Originally Posted by Wow Civic
Mellow, any further specifics of that story are irrelevant. Enough information in that story is there that you can gather the ACLU does not agree with Christianity. They do, however, endorse other minority's religions.
The ACLU isn't a government agency; they can endorse anything they like. It happens that you're wrong that the ACLU specifies a preference for minority religions over the majority.
I can't figure out why you, a guy who claims to be Agnostic, is carrying around a persecution complex on behalf of Christians. Whats up with that?
Originally Posted by Wow Civic
Do you honestly believe that if Gov. Hull declared December the 25th, just one day out of the year, to commemorate the birth of Jesus that the ACLU wouldn't go bizzerks? Good Grief, just look at how they've declared war on the word "CHRISTMAS" let alone if Gov. Hull set aside a day of the year to commemorate the birth of Jesus?? However, Hull, did a smart thing. She trapped the ACLU to reveal double standards against Christianity by declaring one day the "birth of Buddah." What did the ACLU do? Absolutely nothing. To declare a day "the birth of Jesus" is different than to declare a day "the birth of Buddah" --- why??
Ask the ACLU!
There's a difference between Bible Week and a day recognizing the birth of Buddha, and here it is:
Bible week celebrates the doctrine of belief that one religion follows. Ergo it is an endorsement of that religion.
A day celebrating the birth of buddha is a little less clear. I couldn't find the text of the proclamation, but I'm going to have to assume it referred to Siddartha Gautama, a buddha who lived between 563 BCE and 483 BCE. Without going into too much detail, Gautama Buddha is not the only buddha, but I can't imagine the proclamation being for anyone else.
Buddha is an important figure in Hinduism, Islam, and was even a cannonized Christian saint in the Roman Catholic Church. Without reading the proclamation I can't say for sure that Hull meant to honor or endorse one particular religion over another, and I can't see how honoring Gautama Buddha would do that. I have a hunch thats why the ACLU decided it wasn't a cause for action.