The ACLU - pros and cons

[Butterbeer]

is the "beleif in freedom and upholding freedom" by its very nature of beleif a religion also?

if so should it not be banned in public spaces?

[inked]

ACLU whiners are at it again.....
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general...s20060608.html

"Of course, the ACLU are not happy. They are calling it a blank check given to the president. Since it makes sense to most Americans, and it goes along with the best interest of national security, the ACLU don’t care for it. They were the ones calling for the Senate to review things, now they don’t like what the result was. What a bunch of whiners."
http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2006...sa-compromise/

Are they worried that the NSA will pick up their phone calls to silence their own internal critics? Hmmmmmmmm?!

[Butterbeer]

Are they worried that the NSA will pick up their phone calls to silence their own internal critics? Hmmmmmmmm?!

...wouldn't that actually really be an incredible waste of tax payers money??

but hey - you guys are ok to give em a blank cheque, right, with no checks?

they may as well do something while they order the pizza and beer, huh?

[Insidious Rex]

Originally Posted by inked

Are they worried that the NSA will pick up their phone calls to silence their own internal critics? Hmmmmmmmm?!

I think they are more concerned that our government is using illegal methods to spy on us. Someone has to attempt to check absolute power before it comes back to haunt us. So more power to em.

[inked]

Maybe they already spy on each other and know the need for shutting down the internal opposition before it overwhelms them? Or, more likely, they're just average hypocrites. I hear it happens. You know it happens. It is a human organization, IR.

[Butterbeer]

It is a human organization, IR.

as opposed to?

[GreyMouser]

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

My taxes go to support a heck of a lot I don't believe in, but nobody minds.

Simple question- should someone of a minority religion be forced to pay taxes to support the propogation of the majority religion?

[Butterbeer]

GM (wotcha btw! )

Simple question ... should there be ANY law and order on your premise there??

should someone of a minority religion be forced to pay taxes to support the propogation of the majority religion?

... just to be clear here ....


... you advocate anarchy as a serious social-political workable philosophy and discipline to mankind, here and today, in general?????

*gobsmacked*


best, BB

[GreyMouser]

Originally Posted by Butterbeer

GM (wotcha btw! )

Simple question ... should there be ANY law and order on your premise there??




... just to be clear here ....


... you advocate anarchy as a serious social-political workable philosophy and discipline to mankind, here and today, in general?????

*gobsmacked*


best, BB

Umm.... No?

Government has legitimate function, ranging from the minimalist- providing internal and external security, and then, depending on your philosophy, stretching to care of widows and orphans, fixing the roads, toting the mail, educating the future citizens, subsidised sex-change operations for transsexuals and so on...BUT

promoting one particular religious sect over the others (or none at all) is not one of them.

[Butterbeer]

thus we do not, then GM, advocate the anarchy of rejecting the state and the inherent reality of a supporting taxation??


where then, and on what basis to rail against it?

Simple question- should someone of a minority religion be forced to pay taxes to support the propogation of the majority religion?

this then becomes a non issue


(unless you avocate anarchy)

[HOBBIT]

what do any of these last several posts have to do with the ACLU?

[Huorn]

The pros on the ALCU is sometime they bring to light some abuses that may be going on in society, the cons is that they themselves may turn the abuser by marginalizing other groups of people while they are trying to protect their clients.

[Butterbeer]

Originally Posted by HOBBIT

what do any of these last several posts have to do with the ACLU?

because like the ACLU (and their worthy proponents, Hobbit ) it is all about defending free speech??



besides, barring the barring of christmas and banning BB's annual mice pies .. .... those that knock the ACLU should perhaps actually defend their arguments rather than just rail against a human organiusation that isn't always perfect.

Is the government or the church or the Military, or the Bank or the Postal service always perfect?

Why should we expect the ACLU to be?

edit** BB wishes to point out he meant mince pies, not mice pies

[HOBBIT]

those that knock the ACLU should perhaps actually defend their arguments rather than just rail against a human organiusation that isn't always perfect.

i actually agree with that. :P

[inked]

BB, the mice are relieved!

[inked]

Meanwhile, in Moscow
by Emperor Darth Misha I

Well, not actually, but what’s the difference between the ACLU and the Politburo?

LC & IB Jay (http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2006...ht-of-liberty/) reports that the internal dissent in that staunch defender of civil rights and liberties is growing. Some board members seem to feel that it’s sort of hypocritical for an organization like that to impose an official gag order on its own leadership, prohibiting them from criticizing the decisions they make.

We’re shocked. How the Hell did those free thinkers survive the purges of that Stalinist organization for long enough to get a seat on the board?

So far, they’ve had little luck. The gag order stands, but the discussion isn’t over.

Unfortunately for the neo-Stalinists of the ACLU, they don’t have the options open to the idols of their founder, Roger Baldwin. Rounding the dissenters up and shooting them in a forest somewhere just isn’t all that easy to get away with in America. At least not yet, but that’s what they’ve been working to change ever since they started:

“I am for socialism, disarmament, and, ultimately, for abolishing the state itself… I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and the sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal.” – Roger Baldwin, founder of the ACLU.

But in order to reach that goal, it’s important that nobody ever figures out what they’re really up to. Again, in the words of their founder:

“Do Steer away from making it look like a socialist enterprise. We want to get a lot of flags, talk a good deal about the Constitution and what our forefathers wanted to make of the country and show that we are really the folks that stand by the spirit of our institutions.”
…and that’ll only work if you can make sure that nobody within the organization ever speaks Truth to Power™.

more at: http://www.nicedoggie.net/2006/

[GreyMouser]

Originally Posted by inked

Meanwhile, in Moscow
by Emperor Darth Misha I

Well, not actually, but what’s the difference between the ACLU and the Politburo?

LC & IB Jay (http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2006...ht-of-liberty/) reports that the internal dissent in that staunch defender of civil rights and liberties is growing. Some board members seem to feel that it’s sort of hypocritical for an organization like that to impose an official gag order on its own leadership, prohibiting them from criticizing the decisions they make.

We’re shocked. How the Hell did those free thinkers survive the purges of that Stalinist organization for long enough to get a seat on the board?

So far, they’ve had little luck. The gag order stands, but the discussion isn’t over.

Unfortunately for the neo-Stalinists of the ACLU, they don’t have the options open to the idols of their founder, Roger Baldwin. Rounding the dissenters up and shooting them in a forest somewhere just isn’t all that easy to get away with in America. At least not yet, but that’s what they’ve been working to change ever since they started:

“I am for socialism, disarmament, and, ultimately, for abolishing the state itself… I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and the sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal.” – Roger Baldwin, founder of the ACLU.

But in order to reach that goal, it’s important that nobody ever figures out what they’re really up to. Again, in the words of their founder:

“Do Steer away from making it look like a socialist enterprise. We want to get a lot of flags, talk a good deal about the Constitution and what our forefathers wanted to make of the country and show that we are really the folks that stand by the spirit of our institutions.”
…and that’ll only work if you can make sure that nobody within the organization ever speaks Truth to Power™.

more at: http://www.nicedoggie.net/2006/

OTOH

Volokh on ACLU-Derangement-Syndrome
This is exactly the type of ridiculous and over-the-top rhetoric that I frequently blast here regarding the ACLU, and it's nice to see Prof. Volokh jump on it. He begins by noting that after the 1930s and the Hitler-Stalin Pact, Roger Baldwin (the founder of the ACLU) became an outspoken critic of the Soviet Union and of communism. He wrote a book called A New Slavery, referring specifically to forced labor under communist governments and purged the ACLU of all communists involved at the time, presiding over the organization's trial of communist Elizabeth Gurley Flynn himself.

http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2006/01/
"


Yes, in the 20s and 30s many left-wingers were guilty of supporting Communism/ Stalinism, just as many on the right (including Churchill and Lindbergh) felt that Fascism was just what was needed to make the trains run on time.

[inked]

ah, those were the days, my friends,
we though they'd never end...................

[HOBBIT]

the ACLU is really pushing to prevent the flag burning amedment from passing in congress right now. I just got called by them :P

[inked]

let 'em go to Iran and burn the Iranian flag!