Ms. West laments that the ACLU has colluded with liberal judges who legislated from the bench to erode "traditions we've held in this country for over 200 years". Would those hallowed "traditions" include segregated schools, indigent people facing trial without an attorney, law enforcement violations of the rights of those suspected of a crime, suppression of freedom of assembly, forcing Jehovah's Witness children to salute the US flag, restrictive covenants preventing the sale of homes to Blacks, public officials suing the press for "defamation", loyalty oaths, anti-miscegenation laws, and beatings of incarcerated individuals? The ACLU and judges "legislating from the bench" were instrumental in affording individuals legal protection against these American "traditions".
And we owe a deep debt of gratitude to Chief Justice John Marshall, who was one of the first to "legislate from the bench". It was his "judicial activism" in the Marbury v. Madison case of 1803 that elevated the power of the Supreme Court to equal that of the President and Congress. With this ruling Marshall forged the Supreme Court's role as the arbiter and ultimate interpreter of the Constitution. An independent and empowered judiciary is an essential element in a free and democratic society. Had Marshall not "legislated from the bench", we would be closer to the abyss of fascism than we already are.
To support her argument that the ACLU's efforts to remove the Christian God from the public square are "ludicrous" because of the frequency of Christian symbols "on government structures throughout the US....including the Supreme Court", Ms. West relies upon widespread misconceptions which have been explained more thoroughly and accurately at:
Incidentally, the ACLU is not alone in its attempts to remove displays of Christian symbols in public areas. The Anti-Defamation League has joined the cause.
Consider this statement by ADL National Director Abraham Foxman:
"The notion that there is a one-size-fits-all Ten Commandments at the heart of American law and society is convenient, but not really true...There is no way to pick one version of the Ten Commandments, display it and say that this represents American secular tradition. In doing so, you are not respecting people who are not Jewish or Christian, or who come from other religious traditions."
Marsha West also expresses significant concern that the ACLU has "vilified and viciously attacked" the Boy Scouts of America. Careful scrutiny of the situation reveals that rather than attacking the BSA, the ACLU has worked diligently to prevent public entities from supporting an organization which requires its members to swear an oath to the Christian God and discriminates against Gays. I was in the BSA for five years, attained its two highest honors, but now feel deeply disappointed in an organization which I held in such high regard as a youth. There are many worthwhile aspects to Scouting, but it is not the place of the public institutions of a heterogeneous and diverse society to support such an entity.
The ACLU's defense of the rights of convicted sex offenders and NAMBLA also stirred considerable consternation in Ms. West. Yet like many critics of the ACLU, her vision of the forest is obscured by the trees.
As the ACLU stated concerning its defense of the Constitutional rights of NAMBLA:
"Regardless of whether people agree with or abhor NAMBLA's views, holding the organization responsible for crimes committed by others who read their material would gravely endanger our important First Amendment freedoms...We join with all others in deploring the heinous crimes committed against Jeffrey Curley . . . But the expression of even offensive ideas is protected by the Constitution."
The raison d'être of the ACLU is to protect individual people or groups of people from the inevitable "tyranny of the majority". Sometimes this puts them in the unenviable position of defending the Constitutional rights of morally repugnant individuals or groups, including NAMBLA, the KKK, and neo-Nazis. Recalling the ACLU's mission statement, the power even of a democratic majority must be limited, to ensure individual rights.
Regardless of how our society ultimately deals with moral deviants or perpetrators of heinous crimes, they are still human beings with human rights. Considering the magnitude of the prison industrial complex, the US criminal justice system's bias toward punishment over reform, and the fact that the United States has the world's largest prison population, it is highly unlikely that this nation is going to "get soft on crime".
In her piece, Ms. West quotes conservative pundit Deroy Murdock (who is openly homosexual and therefore benefits handsomely from the vigorous support of Gay rights by the ACLU):
"It would be nice to see NAMBLA siphon its own bank account rather than the ACLU's to justify its evil ways. The ACLU decides for itself where to devote its finite resources. Hence, its leaders freely chose to stand with cheerleaders for pederasty while torpedoing those who mentor rather than rape little boys."
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
