Kim Moon you presume that in the absence of the ACLU that there would be no one to watch over our rights. That no one would care. That the USA would slip into whatever it is you think they will slip into.

BS there are 10,000,000 lawyers just waiting to take on causes. Get paid well like the ACLU does for taking on these supposed “Disgustful cases.”

The ACLU is self appointed to determine which rights pay well and which rights dont. They rarely take on a case if they think they are going to lose. Why is that you suppose?

Why money of course. They get to collect huge sums of money for their diligent Rights oversight. Notice they are nearly always suing the government.

Nice speech but the ACLU is nothing more then what they are “Cherry pickers with the goal of communist America.” That which you fear the USA will slip into without the ACLU oversight is exactly that which the founder of the ACLU wanted for his organization and for America.

The ACLU is an essential watchdog group. If the price to be paid for their watchdog activities is that at times they support the civil liberties of persons or groups we would prefer to not have civil liberties or freedoms, that is a price well worth paying.

Jammer,
True – if ACLU were as diligent at protecting freedom of religion as well as freedom of speech. They consistently tear down freedom of religion – even when freedom of speech is also involved.

ACLU doesn’t want religon paid for with tax dollars. Be that in the classroom, the courts, or public funded anything. The churches have plenty of money to preach their faith on their own dime and their own time.

Sam,
Recall the case of the ACLU shutting the Microphone off on a valedictorian who was delivering her speech and referenced god in her ambitions & her inspiration. Theres no public funding there at all and they specifically targeted shutting down free speech in order to shut down her freedom of religion. When I asked the ACLU would not defend their position, they simply responded saying it was their position.

There are times that the ACLU is good – I do support their supporting a pro-nazi march. I have no problem with that. What I do have a problem with is the ACLU striking down one portion of the bill of rights in favor of another.

It’s all about precedent.

Sure the Neo-Nazis are repugnant. I wish they wouldn’t be there. But the thing of it is, any argument that is used to legally suppress them can — and will — be used to silence someone else. And then it will be broadened a little to silence some other group. and then all the groups that people want to get rid of will be gone, and everyone will be happy … and then they’ll decide that this other group needs to go, and the arguments will be dusted off and tweaked a little …

Laws undergo mission creep. When the USA PATRIOT Act was up for renewal, one of the arguments was that its provisions were useful in fighting the drug war. Mission creep in action, and a sure sign that the supposedly temporary provisions of USA PATRIOT Act will be with us for good. It takes constant action and constant watchfulness to prevent that, and constant preparedness of citizens (government officials sure won’t do it) to cry foul.

No matter how repugnant, no matter how appalling, if any group’s right to speak and assemble (within the Supreme Court’s rulings on the permissible restrictions in the name of public safety) is threatened, every group’s right to speak and assemble is threatened. If public offence is held up as a sufficient criterion for preventing the ANSWP from marching, the precedent is set and who will stop a coalition of Christian Right organisations from getting a Pride march banned as offensive to public sentiment? And if enough anti-gun people are banded together in some city, maybe the NRA can legally be run out of town. It’s precisely with organisations like the ANSWP — little distasteful things that nobody wants to defend — that this kind of disastrous precedent gets set with. And so the ACLU takes up the thankless dirty job of protecting the rest of us by protecting the people nobody wants to protect. And people want to dump on it? They wish it away now, in ten or fifteen years they may be wishing it was there to protect them.

Many people deride the ACLU as liberal, but there’s a famous right-wing quote that applies perfectly to its mission: “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” Or has eternal vigilance of the citizenry over government become somehow un-American? If it has, America is a dead myth and our Constitution is just a piece of paper.

That’s where the 2nd amendment comes in!

Or white lacrosse players? *GRIN*

> The government won’t protect you from
> the government. That’s where the ACLU
> comes in.

The ACLU doesn’t protect, but often attacks citizens and government to advance its political agenda.

If anything, we need to be protected by government from the ACLU.

It’s no surprise that a backlash cottage industry has spring up on-line due to ACLU mischief.

http://www.stoptheaclu.com/

http://www.acluvsamerica.com/main/default.aspx

> Of course!

Was this a reply to the following?

“Like gun owners and Christians, for example?”

Those people are examples of those who obviously do not get equal rights or defense of their rights by the ACLU.

> In accordance with TMV’s posted policy
> on comments, one of the editors deleted
> Bill White’s post.

It’s your right as one of the editors. *wink*

I thought overall it was less bad than what else could have been posted, and it possessed some “educational” quality to it (insight about the poster).

The Government will help me when they are threatened by foreign forces.

The government won’t protect you from the government. That’s where the ACLU comes in.

Like gun owners and Christians, for example?

In accordance with TMV’s posted policy on comments, one of the editors deleted Bill White’s post.

1. I oppose the homosexual agenda not homosexuals.

2. Try addressing the substance of my post rather than twist it into something that was never said or implied!

I’ve found that people who fail to recognize the distinction, generally, have an agenda of their own.

Like gun owners and Christians, for example?

That was (too) easy.

And the ACLU support of students who support the homosexual agenda with a day of silence and t-shirt messages, but fail to support Christian students who wear t-shirts opposing that agenda and are required to remove the shirts or be suspended or expelled?

Maybe you should speak to Bill White. Given the anti-gay sentiment expressed on his website, I’m sure he’d love to support Christian students who oppose the “homosexual agenda.”

You’re correct. Thank you!

Lynx,

The city hasn’t denied the imbeciles that are the neo-nazis, the right to protest. They have restricted it due to what they say is the safety of the people. That is what they are supposed to do.

The ACLU is hoping to make this a controversy simply because it means publicity and money.

More members, more dues, more court awarded attorney fees, speaking fees.

If it were truly about rights, you wouldn’t see the inconsistancies, contradictions and hypocracies the ACLU constantly display.