Regarding "A note about the Atheist Legal Center"

Larry Darby ldarbyesq at
Mon Jan 2 02:51:14 PST 2006

Surely Volokh is smart enough to know that the proper name is "Atheist
Law Center", or is he?  Did he not even visit the company web site?
I now present my views as to Eugene Volokh's sophomoric attempt at
[yellow] journalism.  Volokh is not an honest man.  When Volokh
contacted me about his "correspondent", who by the way is an atheist
known to me to be highly unstable or irrational (i.e. crazy), Volokh did
not try and hide the fact that he had a conclusion he wanted to present
on his weblog and that Volokh would not be engaging in ethical
journalism or even some pretense of an ivory tower academic pursuit.
Volokh was out to denigrate me, which is par for the course for those
who, as Albert Einstein wrote, thrive on the oppression they create (see
full quote below). I counseled Volokh several times that if he wanted to
discuss the issues, I would do so.  He ignored or rejected my proposals
and went on to write very poorly, considering he is a "professor" (or is
he "doctor"?), his piece that put Volokh squarely in the camp with the
Traditional Enemies of Free Speech. Volokh seems to think that calling
people names or presenting other tired canards will stop truth-seekers.
That is not working anymore in the United States, though the advent of
hate crimes by the Federal and State Legislatures has us well on the way
of falling in line with the benighted lands of Canada, a handful of
countries in Europe and one state in Australia, for examples.  More and
more people are wondering what has happened to our Republic and more and
more people are awakening from a dumbed-down trance or stupor of 4 or 5
decades, when it has been politically correct to ignore anything
negative when, for example, US foreign policy in regard to the Jewish
state should be discussed, but I digress. (We just blindly continue to
pay U$Trillions in tribute, as if the US Constitution really is based on
submission to Jewish law via the Noahide laws.) Preserving the myths
regarding "the holocaust", which is a modern religion for Zionists or
Israel-Firsters, is what motivated Volokh to write his piece about me,
without interviewing me or addressing genuine issues.  Criticism of
Trotskyism or Communism, which is the ideology of the Nonconservatives
(Jewish and Jewish-Christian Zionists), is what Volokh feared.  He later
revealed that he had lied to me when he claimed he did not know what
"MOT" means, but I digress again, which is easy to do when pretentious
"scholars" reveal insidious motives that, if successful, will result in
the destruction of our Republic or the principles of individual
liberties forged during the Enlightenment and manifested in the US
Constitution.  A reason why the Traditional Enemies of Free Speech are
quick to holler "anti-semite" or "holocaust denier" or "anti-Jew" (terms
of art for Zionists) is that they fear that when a truth-seeker begins
looking into taboos of Judaism, World Jewry or its organizations, and
their global endeavors, that their cover will be blown, so to speak.  In
my investigations of modern mythology, such as the Six Millions Lie,
which by the way was first trotted out by Zionists during or immediately
after World War One, there is a nasty aspect that is too often ignored -
that of Jewish Supremacism.  I've noticed megalomania or superiority
complexes even with so-called secular Jews.  Even though so-called
secular Jews reject the existence of YHWH (the Jewish God of War, the
surviving god of all the gods Jews once worshiped) who made them the
Master Race, according to the Tanakh, so-called secular Jews are still
Jewish Supremacists.
I think Gilad Atzmon sums up how it is:
I argue that once you strip Jewishness of its spiritual content you are
left with mere racism.  Gilad Atzmon, Israeli-born, raised as a "secular
Jew", who later renounced his Jewishness altogether.  Dec. 21, 2005 in
San Francisco Independent Media.
A good reference site on Jewish Supremacism (the real racism) is
Explore it as there are many links within links.
Many Americans are brain-warped to believe that criticizing Judaism or
Jewry or US foreign policy regarding Israel is taboo.  Many people don't
understand that the offensive (not defensive) terms of art, such as
"anti-semite", are just weapons employed by the Traditional Enemies of
Free Speech to quash free inquiry and free expression about subjects
that lead to greater awareness and understanding of the elephant in the
living room.
For Light and Liberty (and a USA-First government),
Larry Darby
"Anti-Semitism is nothing but the antagonistic attitude produced in the
non-Jew by the Jewish group. The Jewish group has thrived on oppression
and on the antagonism it has forever met in the world." -- Albert
Einstein, in Collier's Magazine, November 26, 1938
gins/+%22david+irving%22+origins+Einstein&hl=en> &hl=en
-----Original Message-----
From: religionlaw-bounces at
[mailto:religionlaw-bounces at] On Behalf Of
alclegal at
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 9:05 PM
To: religionlaw at
Subject: Regarding "A note about the Atheist Legal Center"
Dear Moderator:
I am the new president of the Atheist Law Center (ALC), and I feel
obliged to respond to the following post by Eugene Volokh on 12 Dec
2005.  I've provided an edited version of his comments, followed by my
"Since people on this list specialize in the law of government and
religion, they might be interested in the activities of the Atheist
Legal Center, and might even be inclined to work together with them on
some matters.  (I would have been one such, on certain subjects.)"

I welcome the inclination of your members to work with the ALC on our
most pressing issue -- the absolute separation of religion and
Government.  It takes a great deal of time and energy to stop the
dismantling of Liberty at state and federal levels of government, and I
believe we can counter these efforts by working together instead of
against each other.
"Given this, I thought I'd pass along an item I posted about the Atheist
Legal Center's former president and Alabama Attorney General candidate
Larry Darby -- who, by coincidence, has also participated on this list.
Mr. Darby has stepped down as the head of the Center in order to run for
AG, so perhaps his replacement does not share the views I describe
While it does not matter whether I or the ALC shares your views about
Larry Darby,  I would like to insist that the Center's correct name be
used (it's Atheist Law -- not Legal -- Center).
"On the other hand, his having been involved in the group, and the
Center's having hosted David Irving while Mr. Darby was president, makes
me concerned about the group more broadly.  It seems to me very
important that irreligious people participate in public debate, to
defend the legitimacy of their views, and to protect
themselves against religious discrimination and hostility. I don't agree
with everything that all atheist activists urge; for instance, I don't
think that the Establishment Clause is properly interpreted as banning
religious speech by the government. Nonetheless, there are indeed some
egregious forms of discrimination against the irreligious (or the less
religious), for instance in child custody cases - these should be
assiduously fought.  I therefore have nothing at all against atheist
political movements in general, nor do I have any reason to believe that
atheists generally have any hostility towards Jews, or affection for
David Duke. Yet this makes it all the more important, it seems to me,
for atheists who are deciding whom to ally themselves with - or for that
matter, for members of other groups, such as Scouting for All or any
marijuana decriminalization groups - to know Mr. Darby's views that I
describe above, views with which I hope most atheists much disagree." 
I simply do not understand "concerns" about the ALC simply because of
Larry Darby and David Irving.  It is important that citizens participate
in the public debate, but it is even more important that ALL citizens
receive as much information as possible so they can make up their own
minds.  Both Darby and Irving provided such information from different
perspectives.  Listening to all sides of issues does not mean that
atheists "ally" themselves with those who disseminate such information.
It means we embrace free inquiry and discussion first, and then chose
our own level of acceptance of that information.  For the record,
Irving's presentation in Alabama last summer was a discussion of the
English legal system as it related to his case.  Would you have us
ignore this first hand account simply because of other's opinions?  It
that were true, how on earth would anyone get through law school?
"Likewise, Alabama Democrats should know who's running in their primary,
and should keep in mind the views I note above, even if some of them are
tempted to
agree with him on marijuana decriminalization, juvenile justice, or even
religion in public life. (I doubt there are that many Alabama Democrats
who do agree with him on those latter issues, but I imagine there are
Yes, there are enough Alabama citizens who agree with Darby's views to
make Darby a viable candidate for AG.  We "know" about Darby...he's been
a reputable, consistent representative of our frustration with our
current state government.  We are Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians,
and Independents.  We can see through the smoke screen of the current
status quo, listen to all sides of the issues, and make up our own
minds.  Doubts do not deter us -- they challenge us.

"And it's also important for Jews - even in America, the place in the
world in which it is probably safest to be a Jew - to be reminded that
these sorts of views do exist in America, and in what might to many seem
like quite unlikely circles."
This comment perpetuates the myth that Atheists are the enemy.  America
doesn't promise safety, equality, or fairness.  America doesn't promise
that you won't be personally demonized for your opinions - as some on
this service seem to relish.  America does, however, promise via the
First Amendment the opportunity and the potential for a rational life,
by stating explicity that the Government will stay out of religion.
There is no quote on the Statue of Liberty that says "I lift up my lamp
for the religious only."  America promises a forum for all ideas, even
those we may personally abhor.  We are all enriched and enlightened by
the forum and the participants.
Carol Moore, President
Atheist Law Center
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Religionlaw mailing list