| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
10 Jun 2006 11:30:23 PM |
| Object: |
Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2006/02/09/stop-the-aclus-one-year-blogiversary-blogburst-top-ten-myths-about-the-aclu/
Top Ten Myths of the ACLU:
10. The ACLU is non-partisan:
The Truth: Not only were they founded on Communism, they are about as
liberal an organization in existence. The public saw first hand in 1988 how
the ACLU was involved in politics. "The portrayal of the ACLU as a radical
liberal lobby reached its climax in the 1988 presidential campaign when
George Bush used ACLU membership as a black mark against his opponent
Michael Dukakis. The perception had taken root that the ACLU of 1988 has
about as much to do with civil liberties as the AT&T of 1988 has to do with
telegraphs."
"Social reform, in a liberal direction, is the sine qua non of the ACLU.
Its record, far from showing a momentary wavering from impartiality, is
replete with attempts to reform American society according to the wisdom of
liberalism. The truth of the matter is that the ACLU has always been a
highly politicized organization."William Donahue
They may take a token case here and there for the other side to bolster
its non-partisan claims, but those cases are far outweighed by their
numerous other cases that are clearly intended to further its partisan
agenda. They even keep scorecards on Congressmen and Representatives. Their
claim of non-partisanship is what gives them their tax-exempt status, and
nothing is further from the truth. They have split their organization into
two in order to lobby their causes to the legislative branch.
9. The ACLU Cares About Your Privacy Rights:
The Truth: Despite all the rhetoric over the current NSA program, where
the ACLU opposes the U.S. listening to traitor's having conversations with
terrorists, the ACLU has no room to talk when it comes to violating privacy.
The American Civil Liberties Union is using sophisticated technology to
collect a wide variety of information about its members and donors in a
fund-raising effort that has ignited a bitter debate over its leaders'
commitment to privacy rights.
Some board members say the extensive data collection makes a mockery of
the organization's frequent criticism of banks, corporations and government
agencies for their practice of accumulating data on people for marketing and
other purposes.
Daniel S. Lowman, vice president for analytical services at Grenzebach
Glier & Associates, the data firm hired by the A.C.L.U., said the software
the organization is using, Prospect Explorer, combs a broad range of
publicly available data to compile a file with information like an
individual's wealth, holdings in public corporations, other assets and
philanthropic interests.
The issue has attracted the attention of the New York attorney general,
who is looking into whether the group violated its promises to protect the
privacy of its donors and members. NY Times
8. It is a patriotic thing to support the ACLU.
The Truth: If you think the ACLU represents the average American values,
then you are sadly misguided. Their absolutist views of liberty go far
beyond what most people could ever support. They support the legalization of
child porn distribution , and un-regulated prostitution. They are far from
the traditional thoughts of patriotism, constantly defending Americas
enemies, and fighting efforts of military recruiters.
7. The ACLU Defends The Bill of Rights.
The Truth: The ACLU defends the parts of the Bill of Rights that are in
line with its agenda. What about the second, ninth, and tenth amendment?
ACLU POLICY "The ACLU believes that the individual's right to bear arms
applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia.
Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of weapons by
individuals is not constitutionally protected. Therefore, there is no
constitutional impediment to the regulation of firearms."ACLU
And they certainly don't believe in States rights, constantly attempting
to override the will of the people via the judicial branch.
6. The ACLU Defends Religious Liberty
The Truth: The ACLU claims to be the great defender of liberty, but the
truth is that their definition of liberty is limited to what alligns within
their agenda. As a matter of fact, the ACLU is the foremost religious censor
in America. Despite the fact that this nation was founded upon the ideals of
religious freedom, the ACLU has succeeded in manipulating the very founding
principles through the corrupted judicial branch to repress the religious
expression of America, and continues to work daily at erasing our National
religious heritage from the pages of history.details
5. The ACLU's Slogan of "Keep America Safe and Free":
The Truth: What a joke! When 9-11 occurred what measures did the ACLU take
to ensure our safety? None, zip, nada. This organization has done nothing to
ensure our safety, in fact it has chosen to sue our government on behalf of
terrorists outside of their legal jurisdiction while they were located in
prisons on foreign soil.
They have since then demanded that the government release and make public
top secret security information regarding not only the activities of our
military, but also that of our intelligence forces. They have also initiated
one lawsuit after another against the government to stop the searching of
individuals for security purposes in mass transit situations, to stop what
they call profiling (we will never see a Protestant white middle-aged woman
as a terrorist working with an extremist Islamic organization) by race, sex
and religion, and to stop the government from detaining and questioning or
interrogating individuals who have ties or contact with known terrorist
individuals and organizations.
They say they are for a safe and free America. Yet their actions speak
very loudly the opposite of the lip service they give in this banner for a
safe America.
4. They Defend the Oppressed and Helpless:
The Truth: If you count terrorists, child molesters, and murderers as
oppressed and helpless, then you may think this one is true. The truly
defensless are the very children being harmed by these perverts the ACLU
defend. The ACLU don't believe children have any rights, unless it is to
murder their own children without their parents ever knowing.
3. The word "American" in their name truly reflects what they are:
They are constantly stepping outside the bounds of America, reaching out
to help the very enemy. They fight every effort by our government to protect
us, and sue them every chance we get. For the ACLU, the mighty checkbook
takes precendence over America's security, and many think they are rooting
for the enemy. It isn't hard to believe when theytry to get admitted
terrorists off the hook.
2. The ACLU Was Founded On Noble Intentions:
The Truth: One of the great myths of the 20th - and now 21st - century is
the belief that the American Civil Liberties Union was an organization that
had a noble beginning, but somehow strayed off course.
That myth is untrue. The ACLU set a course to destroy America - her
freedom and her values - right from the start.
From its very beginning, the ACLU had strong socialist and communist ties.
As early as 1931, the U.S. Congress was alarmed by the ACLU's devotion to
communism. A report by the Special House Committee to Investigate Communist
Activities stated
The American Civil Liberties Union is closely affiliated with the
communist movement in the United States, and fully 90 percent of its efforts
are on behalf of communists who have come into conflict with the law. It
claims to stand for free speech, free press and free assembly, but it is
quite apparent that the main function of the ACLU is an attempt to protect
the communists.
Roger Baldwin and Crystal Eastman founded the ACLU in 1920 along with
three other organizations dedicated to the most leftist of causes. The
histories of these two individuals belie their claims of patriotism and
respect for the Constitution.
Baldwin openly sought the utter destruction of American society. Fifteen
years after the founding of the ACLU, Baldwin wrote:
I am for Socialism, disarmament and ultimately, for the abolishing of the
State itself . I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the
propertied class and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is
the goal.
1. The ACLU Does Not Collect Taxpayer's Funds:
The Truth: The Civil Rights Act, intended to help poor people who could
not afford to defend their rights, grants judges the right to award attorney
's fees in civil rights cases. The ACLU have turned this on its head, often
using it to threaten small schools and local governments that can not afford
to defend themselves from the ACLU.
Take it from a former ACLU Lawyer, Reese Llyod:
Stated Lloyd: "The ACLU has perverted, distorted and exploited the Civil
Rights Act . to turn it into a lawyer-enrichment act."
Lloyd says the American people are "oblivious" to how many millions of
dollars in taxpayer funds are going to the ACLU each year.
The attorney pointed out many attorneys in cases brought by the ACLU are
volunteers, so the fees the group is awarded normally do not go to reimburse
an attorney but rather directly into the organization's coffers.
--
----------
J Young
youngopinions@aol.com
.
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 12:08:41 AM |
|
|
<youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
Top Ten Myths of the ACLU:
Top ten lies of big-government fascists.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Mitchum" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 03:11:14 AM |
|
|
wrote:
http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2006/02/09/stop-the-aclus-one-year-blogiversary-blogburst-top-ten-myths-about-the-aclu/
Top Ten Myths of the ACLU:
10. The ACLU is non-partisan:
The Truth: Not only were they founded on Communism,
Myth.
I thought this thing was going to debunk myths, not perpetuate them.
they are about as liberal an organization in existence. [..]
Hence: 'American Civil Liberties Union.'
Liberalism isn't partisanship.
The rest of your screed is just as stupid.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Katie Lynn" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
10 Jun 2006 11:35:11 PM |
|
|
wrote:
http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2006/02/09/stop-the-aclus-one-year-blogiversary-blogburst-top-ten-myths-about-the-aclu/
Top Ten Myths of the ACLU:
Those who begin coercive elimination of dissent soon find themselves exterminating dissenters. Compulsory unification of
opinion achieves only the unanimity of the graveyard.
Robert H Jackson, Supreme Court Justice
--
Dr. Kathleen F. Lynn
Chief Medical Officer- ICA-1916
One of the Lesbian Immortals
We Never Die
"Give *Us* the future, we've had enough of your past. Give us back our country, to live in , to grow in, to love."
Michael Collins, A Rebel with a Cause
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila2" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 05:35:52 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 00:30:23 -0400, <youngopinions@aol.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<f72dnZdsedv7ARbZnZ2dnUVZ_o2dnZ2d@giganews.com> wrote:
More propagandizing spam from one of the usual sources.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
10 Jun 2006 11:51:08 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 00:30:23 -0400, <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2006/02/09/stop-the-aclus-one-year-blogiversary-blogburst-top-ten-myths-about-the-aclu/
Top Ten Myths of the ACLU:
10. The ACLU is non-partisan:
The Truth: Not only were they founded on Communism,
Assertion, but no evidence.
they are about as
liberal an organization in existence. The public saw first hand in 1988 how
the ACLU was involved in politics. "The portrayal of the ACLU as a radical
liberal lobby reached its climax in the 1988 presidential campaign when
George Bush used ACLU membership as a black mark against his opponent
Michael Dukakis. The perception had taken root that the ACLU of 1988 has
about as much to do with civil liberties as the AT&T of 1988 has to do with
telegraphs."
"Liberal" used incorrectly as pejorative, and so it's crap.
"Social reform, in a liberal direction, is the sine qua non of the ACLU.
Its record, far from showing a momentary wavering from impartiality, is
replete with attempts to reform American society according to the wisdom of
liberalism. The truth of the matter is that the ACLU has always been a
highly politicized organization."William Donahue
They may take a token case here and there for the other side to bolster
its non-partisan claims, but those cases are far outweighed by their
numerous other cases that are clearly intended to further its partisan
agenda. They even keep scorecards on Congressmen and Representatives. Their
claim of non-partisanship is what gives them their tax-exempt status, and
nothing is further from the truth. They have split their organization into
two in order to lobby their causes to the legislative branch.
9. The ACLU Cares About Your Privacy Rights:
The Truth: Despite all the rhetoric over the current NSA program, where
the ACLU opposes the U.S. listening to traitor's having conversations with
terrorists, the ACLU has no room to talk when it comes to violating privacy.
The American Civil Liberties Union is using sophisticated technology to
collect a wide variety of information about its members and donors in a
fund-raising effort that has ignited a bitter debate over its leaders'
commitment to privacy rights.
Assetion, no evidence.
Some board members say the extensive data collection makes a mockery of
the organization's frequent criticism of banks, corporations and government
agencies for their practice of accumulating data on people for marketing and
other purposes.
Daniel S. Lowman, vice president for analytical services at Grenzebach
Glier & Associates, the data firm hired by the A.C.L.U., said the software
the organization is using, Prospect Explorer, combs a broad range of
publicly available data to compile a file with information like an
individual's wealth, holdings in public corporations, other assets and
philanthropic interests.
"Publicly available" means no privacy violation.
The issue has attracted the attention of the New York attorney general,
who is looking into whether the group violated its promises to protect the
privacy of its donors and members. NY Times
8. It is a patriotic thing to support the ACLU.
The Truth: If you think the ACLU represents the average American values,
then you are sadly misguided. Their absolutist views of liberty go far
beyond what most people could ever support. They support the legalization of
child porn distribution , and un-regulated prostitution. They are far from
the traditional thoughts of patriotism, constantly defending Americas
enemies, and fighting efforts of military recruiters.
They defend the Constitution.
7. The ACLU Defends The Bill of Rights.
The Truth: The ACLU defends the parts of the Bill of Rights that are in
line with its agenda. What about the second, ninth, and tenth amendment?
ACLU POLICY "The ACLU believes that the individual's right to bear arms
applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia.
Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of weapons by
individuals is not constitutionally protected. Therefore, there is no
constitutional impediment to the regulation of firearms."ACLU
And they certainly don't believe in States rights, constantly attempting
to override the will of the people via the judicial branch.
They defend the Constitution.
6. The ACLU Defends Religious Liberty
The Truth: The ACLU claims to be the great defender of liberty, but the
truth is that their definition of liberty is limited to what alligns within
their agenda. As a matter of fact, the ACLU is the foremost religious censor
in America. Despite the fact that this nation was founded upon the ideals of
religious freedom, the ACLU has succeeded in manipulating the very founding
principles through the corrupted judicial branch to repress the religious
expression of America, and continues to work daily at erasing our National
religious heritage from the pages of history.details
The ACLU defends against persecution of AND by religion.
5. The ACLU's Slogan of "Keep America Safe and Free":
The Truth: What a joke! When 9-11 occurred what measures did the ACLU take
to ensure our safety? None, zip, nada. This organization has done nothing to
ensure our safety, in fact it has chosen to sue our government on behalf of
terrorists outside of their legal jurisdiction while they were located in
prisons on foreign soil.
Defending the Constitution IS keeping people safe and free.
They have since then demanded that the government release and make public
top secret security information regarding not only the activities of our
military, but also that of our intelligence forces. They have also initiated
one lawsuit after another against the government to stop the searching of
individuals for security purposes in mass transit situations, to stop what
they call profiling (we will never see a Protestant white middle-aged woman
as a terrorist working with an extremist Islamic organization) by race, sex
and religion, and to stop the government from detaining and questioning or
interrogating individuals who have ties or contact with known terrorist
individuals and organizations.
They say they are for a safe and free America. Yet their actions speak
very loudly the opposite of the lip service they give in this banner for a
safe America.
4. They Defend the Oppressed and Helpless:
The Truth: If you count terrorists, child molesters, and murderers as
oppressed and helpless, then you may think this one is true. The truly
defensless are the very children being harmed by these perverts the ACLU
defend. The ACLU don't believe children have any rights, unless it is to
murder their own children without their parents ever knowing.
If you violate people's rights the ACLU will fight it.
3. The word "American" in their name truly reflects what they are:
They are constantly stepping outside the bounds of America, reaching out
to help the very enemy. They fight every effort by our government to protect
us, and sue them every chance we get. For the ACLU, the mighty checkbook
takes precendence over America's security, and many think they are rooting
for the enemy. It isn't hard to believe when theytry to get admitted
terrorists off the hook.
They defend the Constitution.
2. The ACLU Was Founded On Noble Intentions:
The Truth: One of the great myths of the 20th - and now 21st - century is
the belief that the American Civil Liberties Union was an organization that
had a noble beginning, but somehow strayed off course.
That myth is untrue. The ACLU set a course to destroy America - her
freedom and her values - right from the start.
Assertion, but no evidence.
From its very beginning, the ACLU had strong socialist and communist ties.
As early as 1931, the U.S. Congress was alarmed by the ACLU's devotion to
communism. A report by the Special House Committee to Investigate Communist
Activities stated
Assertion, but no evidence.
The American Civil Liberties Union is closely affiliated with the
communist movement in the United States, and fully 90 percent of its efforts
are on behalf of communists who have come into conflict with the law. It
claims to stand for free speech, free press and free assembly, but it is
quite apparent that the main function of the ACLU is an attempt to protect
the communists.
The HUAC was discredited long ago.
Roger Baldwin and Crystal Eastman founded the ACLU in 1920 along with
three other organizations dedicated to the most leftist of causes. The
histories of these two individuals belie their claims of patriotism and
respect for the Constitution.
Baldwin openly sought the utter destruction of American society. Fifteen
years after the founding of the ACLU, Baldwin wrote:
I am for Socialism, disarmament and ultimately, for the abolishing of the
State itself . I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the
propertied class and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is
the goal.
1. The ACLU Does Not Collect Taxpayer's Funds:
The Truth: The Civil Rights Act, intended to help poor people who could
not afford to defend their rights, grants judges the right to award attorney
's fees in civil rights cases. The ACLU have turned this on its head, often
using it to threaten small schools and local governments that can not afford
to defend themselves from the ACLU.
Take it from a former ACLU Lawyer, Reese Llyod:
Stated Lloyd: "The ACLU has perverted, distorted and exploited the Civil
Rights Act . to turn it into a lawyer-enrichment act."
Lloyd says the American people are "oblivious" to how many millions of
dollars in taxpayer funds are going to the ACLU each year.
The attorney pointed out many attorneys in cases brought by the ACLU are
volunteers, so the fees the group is awarded normally do not go to reimburse
an attorney but rather directly into the organization's coffers.
The ACLU defends the Constitution - which is no doubt why you hate
them so much.
Now watch for Young's inability to respond.
---
I contend we are both atheists - I just believe in
one fewer god than you do.
When you understand why you reject all other gods,
you will understand why I reject yours as well.
- Stephen F. Roberts
.
|
|
|
| User: "Foxtrot" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 12:13:02 AM |
|
|
<youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU
The self-righteous libs are going to have a hissy fit over this thread,
because they hold the ACLU up as godlike.
Adam H <adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
The ACLU defends the Constitution - which is no doubt why you hate
them so much.
Those dirtbags defended the PEDOPHILES at NAMBLA. They tried to
protect the organization from being sued in a wrongful death case after
two of the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10 year old
boy. Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
Every time I hear a pompous lib extolling how wonderful the ACLU is, I
say to them "Oh, you think that child molesters should be protected", eh?
They typically respond "Um, well I, uh, the Constitution, er, um, civil
liberties, uh ...". That's when I sneer at them, turn my back on them and
walk away in disgust.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Joseph Welch" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 12:26:22 PM |
|
|
"Foxtrot" <foxtrot@null.com> wrote in message
news:3p8n829s7cvh87ilies06jqf0mt6hn37b9@4ax.com...
Those dirtbags defended the PEDOPHILES at NAMBLA.
http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/protest/11289prs20000831.html
--
George W. Bush has made the terrorists stronger, their influence wider,
their numbers larger, and their motivation to attack the U.S. and other
western interests greater. He has repeatedly abused his authority and
violated his Oath of Office by turning his back on the United States
Constitution; thereby surrendering to the terrorists by underminig American
freedoms,values, and the very foundations of our system of government.
Supporting Bush is treason.
***************
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: "Joseph Welch" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 12:20:59 PM |
|
|
"Foxtrot" <foxtrot@null.com> wrote in message
news:3p8n829s7cvh87ilies06jqf0mt6hn37b9@4ax.com...
Those dirtbags defended the PEDOPHILES at NAMBLA. They tried to
protect the organization from being sued in a wrongful death case after
two of the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10 year old
boy. Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
The case would have allowed the NRA to be sued if one of it's members went
postal.
Is that YOUR idea of the intent of the Constitution?
--
George W. Bush has made the terrorists stronger, their influence wider,
their numbers larger, and their motivation to attack the U.S. and other
western interests greater. He has repeatedly abused his authority and
violated his Oath of Office by turning his back on the United States
Constitution; thereby surrendering to the terrorists by underminig American
freedoms,values, and the very foundations of our system of government.
Supporting Bush is treason.
***************
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: "Craig Pennington" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
12 Jun 2006 04:40:41 PM |
|
|
Joseph Welch <seattledemocracy@freewebspace.com> wrote:
"Foxtrot" <foxtrot@null.com> wrote in message
news:3p8n829s7cvh87ilies06jqf0mt6hn37b9@4ax.com...
Those dirtbags defended the PEDOPHILES at NAMBLA. They tried to
protect the organization from being sued in a wrongful death case after
two of the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10 year old
boy. Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
The case would have allowed the NRA to be sued if one of it's members went
postal.
Is that YOUR idea of the intent of the Constitution?
Point well made.
Cheers,
Craig
--
Corollary to Clarke's Third Law:
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently
advanced.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 12:50:33 PM |
|
|
Previously, on alt.atheism, Joseph Welch in episode
<GgYig.352$1G7.64@fe04.buzzardnews.com>...
"Foxtrot" <foxtrot@null.com> wrote in message
news:3p8n829s7cvh87ilies06jqf0mt6hn37b9@4ax.com...
Those dirtbags defended the PEDOPHILES at NAMBLA. They tried to protect
the organization from being sued in a wrongful death case after two of
the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10 year old boy. Is
THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
The case would have allowed the NRA to be sued if one of it's members went
postal.
Is that YOUR idea of the intent of the Constitution?
Enforcement of his personal views of course...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
"As hip as it is for outsiders to blame New Orleans
for everything bad that happened during and after
Hurricane Katrina, the truth is that the people
who lived here were much more prepared for a big
storm than the federal government that promised
us flood protection." [Jarvis DeBerry]
http://makeashorterlink.com/?V180525DC
"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff White" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 12:35:47 AM |
|
|
"Foxtrot" <foxtrot@null.com> wrote in message
news:3p8n829s7cvh87ilies06jqf0mt6hn37b9@4ax.com...
<youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU
The self-righteous libs are going to have a hissy fit over this
thread,
because they hold the ACLU up as godlike.
Adam H <adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
The ACLU defends the Constitution - which is no doubt why you hate
them so much.
Those dirtbags defended the PEDOPHILES at NAMBLA. They tried to
protect the organization from being sued in a wrongful death case
after
two of the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10 year old
boy. Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
ah, so because somewhere along the line there happened to be a
newspaper article containing both the acronym "ACLU" and the word
"pedophile", that means the ACLU must be a bunch of pedophiles!
honestly now, is child molestation the worst offense you can think of?
worse so than... child mutilation? typical fundy, always obsessing
about sex. what would freud say about you?
and you think the liberals have mental problems.
Every time I hear a pompous lib extolling how wonderful the ACLU is,
I
say to them "Oh, you think that child molesters should be
protected", eh?
They typically respond "Um, well I, uh, the Constitution, er, um,
civil
liberties, uh ...". That's when I sneer at them, turn my back on
them and
walk away in disgust.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 01:35:55 AM |
|
|
Foxtrot wrote:
<youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU
The self-righteous libs are going to have a hissy fit over this thread,
because they hold the ACLU up as godlike.
Adam H <adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
The ACLU defends the Constitution - which is no doubt why you hate
them so much.
Those dirtbags defended the PEDOPHILES at NAMBLA. They tried to
protect the organization from being sued in a wrongful death case after
two of the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10 year old
boy. Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
So by your logic, if one of your church members goes out and rapes a
"heathen" woman or kills a couple heathen kids, all of you at his church
should be held financially liable???
Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
<trash dumped>
--
--sexkitten--
Whenever I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to
see it tried on him personally.
-Abraham Lincoln
.
|
|
|
| User: "Foxtrot" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 03:11:46 AM |
|
|
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Foxtrot wrote:
Those dirtbags defended the PEDOPHILES at NAMBLA. They tried to
protect the organization from being sued in a wrongful death case after
two of the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10 year old
boy. Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
So by your logic, if one of your church members goes out and rapes a
"heathen" woman or kills a couple heathen kids, all of you at his church
should be held financially liable???
Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
I'd NEVER volunteer to do ANYTHING to help child molesters. Period.
So any lame hypotheticals about how protecting child molesters may
provide some abstract benefit to society at some point in the future can
be dismissed outright.
.
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 12:25:24 PM |
|
|
Foxtrot wrote:
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Foxtrot wrote:
Those dirtbags defended the PEDOPHILES at NAMBLA. They tried to
protect the organization from being sued in a wrongful death case after
two of the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10 year old
boy. Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
So by your logic, if one of your church members goes out and rapes a
"heathen" woman or kills a couple heathen kids, all of you at his church
should be held financially liable???
Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
I'd NEVER volunteer to do ANYTHING to help child molesters.
I beg your pardon, was that what I asked? No.
Need a repeat?
<snip>
--
--sexkitten--
Whenever I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to
see it tried on him personally.
-Abraham Lincoln
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 06:15:18 PM |
|
|
Foxtrot wrote:
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Foxtrot wrote:
Those dirtbags defended the PEDOPHILES at NAMBLA. They tried to
protect the organization from being sued in a wrongful death case after
two of the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10 year old
boy. Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
So by your logic, if one of your church members goes out and rapes a
"heathen" woman or kills a couple heathen kids, all of you at his church
should be held financially liable???
Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
I'd NEVER volunteer to do ANYTHING to help child molesters.
By the looks of the article from the link YOU posted it doesn't
appear that the ACLU were either!
Period.
So any lame hypotheticals about how protecting child molesters may
provide some abstract benefit to society at some point in the future can
be dismissed outright.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Boy Toy" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 11:12:52 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 01:11:46 -0700, Foxtrot <foxtrot@null.com> wrote
in message <60in821gf28mrdot8kl4qq91m2in3gh7vo@4ax.com>
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Foxtrot wrote:
Those dirtbags defended the PEDOPHILES at NAMBLA. They tried to
protect the organization from being sued in a wrongful death case after
two of the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10 year old
boy. Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
So by your logic, if one of your church members goes out and rapes a
"heathen" woman or kills a couple heathen kids, all of you at his church
should be held financially liable???
Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
I'd NEVER volunteer to do ANYTHING to help child molesters. Period.
So any lame hypotheticals about how protecting child molesters may
provide some abstract benefit to society at some point in the future can
be dismissed outright.
Of course Neo-Nazis or the KKKlan is something else, right? I'm sure
you would be out there protecting your brothers.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 03:29:24 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 01:11:46 -0700, Foxtrot <foxtrot@null.com> wrote:
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Foxtrot wrote:
Those dirtbags defended the PEDOPHILES at NAMBLA. They tried to
protect the organization from being sued in a wrongful death case after
two of the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10 year old
boy. Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
So by your logic, if one of your church members goes out and rapes a
"heathen" woman or kills a couple heathen kids, all of you at his church
should be held financially liable???
Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
I'd NEVER volunteer to do ANYTHING to help child molesters. Period.
So any lame hypotheticals about how protecting child molesters may
provide some abstract benefit to society at some point in the future can
be dismissed outright.
Only by fascist idiots who only believe in free speech when they agree
with what's being said.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Scargo" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 01:20:29 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 01:11:46 -0700, Foxtrot <foxtrot@null.com> wrote:
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Foxtrot wrote:
Those dirtbags defended the PEDOPHILES at NAMBLA. They tried to
protect the organization from being sued in a wrongful death case after
two of the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10 year old
boy. Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
So by your logic, if one of your church members goes out and rapes a
"heathen" woman or kills a couple heathen kids, all of you at his church
should be held financially liable???
Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
I'd NEVER volunteer to do ANYTHING to help child molesters. Period.
So any lame hypotheticals about how protecting child molesters may
provide some abstract benefit to society at some point in the future can
be dismissed outright.
What about rapists? Murderers? Nazis? KKK members? American citizens
classified as enemy combatants?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 12:52:07 PM |
|
|
Previously, on alt.atheism, Foxtrot in episode
<60in821gf28mrdot8kl4qq91m2in3gh7vo@4ax.com>...
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Foxtrot wrote:
Those dirtbags defended the PEDOPHILES at NAMBLA. They tried to protect
the organization from being sued in a wrongful death case after two of
the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10 year old boy. Is
THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
So by your logic, if one of your church members goes out and rapes a
"heathen" woman or kills a couple heathen kids, all of you at his church
should be held financially liable???
Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
I'd NEVER volunteer to do ANYTHING to help child molesters. Period. So any
lame hypotheticals about how protecting child molesters may provide some
abstract benefit to society at some point in the future can be dismissed
outright.
Answer the question.
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
"As hip as it is for outsiders to blame New Orleans
for everything bad that happened during and after
Hurricane Katrina, the truth is that the people
who lived here were much more prepared for a big
storm than the federal government that promised
us flood protection." [Jarvis DeBerry]
http://makeashorterlink.com/?V180525DC
"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 10:48:50 AM |
|
|
What's so funny about peace, love and Foxtrot <foxtrot@null.com>
posting the following on Sun, 11 Jun 2006 01:11:46 -0700 iin
alt.atheism?
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Foxtrot wrote:
Those dirtbags defended the PEDOPHILES at NAMBLA. They tried to
protect the organization from being sued in a wrongful death case after
two of the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10 year old
boy. Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
So by your logic, if one of your church members goes out and rapes a
"heathen" woman or kills a couple heathen kids, all of you at his church
should be held financially liable???
Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
I'd NEVER volunteer to do ANYTHING to help child molesters. Period.
So any lame hypotheticals about how protecting child molesters may
provide some abstract benefit to society at some point in the future can
be dismissed outright.
You didn't answer the question.
A member of your church is arrested for the rape and murder of a young
woman. The proescuting attorney demands that the church turn over
membership rolls for everyone who attends the church. That's a
violation of your rights. The ACLU would fight that.
--
Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
Jason Gastrich is praying for me on 8 January 2011
"The belief in the Christian god... is an appalling nightmare. I reject
the notion that the whole universe was created by this kind of evil
creature who would create such a thing." - Anthony Flew, March 22, 2005
.
|
|
|
| User: "Foxtrot" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 12:50:15 PM |
|
|
Douglas Berry <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
Foxtrot <foxtrot@null.com>
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
So by your logic, if one of your church members goes out and rapes a
"heathen" woman or kills a couple heathen kids, all of you at his church
should be held financially liable???
Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
I'd NEVER volunteer to do ANYTHING to help child molesters. Period.
So any lame hypotheticals about how protecting child molesters may
provide some abstract benefit to society at some point in the future can
be dismissed outright.
You didn't answer the question.
A member of your church is arrested for the rape and murder of a young
woman. The proescuting attorney demands that the church turn over
membership rolls for everyone who attends the church. That's a
violation of your rights. The ACLU would fight that.
I am an atheist. But if I were a Christian (or whatever faith), I'd make sure
I didn't belong to a church (mosque, synagogue, whatever) that would
intentionally fight the prosecution of such a terrible person.
Nice try, but you'll have to try to find another way to justify your heroes'
protection of child molesters.
Heh, just as I said, the ACLU toadies get very defensive when the very
civility of their god is questioned.
"The belief in the Christian god... is an appalling nightmare. I reject
the notion that the whole universe was created by this kind of evil
creature who would create such a thing." - Anthony Flew, March 22, 2005
That's where I differ from the hostile atheist types. They go far beyond
disbelief in God, they despise those who *do* believe in God.
I believe that organized religion is a holdover from ancient times, but
that it has done great things for humankind. I see Christians as exemplary
human beings, and I agree with them on most major issues (with a few
exceptions, eg I have no problem with first trimester abortions).
.
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 01:01:05 PM |
|
|
Foxtrot wrote:
Douglas Berry <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
Foxtrot <foxtrot@null.com>
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
So by your logic, if one of your church members goes out and rapes a
"heathen" woman or kills a couple heathen kids, all of you at his church
should be held financially liable???
Is THAT your idea of defending the Constitution?
I'd NEVER volunteer to do ANYTHING to help child molesters. Period.
So any lame hypotheticals about how protecting child molesters may
provide some abstract benefit to society at some point in the future can
be dismissed outright.
You didn't answer the question.
A member of your church is arrested for the rape and murder of a young
woman. The proescuting attorney demands that the church turn over
membership rolls for everyone who attends the church. That's a
violation of your rights. The ACLU would fight that.
I am an atheist. But if I were a Christian (or whatever faith), I'd make sure
I didn't belong to a church (mosque, synagogue, whatever) that would
intentionally fight the prosecution of such a terrible person.
Who said anything about fighting their prosecution?
Do *you* feel that *you* should be prosecuted for the actions of someone
that happened to belong to the same organization as you? THAT was the
question, since THAT was what the entire issue was.
Nice try, but you'll have to try to find another way to justify your heroes'
protection of child molesters.
Heh, just as I said, the ACLU toadies get very defensive when the very
civility of their god is questioned.
Who's defensive? We're just asking you to back up your claim that their
actions were wrong. Which so far you are doing a *****-poor job of.
"The belief in the Christian god... is an appalling nightmare. I reject
the notion that the whole universe was created by this kind of evil
creature who would create such a thing." - Anthony Flew, March 22, 2005
That's where I differ from the hostile atheist types. They go far beyond
disbelief in God, they despise those who *do* believe in God.
I believe that organized religion is a holdover from ancient times, but
that it has done great things for humankind. I see Christians as exemplary
human beings, and I agree with them on most major issues (with a few
exceptions, eg I have no problem with first trimester abortions).
--
--sexkitten--
Whenever I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to
see it tried on him personally.
-Abraham Lincoln
.
|
|
|
| User: "Foxtrot" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 02:03:56 PM |
|
|
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Foxtrot wrote:
Douglas Berry <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
A member of your church is arrested for the rape and murder of a young
woman. The proescuting attorney demands that the church turn over
membership rolls for everyone who attends the church. That's a
violation of your rights. The ACLU would fight that.
I am an atheist. But if I were a Christian (or whatever faith), I'd make sure
I didn't belong to a church (mosque, synagogue, whatever) that would
intentionally fight the prosecution of such a terrible person.
Who said anything about fighting their prosecution?
Do *you* feel that *you* should be prosecuted for the actions of someone
that happened to belong to the same organization as you? THAT was the
question, since THAT was what the entire issue was.
The details of the case are irrelevant in the discussion of whether or not
the ACLU--and those who fund it--consists of civilized human beings. All
that matters is the fact that the ACLU sought to protect child molesters.
A victory for them in such a case is a victory for pedophiles, not some
phony protection of the Constitution that the sanctimonious libs want to
believe it is.
Heh, just as I said, the ACLU toadies get very defensive when the very
civility of their god is questioned.
Who's defensive? We're just asking you to back up your claim that their
actions were wrong. Which so far you are doing a *****-poor job of.
Sez you, an obvious defender of an organization that seeks to protect
pedophiles. Your judgment is dubious, sexcat. Maybe you should pull
yourself out of the catbox so you can think clearly.
.
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 02:29:29 PM |
|
|
Foxtrot wrote:
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Foxtrot wrote:
Douglas Berry <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
A member of your church is arrested for the rape and murder of a young
woman. The proescuting attorney demands that the church turn over
membership rolls for everyone who attends the church. That's a
violation of your rights. The ACLU would fight that.
I am an atheist. But if I were a Christian (or whatever faith), I'd make sure
I didn't belong to a church (mosque, synagogue, whatever) that would
intentionally fight the prosecution of such a terrible person.
Who said anything about fighting their prosecution?
Do *you* feel that *you* should be prosecuted for the actions of someone
that happened to belong to the same organization as you? THAT was the
question, since THAT was what the entire issue was.
The details of the case are irrelevant in the discussion of whether or not
the ACLU--and those who fund it--consists of civilized human beings.
The issue is extremely relevant to the discussion of whether or not the
ACLU consists of civilized human beings. Which I suspect is why you're
avoiding my question like the plague- because you just know that it's
gonna blow your argument to hell if you answer.
All
that matters is the fact that the ACLU sought to protect child molesters.
No, it sought to protect an organization that they belonged to.
A victory for them in such a case is a victory for pedophiles,
Boy, you're slow. How long does it take for a less volatile fact to sink
through your skull?
not some
phony protection of the Constitution that the sanctimonious libs want to
believe it is.
Heh, just as I said, the ACLU toadies get very defensive when the very
civility of their god is questioned.
Who's defensive? We're just asking you to back up your claim that their
actions were wrong. Which so far you are doing a *****-poor job of.
Sez you,
Yup, sez me, to the guy who still can't answer a simple question.
<ad hom dumped>
--
--sexkitten--
Whenever I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to
see it tried on him personally.
-Abraham Lincoln
.
|
|
|
| User: "Foxtrot" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 02:52:45 PM |
|
|
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Foxtrot wrote:
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Do *you* feel that *you* should be prosecuted for the actions of someone
that happened to belong to the same organization as you? THAT was the
question, since THAT was what the entire issue was.
The details of the case are irrelevant in the discussion of whether or not
the ACLU--and those who fund it--consists of civilized human beings.
The issue is extremely relevant to the discussion of whether or not the
ACLU consists of civilized human beings. Which I suspect is why you're
avoiding my question like the plague- because you just know that it's
gonna blow your argument to hell if you answer.
You're attempting to divert away from my original point that the ACLU
sought to protect pedophiles. I don't blame you. If I were a fan of theirs,
I'd be ashamed of them for seeking to protect child molesters too.
You can keep up your attempts to justify what they did, but it doesn't
change this simple fact: The ACLU sought to protect pedophiles. Any
attempt to make life easier for pedophiles is despicable, even if it's done
under some absurd pretense of saving America.
All
that matters is the fact that the ACLU sought to protect child molesters.
No, it sought to protect an organization that they belonged to.
Just an ordinary innocent organization, eh? Do you happen to know
exactly what the NAMBLA acronym stands for?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 04:09:27 PM |
|
|
Foxtrot <foxtrot@null.com> wrote:
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Foxtrot wrote:
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Do *you* feel that *you* should be prosecuted for the actions of someone
that happened to belong to the same organization as you? THAT was the
question, since THAT was what the entire issue was.
The details of the case are irrelevant in the discussion of whether or not
the ACLU--and those who fund it--consists of civilized human beings.
The issue is extremely relevant to the discussion of whether or not the
ACLU consists of civilized human beings. Which I suspect is why you're
avoiding my question like the plague- because you just know that it's
gonna blow your argument to hell if you answer.
You're attempting to divert away from my original point that the ACLU
sought to protect pedophiles.
You're tryiing to distract from the fact that you're trying to
overthrow and discard the Constitution in favor of a religious
dictatorship.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
12 Jun 2006 12:36:37 AM |
|
|
Foxtrot wrote:
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Foxtrot wrote:
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Do *you* feel that *you* should be prosecuted for the actions of someone
that happened to belong to the same organization as you? THAT was the
question, since THAT was what the entire issue was.
The details of the case are irrelevant in the discussion of whether or not
the ACLU--and those who fund it--consists of civilized human beings.
The issue is extremely relevant to the discussion of whether or not the
ACLU consists of civilized human beings. Which I suspect is why you're
avoiding my question like the plague- because you just know that it's
gonna blow your argument to hell if you answer.
You're attempting to divert away from my original point
No, I am not. I am attempting to point out to you the errors in your
original argument. As is everyone else. You are hung up on some
nonexistent defense of a couple of child rapists. Get over it already.
Ready to answer my question yet?
that the ACLU
sought to protect pedophiles. I don't blame you. If I were a fan of theirs,
I'd be ashamed of them for seeking to protect child molesters too.
If I had your reading comprehension problems, I'd certainly be ashamed
to admit to that.
Ready to answer my question yet?
You can keep up your attempts to justify what they did, but it doesn't
change this simple fact: The ACLU sought to protect pedophiles.
No, the ACLU did not. You seem stuck on this point and just can't get
past it.
Ready to answer my question yet?
Any
attempt to make life easier for pedophiles is despicable, even if it's done
under some absurd pretense of saving America.
All
that matters is the fact that the ACLU sought to protect child molesters.
No, it sought to protect an organization that they belonged to.
Just an ordinary innocent organization, eh? Do you happen to know
exactly what the NAMBLA acronym stands for?
Yes, I do. Do you?
They seek to allow consensual relationships between teenagers and adult
males. Which only seems sick until you start looking at the number of
*girls* married off at 16 and 17 years old, with the full approval of
God and country, so to speak.
They do not AFAIK support either rape or pedophilia. Could be wrong here
but don't think so.
And they are NOT responsible for the deviant actions of someone
affiliated with them, any more that you are if your coworker commits a
crime.
Ready to answer my question yet?
--
--sexkitten--
It is not always the same thing to be a good man and a good citizen.
-Aristotle
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 04:33:03 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 12:52:45 -0700, Foxtrot <foxtrot@null.com> wrote:
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Foxtrot wrote:
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Do *you* feel that *you* should be prosecuted for the actions of someone
that happened to belong to the same organization as you? THAT was the
question, since THAT was what the entire issue was.
The details of the case are irrelevant in the discussion of whether or not
the ACLU--and those who fund it--consists of civilized human beings.
The issue is extremely relevant to the discussion of whether or not the
ACLU consists of civilized human beings. Which I suspect is why you're
avoiding my question like the plague- because you just know that it's
gonna blow your argument to hell if you answer.
You're attempting to divert away from my original point that the ACLU
sought to protect pedophiles. I don't blame you. If I were a fan of theirs,
I'd be ashamed of them for seeking to protect child molesters too.
You can keep up your attempts to justify what they did, but it doesn't
change this simple fact: The ACLU sought to protect pedophiles. Any
attempt to make life easier for pedophiles is despicable, even if it's done
under some absurd pretense of saving America.
All
that matters is the fact that the ACLU sought to protect child molesters.
No, it sought to protect an organization that they belonged to.
Just an ordinary innocent organization, eh? Do you happen to know
exactly what the NAMBLA acronym stands for?
So if you were accused of being a child molester, you'd think it's OK
that no one protected your rights?
That's the difference between a liberal and a neo con. A liberal can
tell the difference between someone who has been accused and someone
whom everyone knows the truth is guilty of breaking a law. The first
is reality, the second is impossible.
According to you, if you are only accused of child molesting, you
should be immediately punished. You deserve no rights and the ACLU
would be evil for helping you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Foxtrot" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
11 Jun 2006 06:06:52 PM |
|
|
(Kate ) wrote:
Foxtrot <foxtrot@null.com> wrote:
You're attempting to divert away from my original point that the ACLU
sought to protect pedophiles. I don't blame you. If I were a fan of theirs,
I'd be ashamed of them for seeking to protect child molesters too.
You can keep up your attempts to justify what they did, but it doesn't
change this simple fact: The ACLU sought to protect pedophiles. Any
attempt to make life easier for pedophiles is despicable, even if it's done
under some absurd pretense of saving America.
So if you were accused of being a child molester, you'd think it's OK
that no one protected your rights?
No one except my own counsel. I happen to have faith in our criminal
justice system. Our founding fathers knew what they were doing.
That's the difference between a liberal and a neo con. A liberal can
tell the difference between someone who has been accused and someone
whom everyone knows the truth is guilty of breaking a law. The first
is reality, the second is impossible.
Libs are soft on crime (they oppose the death penalty, three strikes
sentencing etc), which is why the public typically prefers Republicans
on law and order issues.
I encourage liberals to go right ahead and run on issues like protecting
NAMBLA while campaigning for public offices.
According to you, if you are only accused of child molesting, you
should be immediately punished.
Um, you left out the trial.
Although under certain circumstances, I agree with Judge Roy Bean
(IIRC) who said "We're going to have a fair trial and then a hanging."
<g>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dysperdis" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Ten Myths of the ACLU |
12 Jun 2006 04:27:24 PM |
|
|
"Foxtrot" <foxtrot@null.com> wrote in message
news:3n7p821jhs5busc5d3gr0grrgo70ko3i2h@4ax.com...
cobalt@newscene.com (Kate ) wrote:
Foxtrot <foxtrot@null.com> wrote:
You're attempting to divert away from my original point that the ACLU
sought to protect pedophiles. I don't blame you. If I were a fan of
theirs,
I'd be ashamed of them for seeking to protect child molesters too.
You can keep up your attempts to justify what they did, but it doesn't
change this simple fact: The ACLU sought to protect pedophiles. Any
attempt to make life easier for pedophiles is despicable, even if it's
done
under some absurd pretense of saving America.
So if you were accused of being a child molester, you'd think it's OK
that no one protected your rights?
No one except my own counsel. I happen to have faith in our criminal
justice system. Our founding fathers knew what they were doing.
That's the difference between a liberal and a neo con. A liberal can
tell the difference between someone who has been accused and someone
whom everyone knows the truth is guilty of breaking a law. The first
is reality, the second is impossible.
Libs are soft on crime (they oppose the death penalty, three strikes
sentencing etc),
Which are ineffective at reducing crime. Homicide rates go up after
executions. Jail becomes ineffective at protecting recidivism after a
certain amount of time (which can be counted by months, not years), and
three strikes sentencing has no effect on recidivism rates. I'll cite
specific studies once I dig out my criminology textbook, or find a copy of
the paper I wrote on the subject.
which is why the public typically prefers Republicans
on law and order issues.
The public likes revenge, and always had. Where do you think lynch mobs come
from?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|