I had the occasion to have a conversation with Jeff Vessels in Frankfort, Ky. It was 1999, and he was the executive director of the ACLU in Kentucky.
I told him who I was and that I was from Chattanooga, Tn. I asked, “Have you ever wondered what the purpose of the ACLU is?” He didn’t say a word and looked like, “I don’t think I want to get into a conversation like this.” (And I didn’t blame him.
Minutes before, he had been caught in two or three lies in a public Kentucky legislative hearing on the Ten Commandments. It really wasn’t a good day for him.)
I went on and asked, “I mean, what is the goal of the ACLU?” Still no answer. I said, “The goal of the ACLU is to afford legal protection to anyone who wants to disobey one of God’s laws.”
Then I went on, “You’re for adultery; you’re for abortion; you’re for blasphemy and child rebellion. Right after the Columbine massacre, a boy in Ohio went to school with pink hair, and you folks said unless the school let the boy back in with his pink hair that you were going to sue them. Then you’re for sodomy.” He threw his hand up and said, “We’re just for equal protection under the law.” I said, “Jeff, sodomy is a sin. It’s forbidden by God.”
At this point, I said, “What about your founder?” He looked at me like he couldn’t remember the founder of the ACLU. I said, “You do know who the founder of the ACLU is do you not?” He didn’t say a word. After a pause, I said, “Roger Baldwin?” He acknowledged that he was the founder. I said, “He wrote in a classmate’s year book after he had graduated from Harvard, ‘Communism is the goal.’”
Actually, Baldwin’s entire quote is telling: “I am for socialism, disarmament, and, ultimately, for abolishing the state itself... I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and the sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal.” That’s interesting because I’ve never seen a Communist country disarm or do any of the other things he was espousing.
Jeff said, “I don’t agree with you.” I replied, “I understand, but I’d like you to think about what I have said.”
The agenda of the American Civil Liberties Union and their fellow liberal and Woke travelers is so easy to understand: If God is for it, the ACLU is against it. And if God is against it, the ACLU is for it.
Charles Wysong
* * *
Mr. Wysong seems to have confused his facts about the ACLU. The ACLU’s website states its purpose as follows:
“For nearly 100 years, the ACLU has been our nation’s guardian of liberty, working in courts, legislatures, and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties that the Constitution and the laws of the United States guarantee everyone in this country.”
As for Roger Baldwin, one of the ACLU’s founders, according to Wikipedia: “In 1927, he had visited the Soviet Union and wrote a book, Liberty Under the Soviets. Later, however, as more and more information came out about Joseph Stalin's regime in the Soviet Union, Baldwin became more and more disillusioned with communism and in 1953 called it "A NEW SLAVERY" (capitalized in the original). He condemned "the inhuman communist police state tyranny, forced labor." In the 1940s, Baldwin led the campaign to purge the ACLU of Communist Party members.
In 1947, General Douglas MacArthur invited him to Japan to foster the growth of civil liberties in that country. In Japan, he founded the Japan Civil Liberties Union, and the Japanese government awarded him the Order of the Rising Sun. In 1948, Germany and Austria invited him for similar purposes. He was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1951.
In 1968 Washington University awarded Baldwin an honorary doctorate of Laws degree.
President Jimmy Carter awarded Baldwin the Medal of Freedom on Jan. 16, 1981.
Laura Scherzer
* * *
When Mr. Wysong, or any one else, calls me "woke", I think he and they are showing his or her status as a Trump cult member.
What does "woke" mean anyway? No MAGA can define the term. So if it doesn't follow the MAGA cult, they don't believe in it, everyone else is wrong, and insulting them is required.
Mr. Wysong states, "The agenda of the American Civil Liberties Union and their fellow liberal and Woke travelers is so easy to understand: If God is for it, the ACLU is against it. And if God is against it, the ACLU is for it."
What a pompous statement by Mr. Wysong, who apparently has carried his disgust of the ACLU for at least 25 years.
It's easy to deduce Mr. Wysong believes the ACLU is evil since it does not promote his God, Christianity, or any religion.
Mr. Wysong implies that the only "right" way to live is according to his God's laws. Presumably though, he also lives by the laws of the U.S. and not the laws of the Old Testament, an eye for an eye, etc.
Isn't the intent of the First Amendment to prohibit the government from using religious laws as our form of government? Should the government prosecute someone in violation of religious laws?
Since "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" the First Amendment does not prohibit Christian beliefs, the beliefs of Islam, the beliefs of Shintoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Wiccan or even no belief at all. What about Native Americans? So if Mr. Wysong wants the laws of God to exist above the laws of the U.S., what is his opinion of those other religions that are "isms", or people with no religion? They have no rights?
From the ACLU website: “The ACLU is frequently asked to explain its defense of certain people or groups—particularly controversial and unpopular entities such as the American Nazis, the Ku Klux Klan, and the Nation of Islam. We do not defend them because we agree with them; rather, we defend their right to free expression and free assembly. Historically, the people whose opinions are the most controversial or extreme are the people whose rights are most often threatened. Once the government has the power to violate one person's rights, it can use that power against everyone. We work to stop the erosion of civil liberties before it's too late.”
So, a major purpose of the ACLU is assuring all people in the U.S., citizens or not, are treated equally under the laws of the United States, not solely religious laws, i.e. “Christian Nationalism”. That assures the sanctity of the First Amendment. No person should be legally adjudged based upon religious laws, as Mr. Wysong believes.
Mr. Wysong, do you want to be charged under and adjudicated under Sharia law?
The ACLU stands as a guardian that protects every person from having his or her First Amendment rights, all five of them, encroached upon or dictated by government.
It is not a Christian, Jewish, "isms", agnostic or atheistic organization. Whether you like the ACLU or not, the ACLU is a protector of the Constitution, not a detractor.
Joe Warren
* * *
I would remind readers, it’s no longer 1945 and much has changed since then even in the ACLU. Douglas McArthur was essentially the dictator of Japan even though the Emperor was allowed to remain under his control. This was hardly a lesson in civil liberties as is defined by the ACLU 2024.
McArthur’s staff drafted a new constitution. I can’t imagine the ACLU of today’s response to that. A member of McArthur’s staff fashioned a land reform for Japan and the Emperor gave his approval. McArthur even broke up big businesses which had profited from years of war.
W Edward Deming was invited by McArthur to teach the Japanese how to produce top quality products economically, in effect, using quality control. He taught them the essentials of capitalism and the free market.
The ACLU of today is as Mr. Wysong described it. I’m sure some of the post-nominal crowd will disagree, but again it’s not 1945 and we can look at the causes the Union has championed over the last 40 years and judge for ourselves.
Ralph Miller
* * *
The ACLU has not represented all persons being denied their civil liberties. The ACLU just selects what fits their agenda.
There is the case of Jack Phillips of the Colorado Masterpiece Cakeshop who has endured a 12-year legal battle for expressing his 1st Amendment rights against LGBT activists. This man just won the third legal battle (Colorado Supreme Court source ABC or AP 10-08-24) from the LGBT activists who have tried to have him shut down and have him fined and imprisoned for not baking cakes for gays and gender reveal parties. This man also had the Supreme Court rule in his favor previously before this third frivolous lawsuit was brought by an LGBT lawyer who is transgender.
What is apparent is that the ACLU will represent anyone except a Christian or conservative leaning person. The Massachusetts ACLU represented the NAMBLA organization which is North American Man Boy Lovers Association. Source ABC.
How can such an organization even exist in America is beyond my understanding. Most Christian and conservative people see what the ACLU really is. My term for them is Anti Christian Liberal Union. If the ACLU was truly for civil liberties of all citizens then they would have represented Mr. Phillips.
Arch Tinker