Defining moments in ACLU history
out America's Conscience
Time to euthanize Roe
Nedd Kareiva is a 45 year old man from
Chicago who began the Stop the ACLU web site in
August of 2004. His background is varied
which includes a degree in Biblical studies. He
once served as the associate director of the
Christian Broadcasting Network's Chicago
counseling center when such centers were
operating in major cities across America. He
also spent 6+ years in real estate and
mortgages and also worked for the city of
Chicago for 3 1/2 years. He served as the
singles director in the 1990s for a church in
southwest Chicago. He has a 9 year old son with
Asperger's Syndrome, a form of autism.
In addition, Nedd was a professional Scrabble
player who played in many tournaments (and won a
few) from across the Midwest for approximately
13 years, between 1992 & 2005. At one point, he
was in the top 150 players in North America,
according to the National Scrabble Association.
Nedd got involved in political issues back in
the early 90s when his mother and late stepdad
took an active position in the pro-life
movement. They were pro-life activists and even
went to jail for their stances. Thanks to them
and a church willing to deal with issues, his
political involvement began to set in motion.
When Nedd first got online in August of 2001,
he knew things were in the moral arena were bad
but not to the extent he soon found out. When
he started reading information about what the
ACLU was doing and supporting in America, he
could not believe that there were people
litigating for homosexual marriage, abortion
without restrictions, removals of the 10
Commandments nationwide and banning all public
prayer. He already set up a web site to deal
with unconstitutional seat belt laws and was
hesitant to begin another web site. However,
while he saw that there were good legal groups
willing to take on the ACLU, he saw little
effort to tackle the ACLU in other ways and
wanted to do something about it. He wanted to
start a large public awareness campaign to
expose the ACLU's agenda on a wide scale. On
August 29th of 2004, he began the Stop the ACLU
As of 10/2005, the Stop the ACLU Coalition
has over 1500 members and supporters in its
database with people from all 50 states and
roughly a dozen foreign countries and looking to
grow significantly more.
Nedd is a combination
Libertarian/Constitutionalist who believes in
strictly Constitutional government. He believes
the government is intruding where it has
no Constitutional authority to do so like public
education, Medicare, prescription drugs, seat
belt laws, our tax system and pork barrel
spending. He also believe Washington is not
addressing Constitutionally permitted avenues
such as the protection of the unborn, the
protection of religious speech under the 1st
Amendment, the securing of our borders from
illegals and terrorists, and the necessity of
Congress to correct judicial errors and align
our courts accordingly to Article III, Section 2
of the U.S. Constitution. He believes taxpayer
funding of the ACLU through our courts needs to
be promptly addressed and rectified.
Stop the ACLU Coalition
Stop THE ACLU Newsletter
Defining moments in ACLU history
April 23, 2006
Words mean things, a
former boss of mine used to tell me. Or do they?
If you're Bill Clinton, it's conditional. It could depend on
what the meaning of the word "is" is.
And if you're the ACLU, words could mean anything. Read
their press releases, listen to their lawyers and staff at
the microphone and you would come away thinking that only
they know the Constitution and good public policy for
America. But you would also see how they make the evil,
disgusting and gruesome to be palatable and innocuous.
When it comes to abortion, those of us who have been
fighting to see it banned in America know the terms the
pro-abortion crowd and their ACLU allies concocted decades
ago to take the sting and stigma out of it. "Baby" was
reduced to "fetus" to "product of conception." Killing an
unborn child was reduced to "a woman's right to choose" or
"a decision to be made between a woman and her doctor" or "a
woman's right to privacy."
In March of 2004, lawsuits generated by the abortion
industry and the ACLU in response to Congressional passage
and President Bush's signature of a ban on partial birth
abortion triggered what perhaps has been to date the most
brutally fought cultural battle in America's courts.
Incredibly graphic testimony erupted in New York, California
and Nebraska where the cases were heard. Though this
information needs to be read and digested to understand what
abortion truly is, for the sake of readers perusing this
piece, I will avoid the most of the gruesome details —
except for the one word indelibly was placed in the minds of
pro-life activists forever.
That one word is "disarticulate."
Most educated people know the word "articulate" to mean
speaking distinctly and intelligibly. However, some may not
know that an alternate definition identifies it, per
Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, "to unite by means of a
"Disarticulate" thus means "to disjoint." The word was used
in all three court cases. The ACLU was counsel in the
Nebraska case. To read more, click this link
(warning: barbaric in description — and of course, the act).
The term forever altered our cultural landscape. It is one
seldom heard outside of this battle except perhaps in other
medical circles. Whether the ACLU was responsible for
introducing this term in the partial birth debate is open to
conjecture but the fact the word was used in the testimony
of Nebraska abortionists clearly ties the ACLU to it.
Thus the word "disarticulate" was a defining moment for the
In debates over assisted suicide, the ACLU has innoculated
the term by disguising it as "personal autonomy" and "bodily
A more recent term has been "personal end of life decisions"
The fact the ACLU "hailed" this decision which was called
"sweet" by the ACLU of Oregon's executive director is also
noteworthy of its love affair with death which I wrote in an
earlier piece http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/kareiva/060202.
The ACLU's terminology is similar to that of groups like the
Hemlock Society which was later named Compassion in Dying
and then to Compassion and Choices.
You see, words mean things — except to groups like the ACLU.
Perhaps this is a good time to order your book The
Marketing of Evil by David Kupelian, managing editor at
World Net Daily. He points out how groups like the ACLU have
camouflaged evil as something to be desired and not shunned.
OK, wait til you finish reading this piece before going
ordering your copy.
Another area where the ACLU paints smiley faces over evil is
in its defense and promotion of homosexual issues, including
same sex marriage and adoption. You'll never hear the ACLU
point out the dangerous practices of homosexuals of which
you can read the truth on web sites like
But like abortion and euthanasia, the ACLU pushes the
envelope by coding terms such as "fairness" and "equality"
into its promotion of homosexual rights.
You would think the ACLU hadn't read the Declaration of
Independence in which it says "All men (and women) are
created equal." Our Founding Fathers didn't single out
homosexuals but the ACLU apparently reads into it that they
The ACLU is airing their 10 part series, the Freedom Files,
on satellite TV. In an episode earlier this month, according
to their web page http://www.aclu.org/lgbt/gen/24946prs20060407.html,
the ACLU highlighted several couples supposedly harmed by
government discrimination against them in relationship to
wills and adoption.
The facts are not in doubt here. The ACLU has chosen to go
this route because it hasn't been successful in persuading
the American public to adopt same sex marriage. Though the
ACLU has won a few scant cases in liberal enclaves on the
East & West Coasts, they have been decisively defeated at
the ballot box when the people have spoken. Therefore, the
ACLU wants to paint a pretty picture of same sex couples to
recreate a new moral infrastructure.
Like the dangers of abortion and the barbaric means of
effecting one, the ACLU glosses over the issue of
homosexuality. They never acknowledged that those entering
those relationships have chosen to do so and will never
remind you that it's all about sex. They will never tell you
that those couples in the Freedom Files may have had their
physical (and perhaps emotional) pains because of their
unnatural relationship. They will never tell you it's all
But the term homosexuality is all about one's sexual
propensity for someone of the same sex.
Executive director, Anthony Romero, a practicing homosexual
himself, cloaks these families as "concerned parents and
loving partners." The abhorrent sexual practices
historically classified as unnatural and which the likes of
Romero perform are absent in the ACLU's platform.
So when the likes of the ACLU say it's not about sex but
about loving relationsihps being denied, the reality is that
it's all about sex.
You see, words mean something.
And there are other cases of the ACLU cloaking evil into
good (or at least legit) such as making pornography, even
child porn, all about the 1st Amendment, freedom of speech
and free from censure. But there is one area the ACLU boldly
yet absurdly believes is true and does not obfuscate. And
that is in the area of sex education in schools.
Ah, another defining moment in ACLU history.
A recent decision by the Rhode Island Dept. of Education to
halt a program from a group known as the Heritage of Rhode
Island was as a result of the ACLU opposition to abstinence
education in the public schools http://www.aclu.org/reproductiverights/sexed/24721prs20060322.html.
The word "harmful" to describe sexual abstinence outside of
marriage, as noted in the title at the top of the web page,
plus the word "unsafe" near the bottom of the page has to
leave one's head scratching.
The ACLU has also termed abstinence as dangerous as noted in
the title of this web page http://www.aclu.org/reproductiverights/gen/20117prs20050921.html.
The director of the ACLU's Reproductive Freedom Project
(again, the cloaking of abortion as reproductive freedom),
Louise Melling, says the teaching of abstinence puts the
health and safety of students at risk. She also states
when government abstinence programs do not teach on
contraceptives, condoms and abortion, they are "censoring
life saving information."
How come the ACLU can't camouflage the abstinence issue the
way they do abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality and
pornography? At least they tell us the truth of what they
believe but is there anything more absurd than saying that
abstinence is dangerous and teaching on condoms and
contraceptives is life saving?
Someone needs to give Ms. Melling the smelling salts. Or
could they be the Melling Salts?
To any ACLU backers reading this article, I ask you this
question: is this organization worthy of your support? Even
if you support abortion on demand, homosexual marriage and
euthanasia, I'm sure you would agree that, as Rush Limbaugh
terms it, "abstinence works every time it's tried." Does an
organization calling abstinence harmful deserve your money?
An adolescent going thru puberty can figure this one out
better than the ACLU.
The ACLU claims religion is part of abstinence teaching in
public schools and must be banned. Well heck, atheist
parents could send their children to a public school and
urge abstinence be taught to their daughters to keep them
from getting pregnant. You don't need to teach about God and
the Bible to know the facts about the birds and the bees —
unless you believe the ACLU is wiser and the rest of us are
"Disarticulate" and "harmful and dangerous" abstinence
programs, two of the more defining moments in ACLU history.
And now it's time consign the ACLU to history.
Readers, you are dismissed. Now go order the aforementioned
book, undoubtedly harmful and dangerous to your health.
Farming out America's
by Nedd Kareiva
Fresh off of his lawsuits to strip "under God" out from
the Pledge of Allegiance (one a defeat, another pending in
court), California atheist Michael Newdow has now turned to,
echoing the famous Star Trek phrase, "go where no man has
gone before" - suing to remove "In God we Trust"
off our coins and bills.
To most of us, this is quite laughable. Poll numbers already
show well in excess of 80% support for "under God" in the
Pledge and even higher numbers (over 90%) to keep our trusty
motto on our money. Support comes from both major political
parties and encompasses all races and creeds. Outrage at
Newdow's actions likely has the same numbers as well.
So why all the fuss?
Now if you just read that last sentence, perhaps your
hair stood on end, particularly if you are a regular reader
of my columns. You might think I'm not outraged by Newdow's
actions. You might assume I flipped my lid - or worse.
Actually, I haven't. I know this lawsuit is going nowhere
except that some taxpayer money will be used to put Mr.
Newdow in his place. Even the ACLU doesn't want to take up
But for all we care, we may as well remove "In God we
Trust" from our currency. America's conscience, which up
to the last 40 years conveyed a strong trust in God, has now
largely been sold out. It has been done individually,
corporately and governmentally. It has been done by both
major political parties. Some of it has been done willingly,
some of it has been done thru coercion, some of it has been
done for avarice and of course, much of it is done for the
One of the biggest news items to make the headlines in
recent months with regards to conscience concerns
pharmacists who are unwilling to distribute the morning
after bill and other birth control "medications". The usual
suspects - Planned Parenthood, NOW, NARAL & the ACLU - want
these pharmacists to farm out their consciences (to the
devil) to succumb to their agendas.
Sadly, many Americans without giving thoughtful
consideration are unwittingly on the side of the above
stooges of political correctness. These Americans are being
joined by corporate forces like Walgreens and government
such as here in my home state of Illinois where our
governor, Rod Blagojevich, issued an order earlier this year
for all druggists to issue contraceptives without question,
comment or consideration of conscience.
A number of pro-life pharmacists have filed suit against
the governor and complaints against Walgreens. They offered
4 of them who reside near the Missouri state line to
transfer their jobs to the Show Me state where one's
conscience is welcome (unlike Illinois) and where one
abortion clinic recently shut down.
How nice of Walgreens to freely relocate these folks! But
why not, with all its corporate power, join the pharmacists
and stand up to the governor and the abortion lobby?
Unfortunately, the answer to that is Walgreens has sold
itself to the forces of darkness and political correctness.
The chain, which in some parts of Chicago has stores within
a mile or two of others and is seen with the same frequency
as Burger King or McDonalds, has also bowed its corporate
knee to the homosexual agenda. It has provided a 6 figure
sum of money to the Gay Games here in Chicago next summer
and has retained a sponsorship for the event as well.
It's tough to understand how a pharmacy chain, a once
respected bastion of trust here in its home state of
Illinois, now partners with groups whose chosen lifestyle
has led countless individuals to early graves, thanks to
AIDS and other deadly sexually transmitted diseases. It
participated in Chicago's "Gay Pride" parade this
summer for the first time. And on top of that, Walgreens,
the pharmaceutical powerhouse that it is, chose to supply
drug users with free needles, thanks to a mindless law that
passed in this state a couple years ago, instead of going to
court to overturn it.
Political correctness gone amok? For sure. Aligned with
the government in some way? Possibly.
Walgreens is a prime example of a company that has farmed
out its conscience for the sake of political expediency and
a few bucks in the process. And with the force of Illinois
government determined to make the state's pharmacists
complicit with providing birth control against their
consciences, we are on a slippery slope towards having no
morals or conscience.
Walgreens is not an isolated case of its conscience being
corrupted. It has extended to the religious community which
is even more disturbing. Last year, the ACLU used California
law in a suit against Catholic Charities in the state,
forcing them to provide contraceptive insurance to their
employees. The ACLU compelled a religious charity to go
against its moral conscience. The California Supreme Court
upheld the law and the U.S. Supreme Court refused to
To further illustrate the dumbing down or farming out of
its conscience, Catholic Charities of Boston has agreed to
make adoption services on an equal basis to homosexuals as
well as heterosexuals, based on state law. Despite the
priests' sexual abuse scandal which has cost the Boston
Archdiocese millions of dollars and its the church's belief
that homosexual adoption is a form of child abuse, Catholic
Charities caved in to the state, much to the dismay of true
Catholics wanting them to stand up and fight the law.
I guess in the only state where same sex marriage is the
law of the land, what else did we expect?
Though it seems corporate and individual America is
abandoning its morals in droves (perhaps part of the reason
saying "Merry Christmas" has become politically
incorrect), there are still some folks willing to stand
their ground. That is encouraging. But with the forces of
government and corporate America selling out to a political
agenda, the numbers of people resisting are declining.
Most Christians, moral Jews and other principled
conservatives have no problem cooperating and participating
with government and corporate America in their ideas and
plans. Like me, they only ask for a very few things like not
subsidizing or promoting the homosexual and abortion agendas
to their consciences and allow them to opt out if the
government or companies insist on participating in such
activities. They only want to keep their consciences pure.
But alas, few companies and governments are willing to
accommodate those like me.
Regretfully, much of government and corporate America is
not only willing to sell its conscience out but wants to
take others along in the process or bankrupt them if they
refuse. An example of such included a Seattle area
businesswoman who respectfully refused to print wedding
invitations to two homosexuals a couple years ago. Instead
of going to another printer, the two men sued. The city
government, along with the homosexual activists and the
ACLU, proceeded to put this lady out of business and
indoctrinate her conscience with an agenda she was
A recent example of what might happen here in the U.S.
soon, thanks to either the ACLU or some liberal government,
occurred in Canada earlier this year and was decided last
week by a so-called human rights commission. The Knights of
Columbus, an extension of the Catholic Church, was asked to
rent its hall in a small British Columbia town to two
lesbians wanting their "wedding reception" there. They
contracted out their space before realizing who the women
Once the Knights realized what they did, they apologized
to these women, paid for another facility for them and even
paid to have their new "wedding invitations" in exchange for
simply releasing them from the contract. The women refused
to do so and ultimately this "court" ordered the Knights to
pay each of them $1000, despite their previous generous
There are countless companies and city and state
governments subsidizing the abortion and homosexual agendas
and it is causing America to escalate its moral decline. To
get a glimpse of who supports the abortion industry and
specifically Planned Parenthood, visit LDI International at
www.fightpp.org. And to see who supports the homosexual
agenda, visit the Human Rights Campaign website at
www.hrc.org and click "Corporate Equality Index".
When seeing the list of abortion supporters (a
comprehensive list must be paid and ordered thru postal
mail) and the companies and corporations who are 100% with
HRC (from 13 in 2002 to 101 in 2005), it isn't hard to see
how America's moral conscience has rapidly been farmed out
to a political agenda. Healthy and moral people have been
sacrificed to an agenda that is not only considered
unhealthy and immoral but one where greed and an insatiable
lust for money dominate. Walgreens just happens to be a big
participant in it.
What is the answer? Unfortunately, there is no one key to
stopping the promotion of immorality in the work place and
government at the rate it has risen to today. Boycotts do
have an effect and are encouraged but when it comes to items
that we all need like computers, Microsoft and virtually
every major computer company in America is 100% in lockstep
with HRC. Writing letters may also help (e-mails usually get
deleted) but once a company has shaped its corporate policy
on moral matters, particularly homosexual ones, unearthing
such policy is like pushing a dead elephant.
And when it comes to government, getting pro-homosexual
and pro-abortion policy makers and personnel out of a job is
paramount as well as ensuring that states do not contract
services with such groups. But this will happen only if
We the People take this very seriously.
Farming out our conscience reminds me of the words of
Founding Father John Adams "Our Constitution was made only
for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to
the government of any other". If only we took heed!
Our greatest CEO in the 20th century, President Reagan,
once stated "If we ever forget that we are one nation under
God, then we will be a nation gone under". Could he have
coined that phrase (pun intended) prophetically with where
Mr. Newdow and the his ilk have taken us?
It's worth pondering. More importantly, it's worth
addressing. Most importantly, now.
Time to euthanize Roe
March 13, 2006
Leslee Unruh is someone
you should know. She has received harassing and threatening
calls and e-mails at all times of the day and night. She has
had clothes hangers placed in her mailbox with eggs
splattered across her home. Her chiropractor husband has
found dead animals deposited on his business property.
Joshua Heldreth is also someone you should know. He was
arrested for simply bringing a cup of water to a facility he
was not permitted to enter. This 10 year old was found
guilty in court and ordered to perform 25 hours of community
service and write an apology.
What do the above events have in common? Both individuals
were in the spotlight in two historic cultural dramas over
the last 12 months.
What do the above events have dissimilarly? The respondents
For those of you who are unfamiliar with Joshua, here was a
courageous child who chose to shine the spotlight on the
starvation death of Terri Schiavo. He was heartbroken that a
41 year old woman, via a court order effective March 18th,
2005, had gone a full week sans food or water. A week later
on Good Friday, Josh stepped on the property of the Pinellas
County hospice in Pinellas Park, Florida to deliver a drink
to Mrs. Schiavo. However, he was prevented by city police
from doing so and subsequently arrested for trespassing.
13 days after the court order, Terri died from dehydration
During this crisis which will go down as an indelible stain
in U.S. history, conservatives, pro-lifers and Americans of
all stripes and political parties descended on this Florida
facility, praying, singing and holding signs. Citizens from
all 50 states and people from around the world were
frantically calling, writing, faxing and e-mailing state
lawmakers, Congress, Gov. Bush, President Bush and our
courts to save Terri's life. It went down as one of
America's biggest landmark protests.
And Joshua's name made news in much of the media for doing
what he did, shining the light of truth as to what really
was happening to Terri.
However, in spite of one of the intensest, most passionate
events in our history, Americans showed Herculean restraint
from going ballistic on those who arguably contributed to
Terri's death — Terri's husband Michael, attorney George
Felos, hospice personnel, the courts, the police guarding
the facility and the ACLU of Florida. Although violence is
shunned by virtually all of the pro-life, pro-family
community (and rightly so), it would have been
understandable had someone actually entered the facility and
specifically Terri's room and physically rescued her.
Of course, that should have been the job of Jeb Bush and his
administration but we'll leave that go for now.
Fast forward almost a year later to when South Dakota's
elected officials, in bipartisan fashion, passed a complete
ban on abortion in the state, save for the life of the
mother. Gov. Mike Rounds of South Dakota literally made the
rounds and last week signed the first such state ban
And did I say that the sponsor of the ban in the Dakota
Senate, Julie Bartling, is a Democrat?
Unlike the incredibly peaceful protests in Florida, however,
the same could not be said of the pro-abortion souls who
went ballistic on Mrs. Unruh, the director of a crisis
pregnancy center in Sioux Falls. It didn't matter that she
had no power to vote for the ban. Instead of picketing
lawmakers who did so and because there is higher protection
of public servants than private individuals, the likes of
Planned Parenthood and NARAL chose an easy target in the
Unruhs to do the damage they did, not only tangibly to the
Unruh's properties but politically to the pro-abortion cause
that is their sacred cow and symbolically to the political
process they despise.
When push comes to shove, the evidence is clear who is
peaceful when the political process (even rightly so)
doesn't go their way and who is disrespectful and even
Yes, there are a tiny handful of mavericks who take matters
into their hands on occasion at abortion mills and those who
work there. However, they greatly pale in comparison to the
many intolerant individuals on the left who rip up and
deface pro-life signs and posters and even instigate
fisticuffs to get their points across. The posters with
aborted children like Baby Malachi really stir up the
emotions of the left.
Reminds me of the saying "no good deed ever goes
Funny, I can't ever recall a time where pro-lifers snatched
and tore up those carrying Planned Parenthood's "Keep
Abortion Legal" and "Save Roe" signs, among
Time to pull the plug on Roe. Better yet, time to euthanize
Roe. And do it now.
For those of you who think Roe is good, let me ask you about
the signs containing the images of aborted children. Is this
what you support? Would you support doing this to your
pregnant dog or cat? What you do think what happen if
Americans found out the local veterinarian was doing it?
Would you protest? Or would you say that you support the
right to do this to your dog or cat?
If you say yes to the last question, I guarantee that PETA
will be knocking on your door, perhaps literally. And if the
local vet is doing it, I assure you that PETA, if not the
community he or she lives in, will run him or her out of
town, that is if the state hasn't taken action to do so
And if the state catches up with that person, there is
almost likely a jail cell waiting for him or her. And if
there is a jail cell waiting for vets who would do such
things, what excuses can you Roe supporters provide that
like punishment shouldn't be provided for abortionists?
So why do you Roe backers support doing this to your fellow
human beings? I don't buy your arguments like "can't
afford a child now" or "have to finish school first"
or that you're too young. What's that saying — "you make
your own bed, you lie in it"? Grow up! Take
responsibility for your actions! And yes, there are plenty
of us willing to help such mothers in distress to either
have the child or assist in giving him or her up for
Roe lovers, please don't give me your rape exceptions. While
those are arguably traumatic, they don't erase the fact that
a child is inside such women. Women who have experienced
rape need a ton of love and support but they need not kill
that child. The woman who goes thru with such a pregnancy
and either keeps the child or surrenders him or her for
adoption is much stronger mentally and likely has a higher
degree of character than the one choosing to undergo a
second trauma, that of having her body invaded a second time
by a stranger.
Your incest exceptions don't fly either. While almost
assuredly that children born out of incest should not be
retained, it is neither permissible to kill that innocent
being. There are plenty of Americans who would jump at the
chance to adopt such children. And like the rape case, such
pregnant women should get all the help and love they need.
There is no need to kill, ever.
For those of you who think we're not ready to overturn Roe,
I understand and respect your arguments. But my responses:
(1) One abortion is one abortion too many. (2) Is 45 million
abortions not enough? (3) If not now, when?
When the pro-abortion lobby becomes unglued as seen by the
actions done to the Unruhs instead of exhibiting peaceful
demonstrations, something largely unknown to abortion
supporters, we know we're doing the right thing. It's really
no different than militant homosexual activists defacing
billboards containing pictures of former homosexuals or
sending boxes of condoms or phallic symbols to organizations
backing state marriage amendments.
Lawmakers in other states should take note and follow South
Dakota's example. Almost a dozen others have introduced
legislation to do just that. The rest of America's states
should as well, even if such may be near impossible to
obtain. Each state needs to get at least one legislator in
both their upper and lower chambers to introduce such
legislation and fight for an up or down vote to pass it.
It's time to stick the fork in the abortion industry and not
the knife in the women. If the fork won't do, the
euthanizing needle will more than serve the purpose.