Updated 03:46 pm.EST, Mon November 23, 2009

Society|Sun, Oct. 19 2008 04:01 PM EDT

New ACLU President to Counter Anti-Religion 'Misimpression'

By Eric Young|Christian Post Reporter

The newly elected president of the American Civil Liberties Union says the organization plans to reach out to communities where it is not well-known or not well-understood.

"There's a very widespread misimpression that the ACLU opposes religion" despite its efforts to protect rights to religious expression, ACLU president-elect Susan Herman told The Associated Press after she was tapped Saturday to replace Nadine Strossen, the ACLU's longest-serving president.

In particular, the Brooklyn Law School professor said she was surprised "there aren't more people in the African-American community that believe the ACLU is their organization."

Since its establishment in 1920, the ACLU has set out to preserve First Amendment rights, the right to equal protection under the law, the right to due process, and the right to privacy.

Its stated mission is "to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States."

While such rights include the right of Americans of all religions to practice and/or display affirmations of their faith in public, the ACLU has been criticized as anti-religious for its extreme stance on separation of church and state and the efforts it has taken to remove faith-linked displays from public property.

The ACLU has filed lawsuits throughout the United States to remove Christian crosses and the 10 Commandments from public buildings, claiming that they promote one religion over another. It also opposes religious ceremonies and certain types of prayer or "moments of silence" in public schools or schools funded with public money.

“The American Civil Liberties Union claims to be dedicated to protecting the freedoms of all Americans. But its legacy is one of defending pornographers, child molesters, abortionists, and stripping our nation of its Judeo-Christian heritage,” states the Traditional Values Coalition in a special report on the ACLU.

Among the ACLU’s more recent church-state cases is the recent lawsuit of an Ohio county judge who re-posted the 10 Commandments in his courtroom after a court’s order to remove it.

The ACLU claims that Richland County Judge James DeWeese's newest display, which includes what he describes as “humanist principles” posted alongside the Ten Commandments, is a “backdoor method to promote his own religious agenda in the courtroom.”

“The most troubling aspect of Judge DeWeese’s courtroom display is that it states he uses his religious views in his professional role as a judge,” ACLU of Ohio Cooperating Attorney Mike Honohan told The Mansfield News Journal. Honohan was referring to the statement below the two lists that says DeWeese believes in moral absolutes such as the Ten Commandments, rather than what he called the moral relatives of the second set of principles listed.

“Courts should be a place where all people are treated equally, but those who enter his courtroom are given the message they will be judged based on his personal religious views,” Honohan stated.

In May 2008, the ACLU of Ohio had asked federal Judge Kathleen O’Malley to hold DeWeese in contempt of court for displaying the Ten Commandments in his courtroom.

O’Malley declined to do so, however, because she said the display was not a duplicate of the previous sign and included other text, according to The News Journal.

As the federal judge did not rule on whether the current sign was constitutional, the ACLU filed a new lawsuit on Oct. 7 in the U.S. District Court of Northern Ohio, alleging that DeWeese’s intention to promote religion in his courtroom remains the same.

Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
  • Mon Dec 01, 2008 9:23 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Flagged as inappropriate. show The ACLU is just a tool used for the forth-coming of the Anti-Christ. IT is set up to persecute and kill the voices of those who believe in God. I am a Black Christian American and I did not know that the ACLU was created for minorites. They are setup to try and destroy the ONE TRUE FAITH, Christanity. hide

  • Wed Oct 29, 2008 9:58 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Viking, I submit the only difference between personal judgement and professional judgement is that the professional judgement should be educated in the professional area. However, even professional judgement will be affected by one's background and world view.

  • Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:41 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Hi WB thanks for the response, congratulations to your daughter. I guess I have to agree that sometimes judges do insert their personal belief systems into their judgement in a way that is inappropriate. Of course their life experience is influential in their decision making but when they put on the robe they take an oath to uphold the law without prejudice or fear. When the law is not clear and they must by necessity interpret the intent of the statutes then their are a set of clearly defined rules and processes for doing this in which they have been trained in jurisprudence. One of these includes reveiwing the intent of the legislature. This is can include review of the records of the development and debates in the legislature including the statements of intent of the sponsors and in the hearings of the law in committee. In some cases when available the judge will read the writings, memoirs, commentaries, opinion articles, etc. of the authors of the law when they pertain to the law. Also when possible they will sometimes interview the sponsors and other legislators who passed the law in the first place. I would say it is appropriate (and they swear to) use PROFESSIONAL judgement not personal judgement.

  • Mon Oct 27, 2008 9:50 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    viking,

    Sorry if this gets to you late. I have not been on here for almost a week. I just returned from attending my foster daughter's graduation from Navy Bootcamp. I'm so proud of her.

    I realize that the judicial system is suppose to look at the law (including constitution) and then measure the case before it using such.

    However, many times there is room for interpretation (or perhaps the judges choose to make room for interpretation). In such instances, it is appropriate to use one's personal judgement. No one can make judgements absent of their internal thought processes. Every decision one makes is affected by the sum of one's experiences, including religious ones. To believe anyone's decisions are absent the influence their moral and religious background is to bury one's head in the sand and try to pretend that what is, is not.

    Thus, the sarcasm.

  • Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:33 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show I stand by my assertion that their claims are patently false, and many are libelous. As far as being right or wrong, I was referring to Constitutionally/legally right or wrong. hide

  • Sun Oct 26, 2008 8:25 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Aveteran,
    While I agree with you that the ACLU has defended Christians I have to agree with two of your statements.
    When you say everyone posting below has flat out lied about the ACLU you overreach from emotion rather than evidence. Secondly when you say that the ACLU defends Christians when they are right YOU misrepresent the ACLU. The ACLU does not defend groups because they are Right or Wrong but rather on the basis of whether their constitutional rights have been infringed.
    Try not to let emotion replace reason.

  • Sat Oct 25, 2008 2:19 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Flagged as inappropriate. show You folks are seriously afraid that someone will think for themselves instead of believing what you tell them to. Every one of you has flat-out lied about the ACLU. The ACLU does defend Christians, but only when they are right. News flash: Christians are NOT always right. It's truly an act of cowardice to delete a post telling the truth. Are you really so afraid? http://www.aclufightsforchristians.com/ hide

  • Fri Oct 24, 2008 10:48 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    wbmoore,
    Hi this post is probably to late to reach you but here goes anyway. While through past posts I have come to respect your biblical scholarship I have to disagree with your sentiment here (expressed as sarcasm). It is not the judges job to make moral (right/wrong) decisions it is the judges job to make legal decisions based on the laws established by the legislature. The legislature is free to have its development of law influenced by moral values and the conciense of the community.

    also I am strangely compelled to comment on the phrase artm misquotes " to hell in a hand basket" I have often heard it tortured further as to hell in a handbag. The original is a reference to Dantes tale in "Infern" of his descent into Hell in a "Hang Basket" What is really interesting is that like artm's use this phrase is almost always used to denote a slide into decadence when in fact the original reference is in relation to a spiritual trip of hope and reaffirmation of faith in one who had become despondent. It's always interesting to me how the common usage through time distorts the original meaning and intent of many teachings and statements. Unfortunately this has happened to the bible also through the many translations of the original. A prime example of this is the popular concept of Hell which is non existent in the earliest texts of the bible and appears only in the later english translations.

  • Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:44 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    While reading this article I was reminded of the man who beat his wife and then when the police showed up blamed her for making him do it. The other posters are correct, all one has to do is look at the ACLU's "cherry-picking" of issues to see their real agenda.

  • Mon Oct 20, 2008 3:31 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 1

    The ACLU is not opposed to religion. They're opposed to Christ. He, through the Holy Spirit, convicts them of their Sin and they don't like it so they try to "silence" it. Unfortunately, their methods never work.

  • Mon Oct 20, 2008 3:30 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    It would be one thing if the ACLU were just anti religious, but they are not; they are specifically anti-Christian. One just needs to look at their law suites - there is no hidden agenda. So while they, like Obama, may say one thing, you have to look at the record. One the one hand, they sue relentlessly when Christian symbols are present (nativity scenes, crosses, graduation speeches that mention one's Christian faith, displays of the 20 Commandments, etc) and on the other hand support causes in which non-Christian wish to express their religious freedoms (i.e. Wiccans, including pro-Islamist histories in our schools' texts). In sum, if you want to really know what there about, don't take their word for it; look to their actions. It's clear!

  • Mon Oct 20, 2008 2:29 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    The ACLU (Anti Christian Lawyers Union) is the liberal version of the KKK. One wears sheets and uses rope, the other wears suits and uses restraining orders; but their motivations and objectives are the same.

  • Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:59 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    "ONLY WHEN THEY ARE IN THE RIGHT"

    You mean only when it fits their purpose. And its interesting that they can use whatever they choose to decide if something is right/wrong, but no one else can. Its interesting that we can use laws of other countries to decide what is right/wrong, but not the law presented by God. Its interesting that we can use anything other than the foundation of our system of laws to determine right/wrong.

  • artm »
    Mon Oct 20, 2008 5:46 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Without Bible based Values this Country would have gone to hell in a hand basket a longtime ago.

    The ACLU believes that America can survive without God in the Public Square.

    We are going to find out just how much we need God, And when I say God, I mean Jesus Christ, The God of the Bible, and it won't be long.

    Everyone should be able to worship the god of their choice in America, But don't shut Christians down either.

    Some will say they are not, But look around.

  • Sun Oct 19, 2008 9:26 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    " he uses his religious views in his professional role as a judge"

    No, we wouldn't want people to rely on whether something is right or wrong to decide if something is right or wrong.

  • Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:11 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    It is interesting that the ACLU sided with the doctor in CA who was sued by that gay couple.

    Still, they would have to accept concervative values and Biblical values as acceptable for society before they could be accepted by the groups they are trying to reach out to.

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Comment on this story
ID Password

Don't have a Christian Post ID? Signing up is easy. Click Here

  • icon1
  • icon2
  • icon3
  • icon4
  • icon5
The Christian Post reserves the right to terminate the account of any User who violates our Terms of Use.
Advertisement
Advertisement
CP Shopping
  • Jewelry
  • Health
  • Gifts
  • Music
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Joolwe :
Cross-pendant necklace
Zondervan

Struggling to succeed in the Nashville music scene, talented singer/songwriter Parker James finds the competition fierce even deadly. A young woman's murder, industry corruption, a