Best of 2005: Interview With A Former ACLU Lawyer
Posted on December 26, 2005
I had the benefit of getting an interview with Mr. Reese Lloyd, a former ACLU lawyer affiliated with the largest Veterans Organization in America, the American Legion. When I called the media relations department there and inquired about their support for Public Expression of Religion Act of 2005 , this is the man they referred me to. I soon found out why. This was a very passionate, wise, and well spoken man.
I first inquired of his history with the ACLU, how he became employed with them, and why he eventually disassociated himself with them. He informed me that he had worked two janitor jobs while attending law school. One day the ACLU did some kind of fellowship interview, and he was given an internship with them. He eventually went on to be on their staff. He focused in the area of worker’s rights with special attention to the deprivation of speech in the workplace…such as whistleblowers.
So why did he leave them? He said, “it was in part because around that time they established a separation of Church and State Staff Position.” He informed me that, “This was funded by Norman Lear and several other Hollywood millionaires.” It seems even back then that Hollywood sided with the secular left. He went on to say that, “the very purpose of this staff position was to push “establishment clause” lawsuits against the government.”
At this point he got pretty fired up, and dominated the conversation for a while. I didn’t mind…what he had to say was passionate and cut right to the truth of things.
“I think it is important that we shouldn’t forget that we had a civil rights movement that was needed in our history at the time. I was around to see segregated bathrooms. There were black and white water fountains. You could sit at a lunch counter next to someone like Charles Manson because he was white, but not someone like Martin Luther King Jr. because he was black. The ACLU played a helpful role in the civil rights movement defending these people, and I can’t turn my back on that. I have to give credit where credit is due.”
“But….that being said, what they have done in the past is completely eviscerated by what they do in the present. The ACLU has become a fanatical anti-faith Taliban of American religious secularism.”
I don’t think I could have come up with a better more colorful description myself. I think I will be sending him a Stop The ACLU T-Shirt. But wait…he was just getting warmed up! He went on to say….
“I have done more cases for minorities and civil rights violations myself than the whole bunch of them put together. I was in the trenches of the Civil Rights movement. They can’t tell me anything about civil rights. We did that 40 years ago, and we accomplished that goal. There are now laws protecting people from those things we fought against. The Civil Rights movement has now taken some crazed “Jesse Jackson” turn to the point that often it is now the white people that are being discriminated against.”
I must say that in this world of political correctness this guy was bold, blunt, and to the point. Keep in mind this is coming from a guy who fought the battle of Civil Rights, a soldier who fought for them, and an esteemed former Commander of an American Legions post in Banning, California. He continued…
The ACLU is an elitist organization bent on the social engineering of our Country in defiance of both the legislative and executive branches. What they are involved in is secular cleansing of American History.”
He asked if I were familiar with how Stalin airbrushed people like Trotsky out of photos in order to rewrite history. He went on to compare that to how what the ACLU is trying to do with Christianity in American history. He pointed out many similarities.
Then he got to the good stuff! He repeated….
“The ACLU is involved in the secular cleansing of our history. This is not just a fight about free exercise, but about the protection of our American history. The ACLU want to deny America the knowledge of their Christian heritage.”
“For example, the Ten Commandments in Court Houses. I don’t think this is an “endorsement” of religion. It is an acknowledgment of our history. I don’t care if it causes discomfort to Islamic terrorists, Islamic terrorist sympathizers, or Hindus and their holy cows.”
At this point I felt like saying, ….Bwhahahahah! However I restrained myself like the nice guy that I am. I’m glad I did, cause this is when he got the really good stuff.
“This is a Christian Nation! And we ought to be damn proud it is! Because it is only in Christian Nations where you will find freedom of religion. We are a Christian Nation, and the U.S. Supreme Court said so. The Supreme Court in HOLY TRINITY CHURCH v. U.S. that this is a Christian Nation. That is our history. The history the ACLU wants to erase.”
“Secular Humanism is a religion. Again, the Supreme Court ruled this in Torcaso vs. Watkins. If this is true, then it is being given precedence over other religions in our nation today.”
I finally asked the question that I primarily called for. Knowing that the American Legion is supporting The Public Expression of Religion Act of 2005 would it affect the ability of a poor person to defend their religious liberty by having to pay attorney fees out of pocket? To this question he answered….
“Absolutely not! This legislation would only apply to “Establishment Clause” cases. This would help to keep organizations from being paid attorney’s fees in cases such as the ones where the ACLU is fighting to take down our Veterans’ Memorials. It would only affect these kinds of suits. The “Free Exercise” is not affected at all. So someone defending their right to express religion could still collect attorney’s fees.”
“The ACLU crossed the damn line when they denied the Boyscouts charter on U.S. Military Bases. People need to stand up on this. The American Legion has a creed we say now…”For God and Country Forever! Surrender To The ACLU, Never!” We have 2.7 million members and we are stepping up. And when we step, we march, we don’t mince.”
STAND UP! TELL YOUR REPRESENTATIVE TO SUPPORT THE PUBLIC EXPRESSION OF RELIGION ACT OF 2005
Sign The Petition To Get The ACLU Off The Taxpayer’s Dole
Help Us Raise Money To Advertise A Nationwide March On All The ACLU Offices In All 50 States SHOP THE BULLDOZE THE ACLU STORE
» Filed Under 1st Amendment, ACLU, News, War On Terror
Trackback URL
Comments
12 Responses to “Best of 2005: Interview With A Former ACLU Lawyer”
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Advertise
Donate
Steal Me
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
Great article except for one important detail: [q]“This is a Christian Nation! And we ought to be damn proud it is! Because it is only in Christian Nations where you will find freedom of religion.[/q]
Um, Israel is a Jewish nation and it has freedom of religion. Let’s not forget that, especially with the Islamists trying to wipe it out, and the rest of the secular humanists that are in Eurabia.
Absolutely, I concede to your point. This is a quote from the guy I interviewed, so if it really bothers you, I would suggest contacting him about it.
“Secular Humanism is a religion. Again, the Supreme Court ruled this in Torcaso vs. Watkins. If this is true, then it is being given precedence over other religions in our nation today.”
That is the point exactly. And the Oxford English Dictionary clearly defines this when it describes religion as: A pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.
Atheism is also a religion which requires an act of “faith” by its adherents. In that, just as Christians cannot prove the existence of God, atheists can no more prove that God does not exist. Therefore any attempt to remove Christian religious symbols from the public square and replace then with nothing, is, in fact, rewarding a particular faith system and cannot be a neutral act.
a friend posted this ,
QUOTE: “Secular Humanism is a religion. Again, the Supreme Court ruled this in Torcaso v. Watkins. If this is true, then it is being given precedence over other religions in our nation today.” QUOTE
Wrong. This case is often misquote by right wing revisionists.
I have read that case, specifically. The issue was this: The state of Maryland required people who wanted to be a notary to profess a belief in God. Torcaso said he had no such belief, and the state, under Governor Watkins, said he could not become a notary. Torcaso appealed. The Supreme Court ruled in Torcaso’s favor saying there is no religious test for office in the United States.
The Supreme Court did not rule Secular Humanism was a religion. In fact, that phrase only shows up in the footnotes, footnote 11, specifically. The footnote was referring to beliefs that do not include a god but protected by the first amendment.
To say the Supreme Court ruled Secular Humanism is a religion is an intentional distortion of what the case was all about: no religious test for office.
The bloger and the author he was quoting instantly lost all credibility because that assertion is a common one found among the extreme religious rights who are indefatigable revisionists.
The speaker said he was a janitor in law school. Well, now he’s shoveling manure
“Wrong. This case is often misquote by right wing revisionists.”
I notice the left doing the same with the “Treaty of Tripoli” when refering to the U.S. not being a “Christian Nation”. Really chaffs your butt, doesn’t it?
As much in sympathy as I am with the general thrust of your argument, the notion that the U.S. is a Christian nation is simply nuts. The Supreme Court says that the Constitution grants a virtually unlimited right to abortion, too. Does that make it true? Contrary to the historical revisionism common on the Right you would be hard-pressed to find an orthodox Christian among the Founding Fathers. And no, don’t start reeling off politically convenient quotes from these Deists and Freethinkers about how great an example Jesus is, or about how useful Christianity is as a source of social ethics.
Show me where they discuss Jesus as their Savior. Then, when you’ve failed, lose the would-be apologetics and read their actual writings. Dishonest apologetics does not serve the Kingdom of God well at all.
I grant that atheism and agnosticism are indeed religions by any meaningful definition. But I’m not quite sure that there’s ever been a nation which believed in Jesus. That’s something people do.
“Contrary to the historical revisionism common on the Right you would be hard-pressed to find an orthodox Christian among the Founding Fathers.”
You’ll get quotes just the same!
It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ! — Patrick Henry
Patrick Henry, Life, Correspondence and Speeches, William Wirt Henry, editor (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1891), Vol. II, p. 490.
…….
After offering a general survey of America’s Christian history, and speaking out against the practice of polygamy, the Holy Trinity court stated:
These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation.10
Justice David J. Brewer, author of the Holy Trinity opinion, also wrote a book in 1905 called The United States: A Christian Nation. Brewer opened his work with these words:
We classify nations in various ways. As, for instance, by their form of government. One is a kingdom, another an empire, and still another a republic. Also by race. Great Britain is an Anglo-Saxon nation, France a Gallic, Germany a Teutonic, Russia a Slav. And still again by religion. One is a Mohammedan nation, others are heathen, and still others are Christian nations. This republic is classified among the Christian nations of the world. It was so formally declared by the Supreme Court of the United States. But in what sense can it be called a Christian nation? Not in the sense that Christianity is the established religion or that the people are in any manner compelled to support it. On the contrary, the Constitution specifically provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Neither is it Christian in the sense that all its citizens are either in fact or name Christians. On the contrary, all religions have free scope within our borders. Numbers of our people profess other religions, and many reject all. Nor is it Christian in the sense that a profession of Christianity is a condition of holding office or otherwise engaging in the public service, or essential to recognition either politically or socially. In fact the government as a legal organization is independent of all religions. Nevertheless, we constantly speak of this republic as a Christian nation-in fact, as the leading Christian nation of the world. 11
The laws and institutions of our country rest on a religious foundation; the quote in question is consistent with his thoughts. It is absurd to think that the religion of a country does not inform and shape those laws and institutions that overlap religious opinion-its sense of morality. Such was the case in early American history. The religious nature of America, to include the harmonious relationship between Church and state, was rarely challenged with credibility until the modern courts began implementing their own selective and revisionist version of American history. Other courts have stated ideas similar to Holy Trinity. In 1952, the Supreme Court declared:
We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being.
10. Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States; 143 U. S. 457, 471 (1892).
11. David J. Brewer, The United States A Christian Nation (Philadelphia: John C. Winston Company, 1905), pp. 11-12.
……..
To the corruptions of Christianity I am, indeed opposed; but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian, in the only sense in which he wished any one to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others. 27 - Thomas Jefferson
Bergh, Writings of Jefferson, Vol. X, p.380, letter to Benjamin Rush on April 21, 1803.
……….
“the notion that the U.S. is a Christian nation is simply nuts.”
See above and http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=24 and read Barton’s affidavit… http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=41
THE ACLU IS A FLASH IN THE PAN!IN THE
FINAL ANALYSIS THE SUPPORTERS, AND STAFF
WILL GO THE WAY, OF ALL COMMUNISTS, SOCIALISTS,
HITLER’S, STALIN’S, CASTRO’S, KIM JONGll’S,
AND A MYRIAD OTHER DICTATOR SCUMBAGS.
I KNOW WHERE I WILL SPEND ETERNITY! DO YOU?
A.C.L.U. (ALL COMMUNIST LOSERS UNITED!)
There seems to be a lot of ignorance about the separation of church and state. Separation exists to protect the rights of minorities and the purity of religious practices.
The phrase “wall of separation between church and state” comes from Thomas Jefferson who, in a letter the Danbury Baptists in Conn., promises the Baptists that they will be able to practice their faith free of government control. In erecting this wall, the Baptists’ faith would be kept pure, given protection from political intrusion. It would also keep the government from using religion in to make some individuals second class citizens.
This value of separation grows–directly–out of harassment by the Congregational Church on Baptists and Quakers. It also grows out of the religious wars of Europe arising during the time of Reform following Martin Luther. The hope was that a wall would prevent religious warfare, disenfranchisement, and protect the purity of religious practices.
As an aside– people talk about this being a “Christian” nation. Perhaps we can point to all the colonies and say, “They were Christians,” but history tells us that they were hardly unified under that banner. These colonies began to make a profit or to escape religious discrimination. They did not begin under some unified notion of prayer in school, bible readings at graduations, etc. The “founders” of our country were diests, atheists, protestants, catholics, etc., all of whom would significantly disagree on major issues. In light of their common European history, they added the First Amendment to prevent intrusion of a fed. gov. into their various religious practices.
Well, it’s late, and I’m tired, so–goodnight.
Actually, Torcaso vs. Watkins did not rule that secular humanism is a religion. In fact, the very link you provided to prove that the supreme court ruled that it was a religion, proved that it is not a religion under the law. It was a footnote which said that secular humanism should be considered a religion, and carried no legal binding. Read your sources better before posting intentionally misleading blogs.
I am sick and tired of some radical organization to tell me that it is not right for me to wish all that I see and wish them a Merry Christmas. What they don’t understand (aclu) that in my religion, which is Roman Catholic, the interpretation in the word Christmas - actually means “Christ’s Mass.” I will not ever for the rest of my life submit to their “demands” and will if I can walk the halls of our State Capital and wish all I see and pass a very Merry Christmas and I hope some ACLU member confronts me about it. I am a war veteran and prayed with many of my comrades from diffent religions right on the battlefield and would ask that person if he sees any foreign entity crawling up his back side. Hmmm! Wouldn’t this situation make this radical individual make the statement, “Oh my GOD, what is happening to me before he realizes what he says. Hmmm! I am sending a Merry Christmas card to 125 Broad St. New York, NY and be very nice about it.
Both me and my husband are military veterans adding up to 52 years of our military service to the United States of America, and I’ve read that the ACLU helped to stop Verbiage being said during flag-folding ceremonies at all veterans’ cemeteries. That in itself is the reason I’m with “Stop The ACLU” organization to stop this absurdity of the ACLU now is trying to tell the VA what to do! My husband is a Vietnam and Desert Storm veteran, he fought for our rights here back home, and now, if he dies before I do (God help that it don’t happen) and if I want the flag-folding ceremony to include what each fold of the flag stands for (ACLU’s stoppage included the 11th fold where it mentions it stand for Jewish war veterans and ‘God of Abraham’, etc.) that I’ll be stopped from doing such because I’m a veteran burying my veteran husband who fought in 2 wars? The nerve of ACLU making that a law and the VA should be ashamed that they folded badly by being scared of the ACLU! I’m with John Gorski above here…our soldiers, men and women, are dying over there in Iraq and the ACLU needs to be STOPPED forever for allowing an absurd law like stopping verbiage during flag-folding ceremonies at veteran cemeteries! Our dead and buried soldiers at our veteran cemeteries ought to be turning in their graves at this outlandish, ridiculous, self-centered law! I’m also a member of my state’s (RI) National Guard Retirees Association and I will make sure all our retirees in my state are aware of this law, and we will fight to ignore it….they can’t put us all in jail!
Oh, and MERRY CHRISTMAS to all and to all a good night! There! Now I said it, too!