and eroneous conclusions.
Yet another example: your false conclusion that I believe all conservatives think alike is obvious only to yourself, and sounds especially foolish following my comment about egregious decisions made by GWB, whom the Left, at least, considers to be a conservative."

That statement of his is called a "mere" assertion. He simply states that something is false. He never even tries to address how I reached that conclusion.

Denial is NOT rebuttal. Rebutall is what I do.

Here's what I said:

"...and accuse everyone who disagrees with you (not just me) of being a liberal."
" Thus, checking YOUR premises, your obvious assumption is that all conservatives think alike (and like you)."

Is anyone else incapable of grasping this simple syllogism???

1) If everyone (not just me) who disagrees with JohnGalt is a liberal, according to JohnGalt .... then that presumes no CONSERVATIVE can disagree with JohnGalt.

Duh.

2) Thus, according to JohnGalt, all conservatives must agree with him -- despite his later revision about disagreeing with Bush, and I hope nobody HERE considers Bush a conservative.

DoubleDuh.

And yet another "revision" (perhaps the biggest whopper yet.

JohnGalt:
"Further, although I often comment on lib policies, beliefs and actions, the only individuals I have labeled such on this site are self-admitted libs like LeftAngle and Philo."

Sorry, chump, but there they are.

"My conclusion is that you are new, improved liberal troll, much like Terminator 2. " (9/12, 2:17 PM.)

Let's see the Brain Trust in action. :-)

First you said it (9/12, 2:17 PM).

Then you defended it. (9/13, 2:02 PM)

Then you denied ever saying it. (9/14, 1:07 AM)

That proves EXACTLY what I first stated:
you disgrace the name of John Galt.

(flush)



Flag as Offensive
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
 *
State:
 *
Zip:
 *
Phone:
       
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.