| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
20 Oct 2005 12:47:33 AM |
| Object: |
100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
Americans are getting sick and tired of having decency and morality torn
from our social fabric by the ACLU. The days when they defended the
downtrodden are long past. They are nothing now but a tool for the liberal,
atheist establishment.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46784
100,000 back bill to curb ACLU
Petition urges Congress to act on legislation
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
----
A grass-roots group is mobilizing more than 100,000 Americans to urge
Congress to pass a bill that would curb the ACLU by denying plaintiff
attorneys the right to collect attorneys fees in lawsuits targeting religion
in the public square.
The petition by the Center for Reclaiming America calls for "a stand against
the ACLU's radical agenda, which undermines our nation's moral and religious
heritage."
The group says it already has 100,000 signatures and hopes to garner another
30,000.
The petition reads:
As a concerned citizen, I am taking a stand against the ACLU's radical
agenda, which undermines our nation's moral and religious heritage. I join
with citizens across the nation in protest of ACLU policies and actions to
strip faith in God from the public square while promoting anti-family and
pro-homosexual initiatives. I am calling on leaders in government and media
to tell the truth about the ACLU's radical agenda. Furthermore, I demand
lawmakers take the necessary steps to eliminate the monetary motives behind
the ACLU's campaign to remove all mention of God from the public square. The
ACLU does not represent me nor the vast majority of American citizens.
.
|
|
| User: "Mitchell Holman" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
20 Oct 2005 09:26:39 AM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
news:ArWdnfTPPMqWrcrenZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d@giganews.com:
Americans are getting sick and tired of having decency and morality torn
from our social fabric by the ACLU. The days when they defended the
downtrodden are long past. They are nothing now but a tool for the
liberal, atheist establishment.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46784
100,000 back bill to curb ACLU
Petition urges Congress to act on legislation
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- -
----
A grass-roots group is mobilizing more than 100,000 Americans to urge
Congress to pass a bill that would curb the ACLU by denying plaintiff
attorneys the right to collect attorneys fees in lawsuits targeting
religion in the public square.
The petition by the Center for Reclaiming America calls for "a stand
against the ACLU's radical agenda, which undermines our nation's moral
and religious heritage."
The group says it already has 100,000 signatures and hopes to garner
another 30,000.
The petition reads:
As a concerned citizen, I am taking a stand against the ACLU's radical
agenda, which undermines our nation's moral and religious heritage. I
join with citizens across the nation in protest of ACLU policies and
actions to strip faith in God from the public square while promoting
anti-family and pro-homosexual initiatives. I am calling on leaders in
government and media to tell the truth about the ACLU's radical agenda.
Furthermore, I demand lawmakers take the necessary steps to eliminate
the monetary motives behind the ACLU's campaign to remove all mention of
God from the public square. The ACLU does not represent me nor the vast
majority of American citizens.
Please name one law overturned by the ACLU,
one religious display removed by the ACLU, or
one criminal freed by the ACLU.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Joseph Welch" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
20 Oct 2005 10:39:30 AM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ArWdnfTPPMqWrcrenZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
Americans are getting sick and tired of having decency and morality torn
from our social fabric by the ACLU.
No, America isn't - because the ACLU does no such thing.
--
JW
***************
"You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have
you left no sense of decency?"
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/welch-mccarthy.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
20 Oct 2005 11:57:07 AM |
|
|
Joseph Welch wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ArWdnfTPPMqWrcrenZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
Americans are getting sick and tired of having decency and morality
torn from our social fabric by the ACLU.
No, America isn't - because the ACLU does no such thing.
Wellll. They did defend Rush Limbaugh and if we apply fundie standards to it
we can ignore the reasons and condemn them for that.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Harry Flynt" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
20 Oct 2005 04:31:02 PM |
|
|
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Joseph Welch wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ArWdnfTPPMqWrcrenZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
Americans are getting sick and tired of having decency and morality
torn from our social fabric by the ACLU.
No, America isn't - because the ACLU does no such thing.
Wellll. They did defend Rush Limbaugh and if we apply fundie standards to
it we can ignore the reasons and condemn them for that.
We should condem and shun them for defending NAMBLA. Right?
Harry
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mimi Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
20 Oct 2005 05:25:56 PM |
|
|
Harry Flynt wrote:
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Joseph Welch wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ArWdnfTPPMqWrcrenZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
Americans are getting sick and tired of having decency and morality
torn from our social fabric by the ACLU.
No, America isn't - because the ACLU does no such thing.
Wellll. They did defend Rush Limbaugh and if we apply fundie standards to
it we can ignore the reasons and condemn them for that.
We should condem and shun them for defending NAMBLA. Right?
Harry
Wrong as usual. I realize this is a difficult concept for you but EVERY
AMERICAN whether you like them or not (personally I find NAMBLA stomach
turning) is guaranteed the same rights as every other American. I,
personally thought it was atrocious that the Nazis marched in Skokie,
but the ACLU was correct in defending their rights. A day is going to
come when you RRR fascists are going to need them and they'll even be
there defending your right to do vile unspeakable but LEGAL things.
Jeeez you're a moron.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
27 Oct 2005 02:01:00 PM |
|
|
Mimi Cohen wrote:
Harry Flynt wrote:
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Joseph Welch wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ArWdnfTPPMqWrcrenZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
Americans are getting sick and tired of having decency and morality
torn from our social fabric by the ACLU.
No, America isn't - because the ACLU does no such thing.
Wellll. They did defend Rush Limbaugh and if we apply fundie standards to
it we can ignore the reasons and condemn them for that.
We should condem and shun them for defending NAMBLA. Right?
Harry
Wrong as usual. I realize this is a difficult concept for you but EVERY
AMERICAN whether you like them or not (personally I find NAMBLA stomach
turning) is guaranteed the same rights as every other American.
Great, but irrelevant. The ACLU decides which cases it'll take and
which ones it won't. Don't cry.
I,
personally thought it was atrocious that the Nazis marched in Skokie,
but the ACLU was correct in defending their rights.
Of course if there was ever a protest against Muslims and the bombs
they use to proselityze, the ACLU would be AWOL, since they're utterly
in love with that "religion."
A day is going to
come when you RRR fascists are going to need them and they'll even be
there defending your right to do vile unspeakable but LEGAL things.
The ACLU does little these days except install far-left minority rule,
protect the due-process "rights" of terrorists, and get as many
illegals into the country as possible. Try not to let that destroy you.
Jeeez you're a moron.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Bohlman" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
27 Oct 2005 04:17:31 PM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1130439660.008533.266340@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Mimi Cohen wrote:
Wrong as usual. I realize this is a difficult concept for you but
EVERY AMERICAN whether you like them or not (personally I find NAMBLA
stomach turning) is guaranteed the same rights as every other
American.
Great, but irrelevant. The ACLU decides which cases it'll take and
which ones it won't. Don't cry.
In deciding which cases it will take, the ACLU mostly considers the
precedents that a decision could set. In the case involving NAMBLA, a
decision against them would set some extremely sweeping and disastrous
precedents. One of them would be that a company that provides Web space
could be held liable for the actions of anybody who viewed or read material
posted by one of that company's customers. In particular, that would allow
corporations to sue Web hosts on the grounds that material posted by
customers negatively affected their stock prices. The upshot of all this
would be that Web hosting would become unaffordable for most people.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mimi Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
27 Oct 2005 09:30:20 PM |
|
|
Eric Bohlman wrote:
omarenoryt@aol.com wrote in
news:1130439660.008533.266340@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Mimi Cohen wrote:
Wrong as usual. I realize this is a difficult concept for you but
EVERY AMERICAN whether you like them or not (personally I find NAMBLA
stomach turning) is guaranteed the same rights as every other
American.
Great, but irrelevant. The ACLU decides which cases it'll take and
which ones it won't. Don't cry.
In deciding which cases it will take, the ACLU mostly considers the
precedents that a decision could set. In the case involving NAMBLA, a
decision against them would set some extremely sweeping and disastrous
precedents. One of them would be that a company that provides Web space
could be held liable for the actions of anybody who viewed or read material
posted by one of that company's customers. In particular, that would allow
corporations to sue Web hosts on the grounds that material posted by
customers negatively affected their stock prices. The upshot of all this
would be that Web hosting would become unaffordable for most people.
Ah, a voice of wisdom in the wilderness, thank you for that breath of
fresh air.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
27 Oct 2005 09:47:27 PM |
|
|
Eric Bohlman wrote:
In particular, that would allow corporations to sue Web hosts on the
grounds that material posted by customers negatively affected their stock
prices. The upshot of all this would be that Web hosting would become
unaffordable for most people.
When people abuse their rights, as so many American webmasters have, it's
good and that it should become unaffordable for them to continue to do so.
Every 10 year old is 10 clicks away from a bottle of Viagra, Hydrocodone or
the ingredients for a pipe bomb and a meth lab.
Clearly, something has to be done.
Since the dollar-ballot is the only ballot that *really* counts, fighting
these predators on the economic front makes perfect sense.
Anybody will always be able to setup their own web server, and work from
that.
But if they ask the legitimate market to act as a co-conspirator in their
bad acts, they should be disappointed.
--
I'm gonna be a happy idiot, and struggle for the legal tender.
Where the ads take aim,
And lay their claim,
To the heart and the soul of the spender.
And believe in whatever they lie,
Of these things that money can buy.
Though true love, surely should have been a contender.
Say a prayer for the pretender.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Bohlman" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
29 Oct 2005 05:48:58 PM |
|
|
"Sanders Kaufman" <sanderskaufman@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:3jg8f.7245$q%.285@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com:
Eric Bohlman wrote:
In particular, that would allow corporations to sue Web hosts on the
grounds that material posted by customers negatively affected their
stock prices. The upshot of all this would be that Web hosting would
become unaffordable for most people.
When people abuse their rights, as so many American webmasters have,
it's good and that it should become unaffordable for them to continue
to do so.
Every 10 year old is 10 clicks away from a bottle of Viagra,
Hydrocodone or the ingredients for a pipe bomb and a meth lab.
Clearly, something has to be done.
Since the dollar-ballot is the only ballot that *really* counts,
fighting these predators on the economic front makes perfect sense.
Nothing on the NAMBLA site that's the subject of the case was illegal.
There was no child pornography or even pornography period. The claim is
that the *ideas* expressed on the site caused third parties to behave
dangerously.
Anybody will always be able to setup their own web server, and work
from that.
Provided they have sufficient cash (a colo with a T1 to backbone doesn't
come cheap; a box at home hooked to a regular ISP by DSL/cable would
suffer the same legal problems as remote hosting since the ISP could be
held responsible) and sysadmin skills; that's a small percentage of the
people who currently have Web sites.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
29 Oct 2005 11:09:10 PM |
|
|
"Eric Bohlman" <ebohlman@omsdev.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96FEB70DA70C6ebohlmanomsdevcom@130.133.1.4...
Nothing on the NAMBLA site that's the subject of the case was illegal.
There was no child pornography or even pornography period. The claim is
that the *ideas* expressed on the site caused third parties to behave
dangerously.
That's a lie.
You predators were using their site to coordinate your efforts to hunt down
and attack children.
When your sick ideas became real plans, something had to be done about you.
--
We Americans can never be safe from Muslim terrorists until we neutralize
our own Militant Christian insurgency.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
29 Oct 2005 11:17:12 PM |
|
|
On 27-Oct-2005, "Sanders Kaufman" <sanderskaufman@hotmail.com> wrote:
Eric Bohlman wrote:
In particular, that would allow corporations to sue Web hosts on the
grounds that material posted by customers negatively affected their
stock
prices. The upshot of all this would be that Web hosting would become
unaffordable for most people.
When people abuse their rights, as so many American webmasters have, it's
good and that it should become unaffordable for them to continue to do so.
Every 10 year old is 10 clicks away from a bottle of Viagra, Hydrocodone
or
the ingredients for a pipe bomb and a meth lab.
Clearly, something has to be done.
Yes, the parents should keep their credit card information away from their
little psychopaths.
You are the kind who would sue Detroit because someone used a car to run
someone downj.
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
30 Oct 2005 02:03:54 AM |
|
|
<flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message news:cPX8f.15172$7Z5.7987@trnddc07...
On 27-Oct-2005, "Sanders Kaufman" <sanderskaufman@hotmail.com> wrote:
Every 10 year old is 10 clicks away from a bottle of Viagra, Hydrocodone
or
the ingredients for a pipe bomb and a meth lab.
Clearly, something has to be done.
Yes, the parents should keep their credit card information away from their
little psychopaths.
You are the kind who would sue Detroit because someone used a car to run
someone downj.
Be that as it may - something has to be done.
Your belief that we should just trust parents to keep their kids in line
isn't working.
They still end up raising little trouble-makers like you.
So it's up to the rest of us to do something about you.
I'd rather my tax money went to AIDS shots in Africa or somesuch.
But charity begins at home.
That's conservatism.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brian Westley" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
01 Nov 2005 06:02:35 PM |
|
|
"Sanders Kaufman" <sanderskaufman@hotmail.com> writes:
<flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message news:cPX8f.15172$7Z5.7987@trnddc07...
On 27-Oct-2005, "Sanders Kaufman" <sanderskaufman@hotmail.com> wrote:
Every 10 year old is 10 clicks away from a bottle of Viagra, Hydrocodone
or
the ingredients for a pipe bomb and a meth lab.
Clearly, something has to be done.
Yes, the parents should keep their credit card information away from their
little psychopaths.
You are the kind who would sue Detroit because someone used a car to run
someone downj.
Be that as it may - something has to be done.
Your belief that we should just trust parents to keep their kids in line
isn't working.
They still end up raising little trouble-makers like you.
So it's up to the rest of us to do something about you.
Just ***** and die, will you? There's a good fellow.
---
Merlyn LeRoy
PS: Really, ***** and die. You're a waste of skin.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "No One" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
30 Oct 2005 01:51:06 AM |
|
|
writes:
On 27-Oct-2005, "Sanders Kaufman" <sanderskaufman@hotmail.com> wrote:
Eric Bohlman wrote:
In particular, that would allow corporations to sue Web hosts on
the grounds that material posted by customers negatively
affected their stock prices. The upshot of all this would be
that Web hosting would become unaffordable for most people.
When people abuse their rights, as so many American webmasters have, it's
good and that it should become unaffordable for them to continue to do so.
I think Eric (and the ACLU) is right. BTW, I don't know much about
NAMBLA, having enough trouble just remembering what the damn acronym
stands for, but a couple of months ago I was helping some people I
know who were trying to use a web server for a perfectly legal,
mainstream, personal activity that would require encryption because
some financial data was involved. I tried to find a cheap certificate
authority, and tried a google search, using more or less technical
terms in the search, and stumbled across some site that was apparently
setting up certificates for men interested in little boys.
Needless to say, I dropped that site like a hot potato (and I don't
remember its name, so don't ask), but you can be pretty damn sure
about what it means - these creeps are probably using client-side
certificates (SSL allows that) so that only they can access their
servers, pretty much keeping the FBI and other law enforcement types
out.
This may make these guys harder to nab, but at least there is a
one silver lining - it keeps the kids out as well.
Every 10 year old is 10 clicks away from a bottle of Viagra,
Hydrocodone or the ingredients for a pipe bomb and a meth lab.
Clearly, something has to be done.
If there are 10 links per page, that means the 10 year old will actually
have to search 10 billion pages to find anything if he simply follows
links doing a depth first or breadth first search.
You should be more worried about the 10 year old running out of the
driveway chasing a ball.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
30 Oct 2005 02:03:56 AM |
|
|
"No One" <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:m3d5lnbiri.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net...
You should be more worried about the 10 year old running out of the
driveway chasing a ball.
That's easy.
Just set them in front of a computer and don't let them go out and play.
Nope - wait, they're not safe there either, are they?
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Secretary of HomInt3rn" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
30 Oct 2005 03:32:20 AM |
|
|
I was busily flonking away in alt.politics.homosexuality, when The Goddess
Eris Herself suddenly made me reply to Sanders Kaufman:
"No One" wrote...
You should be more worried about the 10 year old running out of the
driveway chasing a ball.
That's easy.
Just set them in front of a computer and don't let them go out and play.
Nope - wait, they're not safe there either, are they?
So what? The only truly "safe" place is the *grave*.
--
___________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! "The personal _is_ political."
Bent Depraved N. Deviant *****-Smoker, Esq., Superfaggot; Cross-Poster for
Goddess
"Stupidity excuses nothing. It's only a reason...." -- Phxbrd
Economic Left/Right: -7.63 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.38
"The whining has just begun." -- John Wentzky
Killfiled by: directory; Anim8rfsk
"It's not nice to misrepresent Mother Nature."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "L. Michael Roberts" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
28 Oct 2005 07:59:32 AM |
|
|
Sanders Kaufman wrote:
Eric Bohlman wrote:
In particular, that would allow corporations to sue Web hosts on the
grounds that material posted by customers negatively affected their stock
prices. The upshot of all this would be that Web hosting would become
unaffordable for most people.
When people abuse their rights, as so many American webmasters have, it's
good and that it should become unaffordable for them to continue to do so.
Every 10 year old is 10 clicks away from a bottle of Viagra, Hydrocodone or
the ingredients for a pipe bomb and a meth lab.
Clearly, something has to be done.
Agreed.... and the simplest and most effective solution is to put the
Internet access computer in the living room or dining room where any
parent entering the room can see what is on the screen when the kids are
using the net. Those who advocate censorship or limitations on the
Internet are usually lazy parents who don't want to be actively involved
in guiding their children.
Why should the vast majority of net users who are consenting adults
have their access and free speech rights abrogated by shiftless parents?
<snip>
--
+==================== L. Michael Roberts ======================+
This represents my personal opinion and NOT Company policy
Goderich, Ont, Canada. To reply, post a request for my valid E-mail
"Life is a sexually transmitted, terminal, condition"
+================================================================+
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
28 Oct 2005 08:29:35 AM |
|
|
"L. Michael Roberts" <L_Michael_Roberts@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:8qadnVfU_Pktvf_eRVn-gw@golden.net...
Sanders Kaufman wrote:
Every 10 year old is 10 clicks away from a bottle of Viagra, Hydrocodone
or the ingredients for a pipe bomb and a meth lab.
Clearly, something has to be done.
Agreed.... and the simplest and most effective solution is to put the
That option is already available... and has proven to be ineffective.
Those who advocate censorship or limitations on the Internet are usually
lazy parents who don't want to be actively involved in guiding their
children.
Yeah - usually.
That's why something has to be done.
Because there are so many bad parents out there.
Your idea - that we rely on the effectiveness and intitiative of those bad
parents - well, it's just not working.
Have you heard about how kids throw Rages (like Raves)?
A thousand kids will descend on an area, and wreck it.
Then they disperse 10 minutes later.
Al Quaeda could do that too, if they chose to.
Why should the vast majority of net users who are consenting adults have
their access and free speech rights abrogated by shiftless parents?
To provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure
the bleffings of liberty... to ourfelves and our profperity.
If the founding fathers were willing to sacrafice their lives, fortunes and
honor - the least you could sacrafice is porn.
-- The Devil's Advocate.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Secretary of HomInt3rn" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
28 Oct 2005 09:47:43 AM |
|
|
I was busily flonking away in alt.politics.homosexuality, when The Goddess
Eris Herself suddenly made me reply to Sanders Kaufman:
Why should the vast majority of net users who are consenting adults have
their access and free speech rights abrogated by shiftless parents?
To provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure
the bleffings of liberty... to ourfelves and our profperity.
If the founding fathers were willing to sacrafice their lives, fortunes
and honor - the least you could sacrafice is porn.
Yes, as long as the porn itself remains online -- if Americans choose to go
down such a road, well, we can't really stop them, but if they try to force
the rest of the world to accept their puritanical tyranny, they'll be in
for WWIV (#3 being the Cold War, natch).
--
___________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! "The personal _is_ political."
Bent Depraved N. Deviant *****-Smoker, Esq., Superfaggot
"Stupidity excuses nothing. It's only a reason...." -- Phxbrd
Economic Left/Right: -7.63 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.38
"The whining has just begun." -- John Wentzky
Killfiled by: directory; Anim8rfsk
"It's not nice to misrepresent Mother Nature."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
28 Oct 2005 04:22:11 AM |
|
|
On 27 Oct 2005 12:01:00 -0700, wrote:
Wrong as usual. I realize this is a difficult concept for you but EVERY
AMERICAN whether you like them or not (personally I find NAMBLA stomach
turning) is guaranteed the same rights as every other American.
Great, but irrelevant. The ACLU decides which cases it'll take and
which ones it won't. Don't cry.
So, essentially, you believe in the constitutional right of freedom of speech
for all, but only so long as they are saying things that you like or agree with.
The ACLU did not defend NAMBLA's morality, only their right voice it.
But tell us: What protections would you remove from the First Amendment?
I will bet, that the changes you would make, are the changes that would turn
your country, into a "one political party", theocracy, wherein the only freedom
of speech allowed, would be to agree with the church/government; All other
speech, being heresy or treason.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
28 Oct 2005 11:06:23 AM |
|
|
Dubh Ghall wrote:
On 27 Oct 2005 12:01:00 -0700, wrote:
Wrong as usual. I realize this is a difficult concept for you but EVERY
AMERICAN whether you like them or not (personally I find NAMBLA stomach
turning) is guaranteed the same rights as every other American.
Great, but irrelevant. The ACLU decides which cases it'll take and
which ones it won't. Don't cry.
So, essentially, you believe in the constitutional right of freedom of speech
for all, but only so long as they are saying things that you like or agree with.
If you're going to lie, try not doing it in the face of so much
contradictory evidence.
The ACLU did not defend NAMBLA's morality, only their right voice it.
Their choices betray their morality. Try not to let that destroy you.
But tell us: What protections would you remove from the First Amendment?
I will bet, that the changes you would make, are the changes that would turn
your country, into a "one political party", theocracy, wherein the only freedom
of speech allowed, would be to agree with the church/government; All other
speech, being heresy or treason.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
28 Oct 2005 01:48:55 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Dubh Ghall wrote:
On 27 Oct 2005 12:01:00 -0700, wrote:
Wrong as usual. I realize this is a difficult concept for you but
EVERY AMERICAN whether you like them or not (personally I find
NAMBLA stomach turning) is guaranteed the same rights as every
other American.
Great, but irrelevant. The ACLU decides which cases it'll take and
which ones it won't. Don't cry.
So, essentially, you believe in the constitutional right of freedom
of speech for all, but only so long as they are saying things that
you like or agree with.
If you're going to lie, try not doing it in the face of so much
contradictory evidence.
You are supporting the will of a small minority to remove the right of free
speech from the ACLU.
The ACLU did not defend NAMBLA's morality, only their right voice it.
Their choices betray their morality. Try not to let that destroy you.
Naturally the bigots only make noise when something they like is defended.
When the right to carry bibles, put up nativity scenes, form christian clubs
or defend JERRY FALWELL happens they don't bother to mention it.
"The ACLU of Virginia, like other state ACLU offices, stands at the
forefront of defending religious freedom. Several years ago, for example, I
received a call from a Baptist minister in Richmond who was concerned about
an ordinance that severely restricted his program for feeding homeless
people. He said that providing alms to the poor was part of the church's
purpose, and that he felt it was unfair for the city to interfere. We filed
a free exercise lawsuit on behalf of several churches and won.
When Rita Warren was told she could not place a nativity scene in front of
the Fairfax County Government Complex because she was not a county resident,
we took her case. We argued that all people, regardless of where they live,
and all messages, whether religious or not, are equally welcome in a public
forum. The court agreed with us.
Last year, a Jehovah's Witness called us to say that she was being told she
could not get a promotion with the Department of Defense unless she signed
an oath swearing full faith and allegiance to the government. As a Jehovah's
Witness, however, she was not allowed to swear allegiance to any entity
other than God. When the Defense Department refused to reword the oath to
accommodate the employee's religious beliefs, we sued. Soon thereafter, the
oath was rewritten.
In a couple of weeks, the ACLU of Virginia will be filing a legal brief on
behalf of Jerry Falwell, who is challenging a Virginia law that restricts
the amount of land churches may own. The ACLU, at Falwell's invitation, is
arguing that the law infringes on his right to practice his religion.
In recent years, the ACLU of Virginia has also helped students who were told
they could not carry Bibles or other religious items to school, assisted
student religious clubs with their right to meet on school grounds after
hours, defended the right of prisoners to receive religious materials, and
challenged a Department of Corrections policy requiring a lineage test to
prove affiliation with certain religions.
http://www.acluva.org/opeds/Feb72002church.html
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jenn" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
20 Oct 2005 08:12:39 PM |
|
|
In article <20051020173102.456$1H@newsreader.com>,
(Harry Flynt) wrote:
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Joseph Welch wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ArWdnfTPPMqWrcrenZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
Americans are getting sick and tired of having decency and morality
torn from our social fabric by the ACLU.
No, America isn't - because the ACLU does no such thing.
Wellll. They did defend Rush Limbaugh and if we apply fundie standards to
it we can ignore the reasons and condemn them for that.
We should condem and shun them for defending NAMBLA. Right?
Not if their rights were being violated.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Secretary of HomInt3rn" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
20 Oct 2005 08:45:26 AM |
|
|
I was busily flonking away in alt.politics.homosexuality, when The Goddess
Eris Herself suddenly made me reply to J Young:
Americans are getting sick and tired
Of being represented by a bunch of racist, homophobic, redneck, "My country
right or wrong" Kristian KKK00ks? Well, it's about time.
--
___________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! "The personal _is_ political."
Bent Depraved N. Deviant *****-Smoker, Esq., Superfaggot
"Stupidity excuses nothing. It's only a reason...." -- Phxbrd
Economic Left/Right: -7.63 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.38
"The whining has just begun." -- John Wentzky
Killfiled by: directory; Anim8rfsk
"It's not nice to misrepresent Mother Nature."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
20 Oct 2005 07:24:54 AM |
|
|
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
Americans are getting sick and tired of having decency and morality torn
from our social fabric by the ACLU.
"Decent" people like J Young would rather be free to enslave and kill
people they don't like without having to worry about rights.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "nJb" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
20 Oct 2005 11:59:57 PM |
|
|
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
Americans are getting sick and tired of having decency and morality torn
from our social fabric by the ACLU.
"Decent" people like J Young would rather be free to enslave and kill
people they don't like without having to worry about rights.
That's a whole 3.6% of the population, or 10% of the voting population.
Looks like we have a "movement".
--
Jack
Plonked by Thomas
bobo1148atxmissiondotcom
http://photos.yahoo.com/bc/xmissionbobo/
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
20 Oct 2005 04:40:04 PM |
|
|
J Young wrote:
Americans are getting sick and tired of having decency and morality torn
from our social fabric by the ACLU.
Yes. Nothing destroys decency and morality more than asserting those rights and
protections guaranteed by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Tell me, Mr. Young: Why do you hate America so much?
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking,
which leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy."
- Robert Anton Wilson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mimi Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
20 Oct 2005 05:26:37 PM |
|
|
Gregory Gadow wrote:
J Young wrote:
Americans are getting sick and tired of having decency and morality torn
from our social fabric by the ACLU.
Yes. Nothing destroys decency and morality more than asserting those rights and
protections guaranteed by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Tell me, Mr. Young: Why do you hate America so much?
Amen!
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking,
which leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy."
- Robert Anton Wilson
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 100,000 back bill to curb ACLU |
26 Oct 2005 12:59:05 AM |
|
|
Gregory Gadow wrote:
J Young wrote:
Americans are getting sick and tired of having decency and morality torn
from our social fabric by the ACLU.
Yes. Nothing destroys decency and morality more than asserting those rights and
protections guaranteed by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
No jew was involved in writing The Constitution, those who founded
the U.S. were all Christian and if they were around today to see
what groups like the ACLU ( jew inc) and other left wing groups
had done in the name of the Constitution they would all go back to
the Mother country.
Tell me, Mr. Young: Why do you hate America so much?
And what do *you* hate - 2000 years of Western Christian
civilisation?
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking,
which leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy."
- Robert Anton Wilson
Without faith there would be no U.S.A. or did you think that those
people in the Mayflower were atheistic commies ala The Hollywood
10.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
