Monday, August 22, 2005
THE HYPOCRISY OF THE ACLU
Don't you just love the ACLU? Didn't' think so. But I do love their hypocrisy. While they try their hardest to erase the Christian and Jewish religions from ever aspect of American life, they're trying to get more of the Muslim faith to take their place. Why don't they just swear to tell the truth, without the Bible? You have that option.
Thanks John.
The Only Thing Necessary For Evil To Triumph
Is For Good Men To Do Nothing

14 comments:

GRR said...

I am not a fan of the ACLU as it is today. But, regarding the article - wouldn't you want a Muslim to "swear" on the Koran instead of the bible when in court?

John K said...

No..I do not think they should even get to go to court, Greta.

Jake said...

John, go play in the middle of a busy freeway.

Better yet, got rat poison? I hear it goes great with Cheerio's.

What hypocrisy, Chris?

You mean, forcibly deleting comments from your own blog, then complaining when it happens to you on another?


========================
http://tinyurl.com/8a9bs

They want to allow people of different faiths to 'swear' an oath on their "holy book".

You know what? In spite of you, Chris, I'm going to become a card-carrying member.

:D

John K said...

Hey Jake..I tryed that once but all the cars kept swerving around me and I do not eat cereal at all.
You could stand to do the same and drop a few pounds while your at it.
:)

Indian Chris said...

GRR, like I said, we have to option to just promise to tell the truth without the use of a holy book.

Jake, what comments have I forcibly deleted? And as long as you don't bring your bomb to my house, be my guest. But that would mean believing in a God. Can you do that?

John, watch out on the fat jokes. I'm big boned myself.

John K said...

Well...Uh..Er..yea, Ok.

John K said...

BTW: Chris and Jake; Since when do "bones" shake like jelly?

Indian Chris said...

When you're fat and they belong to you.

John K said...

Dude..in this day and age when PC is everywhere; maybe you should consider calling it being a Horizontal over-achiever or being vertically challenged...or something.

Za said...

Chris, let me ask you a series of questions here:
1) Would you want a devout Muslim swearing without a holy book, or with the Qu'ran?
2) Which do you think would hold more weight - with or without?

Honestly - it's not "pushing Islam" on anybody. It's giving another option.

Indian Chris said...

1. I could care less. All you have to do is promise to tell the truth. You don't need a holy book of any kind.

2. Hold more weight? Neither. With book, without, who cares.

You need to read into the post. I don't care if they use the Qu'ran. The point of the post was to show the hypocracy of the ACLU. They love the phrase "seperation of church and state" yet don't seem to care when that church is Muslim. Use the Bible, use the Qu'ran, use the Torah, don't use any, I don't don't care.

Jake said...

Chris:
Use the Bible, use the Qu'ran, use the Torah, don't use any, I don't don't care.

Which is exactly what the ACLU is trying to do. Allowing the people the option of choosing THEIR 'holy' book.

What you were suggesting was like asking a thirsty lactose-intolerant person if they want milk or nothing at all.

Za said...

Chris, I'm sure John cares about the first question.

And separation of church and state doesn't mean a damn thing in relation to which book you swear on. That's why they have the option not to swear on a book. That's why the ACLU is trying to allow Muslims the ability to swear on the Qu'ran if they want to.

Separation of church and state is a historical process - and funnily enough, the Islamic church doesn't have a history of being intertwined with western government while Christianity does, so it's hardly surprising if they advocate policies which take down that integration and give more freedom to other religions.

You're raving if you seriously think that this is "favouring" Muslims over anyone in any way.

GRR said...

So Chris - then let's not allow anyone to swear on the bible. Yes?

If you allow the bible to be a "holy book" able to be "sweared upon", then you have to allow other "holy books" for the same reason. Either allow options on which "holy book" is used, or don't offer them as options at all.