you can probably find a recording of the speech barry goldwater delivered to rnc delegates who'd nominated him as their presidential candidate in 1964.   what you'll hear him say is:

I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

you wont hear anything about pursuing virtue or pursuing vice. 

if the aclu is extremist--which is exactly your contention--it is extreme in defense of liberty (that's what the 'L' stands for no?).  it is certainly not moderate in pursuit of justice.

im not sure how you make the leap from fighting state-supported endorsement of religion (by exhibiting sectarian symbols) to causing the us to fall under the sway of castro cultism.  i do know youve badly twisted barry's words in the process. 

when jerry falwell called upon "all good Christians" to unite in opposition against justice o'connor because of her vote in the roe v wade abortion decision, goldwater opined:  ''all good Christians should band together and kick Jerry Falwell in the ass.''

society?  no.  only from state-owned/operated/supported facilities/functions/programs.

I care not what the fringe says!  you quote Falwell.  Name one law he has passed.  Name one act or executive order he has made?

You see?  you are guilty of the same myopia!  At the mere mention of anything Christian, you get defensive.  I am not what you have to fear, but you have to fear.  for it is coming.  I am the one that is trying to stop it.  Trying to stop the stupidity when the ACLU gets the Boy Scouts banned from all military bases (and that is a major thing, trust me).

You want to debate semantics.  You do not see what is happening due to your zeal.  This was not an attack on the ACLU, but a warning.  and theirs to ignore at their own peril.  I know the ACLU does some good work, but they have lost their vision and mission.

instead of being pendantic, perhaps you should wake up and smell the seething.  Now it may be Falwell.  But it will nto remain that way.  I for one would like to cut it off before it becomes a conflagaration.  You on the other hand just want to add gasoline to the pyre.

Good luck.

No Society.  Since when is it a crime to profess beleif in God and get banned from federal property for doing so?

Hello boy scouts!  You cant win this one, but thanks for trying.  I hope at least this one makes you think about it.

That is the key point to this article. Anytime you ban or suppress something, someone, or some idea, eventually it becomes the minority and groups, like the ACLU, form to protect that minority. ACLU might one day mean American Christian Liberties Union.

To represent history, as Dr. Guy explained, does not endorse any religion. A state seal having to remove the picture of a Spanish mission from the seal, because it had a cross on it, is refusing to acknowledge history. The seal was not an endorsement of religion. It had the mission, among various other historical symbols, as a commemoration of the state's founding. Not any more.

only incidentally to frame goldwater's attitude about mixing religion and government.

i'm not sure what youre predicting.  the aclu better shut up and go away or do the right thing in order to prevent some sorta retaliation? 

you quoted one sentence correctly and then implied the tagline had to do with pursuing virtue.  id love to see a link to goldwater saying anything of the sort.

and then proceeded to claim the aclu's irresponsible stupidity was gonna lead to some horrendous conclusion because they were unwittingly being duped into castro zombies.

im not sure how i managed to duplicate my original comment 4 times.  i woulda dealt with those in one reply but since i already had four of em going...

i dont recall any campaigns or effort by the aclu to remove any religious symbols from the media, markets or anything excepy state-sponsored venues...so i dont know why youve decided the issue is society. 

on the other hand, there are numerous crusades to enforce christian beliefs on society--one of the more recent of which involved flooding the fcc with complaints bout howard stern.  then there was the big flap over janet jackson.  as far as symbols go, do you recall the years-long effort to get proctor & gamble to change their company logo?  what about the gay telitubbies? 

they have a perfect right to do so, but give credit where its due.

to accurately represent the history of christmas in america, we'd have to ban its celebration (as boston did for 10 years).  one of the reasons the puritans made the trip to new england was to free themselves from what they considered the blasphemous revelry of a good ol 17th century english christmas. cromwell banned christmas celebrations for a time as well.