Your thoughts on the ACLU

[Ben Kenobi]

They defend the right of NAMBLA to state their opinion - not some (non-existant) "right" to **** little kids.

Is there evidence that the NAMBLA abuses little children? If so, they should be punished for the act. You cannot punish them for what they say, only if they act on what they say, or if they threaten someone with violence.

I agree that what they advocate is disgusting, immoral, etc. but they still have the right to say their opinion.

Another good example would be the Klu Klux Klan, let them speak, and then thoroughly refute their position.

[Q Classic]

aclu: good group, but they don't always have their heads on straight. kinda like the nra.

[Inverse Icarus]

ACLU is a speedbump in the supremacy of the white race.

and diss, your statement:

the only problem I have is their defense of NAMBLA (north american man boy love association). How could they defend such scum?

can be generalized to: the only problem I have is their defense of [group i hate]. How could they defend such scum?

scum is relative.

[Ben Kenobi]

One need not advocate relativism, Dissident.

In fact, this discussion goes way back, as long as there have been books, there has been censorship.

That's why I favour Milton's argument, in Areopagitica:

"Let truth and falsehood grapple. Who ever knew truth to be the lesser in a free and open encounter?"

To paraphrase Milton, we are falliable beings. In censoring falsehood, we inevitably censor some truth.

[Jack_www]

Originally posted by The Templar


It's called 'free speech'. They defend the right of NAMBLA to state their opinion - not some (non-existant) "right" to **** little kids.

What? NAMBLA advocates the rape of minors. Telling people to rape kids is not protected by the bill of rights.

[Jack_www]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Is there evidence that the NAMBLA abuses little children? If so, they should be punished for the act. You cannot punish them for what they say, only if they act on what they say, or if they threaten someone with violence.

I agree that what they advocate is disgusting, immoral, etc. but they still have the right to say their opinion.

Another good example would be the Klu Klux Klan, let them speak, and then thoroughly refute their position.

The problem is that they tell their members to rape Kids! That is not protected speach.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

The ACLU is a great organization. I voted for the first option.

[Ben Kenobi]

That is not protected speach.

Agreed. That falls under advocating violence.

[Dis]

they ****ing give a step by step guide how to have sex with little children!!!!!!

The Ku Klux Klan does not give guides how to beat up black people. So that comparison is meaningless. Same with comparison to other hate groups.

[Jack_www]

Once the ACLU start to defend groups like NAMBLA right to advocate violence and rape of minors, that just shows me how low they really are. Way to go ACLU, you defend a groups right to tell people to rape kids!

[chequita guevara]

AFAIK, NAMBLA only says people should have the right. They do not tell people to go do it. It's sad that they have a guide on how to do it, but that is no more illegal than a how to build your own bomb guide. Disgusting, yes. Unprotected speech, no.

[Jack_www]

Anther thing that makes me hate the ACLU is their suit to delay the recall election in California. They got the 9th Circuit Court to delay because they will be using punch cards, the same system that elected Gray Davis. They need to be stop before they destory this country.

[Oerdin]

The punch cards have been used in every election for a half century including the recent election where Davis beat Simon.

[chequita guevara]

That's because California could not reasonably upgrade the voting booths for the 2002 election. The ACLU does realize you can't get blood from a stone.

Here's the deal. Touch screen systems have less than a 1% fallability (providing they are programmed correctly, an assumption I am not willint to make without seeing the source code and a paper record of the vote), whereas punchcards have about 4% fallability. Thus, people in countries which use punchcards will have a diminished right to vote vis a vis other counties. This violates the Equal Protection clause.

BUT (there's always a but), despite the consent decree between the ACLU and California, California has to get the permission of some Federal judge or agency to change anything related to voting in those particular counties because of some civil rights decision.

[Jack_www]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
That's because California could not reasonably upgrade the voting booths for the 2002 election. The ACLU does realize you can't get blood from a stone.

Here's the deal. Touch screen systems have less than a 1% fallability (providing they are programmed correctly, an assumption I am not willint to make without seeing the source code and a paper record of the vote), whereas punchcards have about 4% fallability. Thus, people in countries which use punchcards will have a diminished right to vote vis a vis other counties. This violates the Equal Protection clause.

BUT (there's always a but), despite the consent decree between the ACLU and California, California has to get the permission of some Federal judge or agency to change anything related to voting in those particular counties because of some civil rights decision.

The problems with punch cards can be solved if you know what you are doing and are carefull. With the touch screen voting, who is too say you cant hack into the system and screw with the results, or people mistakenly touch the wrong button, or the system crashes, or their is a major bug in the program. So yes when you are voting their is no system that can be 100% accurate and counts everyone vote. So does that mean that we should not have elections at all untill we find a 100% accurate system???

[Japher]

My view of the ACLU:

Lil' Timmy's religion prevents him from wearing jeans, thus no one should wear jeans in front of him to avoid hurting his feelings or insulting him...

The ACLU does not protect freedoms, rather they take them away

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Japher
My view of the ACLU:

Lil' Timmy's religion prevents him from wearing jeans, thus no one should wear jeans in front of him to avoid hurting his feelings or insulting him...

A more correct view of the ACLU.

Lil' Timmy's religion prevents him from wearing jeans, but his public school requires that all children wear blue jeans as part of their school uniform. Lil' Timmy's parents try to get their son an exemption based on religious grounds, but the school refuses. Lil' Timmy's parents ask the ACLU for help.

[Japher]

Lil' Timmy's religion prevents him from wearing jeans, but his public school requires that all children wear blue jeans as part of their school uniform. Lil' Timmy's parents try to get their son an exemption based on religious grounds, but the school refuses. Lil' Timmy's parents ask the ACLU for help.

OK

Then the ACLU attempts to ban the selling of blue jeans to anyone, anywhere...

I'm telling ya, they just take it too far.

[Jack_www]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


A more correct view of the ACLU.

Lil' Timmy's religion prevents him from wearing jeans, but his public school requires that all children wear blue jeans as part of their school uniform. Lil' Timmy's parents try to get their son an exemption based on religious grounds, but the school refuses. Lil' Timmy's parents ask the ACLU for help.

Sometimes the ACLU does good, but many times I agree they take things too far.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Dissident


complete lack of understanding of right wing zealots here.

Only christians are right wing zealots. Do you really think muslims are conservatives

Christianity? Islam? Same nonsense, different names. And actually right wing Muslims are pretty much the same as right wing Christians - oppressing women, bashing gays, opposing reproductive freedom (incl. the use of contraception) and trying to impose their view of virtue on everyone else by hijacking the political process.

Sounds pretty conservative to me ...

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Jack_www

What? NAMBLA advocates the rape of minors. Telling people to rape kids is not protected by the bill of rights.

IIRC, NAMBLA advocates sex with minors and opposes statutory rape schemes. In other words, they oppose the current political regime. That makes them disgusting - not criminal.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Japher
My view of the ACLU:

Lil' Timmy's religion prevents him from wearing jeans, thus no one should wear jeans in front of him to avoid hurting his feelings or insulting him...

The ACLU does not protect freedoms, rather they take them away

Care to cite an actual case where the ACLU took such a position (you can start w/ http://www.aclu,org ). Until you can cite such a case, we can assume this is more right-wing hyperbole.

[Japher]

Ten Commandments

Perhpas you should look at that sight a little more closely and thank about the implications of what the ACLU actually does. What I showed is exactly what the ACLU does, eliminates anything that insults anyone...

[chequita guevara]

That had no business being posted as it was in a public school. It was an endorsement of relgion.

On the other hand, just last week here in Florida, the ACLU said that a monument being putin a courthouse that has the Ten Commandments is perfectly fine, because it also has the Magna Carta, and other historical documents of the law. In that context, the 10C are not an endorsement of religion.

[Japher]

That had no business being posted as it was in a public school. It was an endorsement of relgion.

I agree. Yet, the solution was not the right solution. This is similar to prayer in school; by protecting others rights the ACLU likes to take rights away from others... No harm is done by someone posting the ten commandments in the hall, why don't other people post articles from the Koran as the superintendent snidely commented on?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

I heard on the radio that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has delayed the recall election.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Japher
I agree. Yet, the solution was not the right solution. This is similar to prayer in school;

What's wrong with their position on school prayer? No school led prayer or mandatory prayer or prayer as a part of official functions. Students are perfectly free to pray on their own, as are teachers and staff.

by protecting others rights the ACLU likes to take rights away from others.

Rights implicitly do that. My right to freedom of religion means you do not have the right to impose your religion upon me or use my tax dollars to endorse or celebrate your religion. My right to swing my fist ends at your right to be free from bodily injury.

No harm is done by someone posting the ten commandments in the hall,

It can create a climate of fear and harrassment for students who do not follow that religious tradition.

why don't other people post articles from the Koran as the superintendent snidely commented on?

Two wrongs don't make it right.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Japher
Ten Commandments

Having read this now, I have to wonder what solution the ACLU proposed. The school's lawyer told them to take it down and the state superintendent of schools also disagered with the posting.



Okay, what the hell is it with Christians that makes them want to shove their religion down everyone else's thoat?

[Japher]

I don't know, I hate christians too..

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Japher


I agree. Yet, the solution was not the right solution. This is similar to prayer in school; by protecting others rights the ACLU likes to take rights away from others... No harm is done by someone posting the ten commandments in the hall, why don't other people post articles from the Koran as the superintendent snidely commented on?

Uh, prayer in school is allowed - I remember people in my public high school praying. What isn't allowed is using school equipment to facilitate prayer (like the intercom) or teachers leading classes in prayer (i.e. using school time to promote religion).

Had the 10 Commandments (and BTW, was it the protestant, Jewish, or Catholic version?) been posted in an educational context it would have been fine. No, this was a school promoting religion.

Let me put it to you this way at my old high school (which had a fair number of Muslims and Hindus as well as way too many evangelicals), if a Muslim or Jewish or Hindu principle hung any items of significance from their religion, the parents of those evangelical students would have throw a hissy fit. And the ACLU would have been there to protect them from displays of Hinduism or Islam. So every time some group of right wing Christian Zealots ***** and moan that they are being oppressed, just remember, if the shoe was on the other foot with respect to some other religion - those zealots would be the first to call the ACLU.