ACLU's 'rock-solid' anti-prayer case crumbles

The ACLU doesn't care. The simply litigate, litigate and litigate hoping to wear good folks down.

 

Let 'em litigate. If their case is poor, it will crumble, as it did in this case. What a person needs to do is simply not settle, but let it go to trial.

 

The problem with the ACLU is they pick on people who cannot afford (time or money) to battle it out in the courts. They have the advantage of deep pocket donors who want to promote their agendas by way of court decisions. Thus their 'job' is to seek out law suites that will support their agendas. Hence most people capitulate to their demands to avoid the expense of having a court decide.

 

It's not just the ACLU, it happens a lot in the regular world as well. Any time it happens, we should not settle. The success of these firms depends highly upon people settling. The less often people settle, the less likely these lawsuits are to appear.

 

The success these parasites get is from intimidation.
They only have to infect a few people with fear and hesitancy..... and make good on their threats with those who are bold enough to test the waters..... and, by carefully picking folks who are vunerable by virtue of a precarious employment, or unsympathetic people in 'support groups' to include those of common faith, companions in the work place, and folks who confuse patriotism with loyalty to government and strangers over knowledge and trust in those who they already know, or threat of fines and incarceration designed to ruin them and the lives of their loved ones.

It is time for people to push back and exercise their rights, but to do so carefully with knowledge and faith..... where they do have reasonably clear cut rights..... It may be possible for a group, such as the ACLU, to come against a few complaints...... but if enough occur to swamp their resources..... something will have to give eventually. We don't gain ground by giving up...... And, yes, that may mean pushing the limits where it would appear from their previous successes that limits have already been set.

And, yes, we have to be reasonable in our tolerance of others and their rights. If a person of a different religion is leading a group and decides, within the practice of his religion, to conduct a practice which we might find to be religious expression..... we can be polite and respectful of their rights..... or figure out an orderly way to assert our similar right in the context of the program, or opt out..... leave quietly and without ceremony and return when their practice is finished. If a community or a society has any worth..... it also has some values and practices which are customary to the majority of its people..... and, while they have no right to oppress those who are not in agreement with them...... no one is owed an apology for the rights freely exercised and available to each and all.... One freedom we don't have is to be free from offense... either from others or a guarantee to others. As Christians, we try not to offend and to exercise consideration and grace towards all men...... but that doesn't mean that we subordinate our witness or the liberty we have in Christ to the laws of man. A rule or law which isn't right..... is wrong, whether obeyed or not. We don't make it right nor change it by obediance. That is servatude..... and that is denying our Lord....... whether we like it or not.... and that is WRONG.