NationStates Jolt Archive

Any fellow members of the Civil Liberties Union here?

Anyone have anything to say about the ACLU, anything they'd like to discuss regarding it?

As much as I love defending civil liberties, the ACLU is just way too partisan to the left for my tastes

I would tend to agree they are to partisan. They go overboard at times when they should use common sense. Not that there isnt a place for them.

The ACLU is like Communism...it looks great in concept, but is a total failure in reality.
Meh.

It promotes freedom of speech unless your christian.
Or Republican.

Basically, it says "Anyone I agree with can say what they want."

I used to like the ACLU unless they became anti-Christian. Then they just confused me.
:headbang:

As much as I love defending civil liberties, the ACLU is just way too partisan to the left for my tastes
Which is of course why they defend ludicrous cases on both sides of the political line.

I'm inclined to agree with the others on this, at first it was doing a great job with getting people civil rights. However, now it seems to be more of tool for leftist organizations that don't seem to like Christians. Furthermore, some of the cases they have brought forward should have never been allowed in court because the cases were a waste of taxpayer money. Sorry but taking a school system to court because they try to teach their students evolution is just a theory and it also has competition from another theory was just half-assed.

It promotes freedom of speech unless your christian.
Or Republican.

Basically, it says "Anyone I agree with can say what they want."

I used to like the ACLU unless they became anti-Christian. Then they just confused me.
:headbang:
You mean like this (http://www.aclu.org/StudentsRights/StudentsRights.cfm?ID=10523&c=162), where they support the right of an Iowa student to distribute christian literature?

or

This (http://www.aclu.org/StudentsRights/StudentsRights.cfm?ID=15680&c=159) where they support a valdictorian's right to have a christian slogan as her yearbook entry?

or

have you been caught up in the hysteria as they protect the seperation of church and state and have mistaken it as being anti-christian?

The ACLU delivers justice all right, if your not:

White
Asian (in California)
Christian
Jewish
Republican
A gun owner
Heterosexual


The ACLU used to be great, but now it has become another mouthpeice of the left.

Can politics just stay out of one single thing, just for once....Please?

The ACLU is too radical at times, but that is needed to counterbalance the facist forces on the right.

The ACLU delivers justice all right, if your not:

White
Asian (in California)
Christian
Jewish
Republican
A gun owner
Heterosexual


The ACLU used to be great, but now it has become another mouthpeice of the left.

Can politics just stay out of one single thing, just for once....Please?

Hurray for misinformation!

I'll say the ACLU does tend to go overboard sometimes but as an organization, I still like them. What gives the ACLU their anti-christian image is the fact that they tend to go after school that begin to teach or display exclusivly christian themes while ignoring other relgions. If you're going to have a public school, ecuminism tends to be a good thing.

You mean like this (http://www.aclu.org/StudentsRights/StudentsRights.cfm?ID=10523&c=162), where they support the right of an Iowa student to distribute christian literature?

or

This (http://www.aclu.org/StudentsRights/StudentsRights.cfm?ID=15680&c=159) where they support a valdictorian's right to have a christian slogan as her yearbook entry?

or

have you been caught up in the hysteria as they protect the seperation of church and state and have mistaken it as being anti-christian?
The problem is that some of there recent cases don't fall under the category of seperation of Church and State, some of these cases are in the category of seperation of Church and Public space. I think what the ACLU needs to do is tell some of these people who are so easily offended by anything religious to get a life or move out of the US.

Jurian States']The problem is that some of there recent cases don't fall under the category of seperation of Church and State, some of these cases are in the category of seperation of Church and Public space. I think what the ACLU needs to do is tell some of these people who are so easily offended by anything religious to get a life or move out of the US.
And what do you consider violating the seperation of Church and State? I'd lvoe to hear it

Jurian States']The problem is that some of there recent cases don't fall under the category of seperation of Church and State, some of these cases are in the category of seperation of Church and Public space. I think what the ACLU needs to do is tell some of these people who are so easily offended by anything religious to get a life or move out of the US.
The way you are using the term 'public space' you would leave the casual reader to assume that they are having churches take down their crosses and people take thier 'Honk if you love Jesus' stickers off thier cars.

They are not.

It is public space in the sense that it is public, i.e. not owned by anyone but rather government space reserved for the public, which is then suseptable to the seperation clause if it gives preferential display of a particular religion.

Don't fall into the trapdoor of hysteria. Be clear.

have you been caught up in the hysteria as they protect the seperation of church and state and have mistaken it as being anti-christian?

No, I mean this (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,141488,00.html)

And this (http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=13330&c=38)

Both violate the freedom of speech. Why doesn't the ACLU defend them?
:headbang:

The ACLU appears to undiscriminating observers as 'leftist' group for two reasons:

One, the enlightenment ideas which are taken up by economic leftists in the US are essentially ideas that demand civil liberties.

Two, the american right is generally opposed to civil liberties, and when the right is opposed, regardless of the grounds, it tends to paint its enemies as leftists.

The problem is that some of there recent cases don't fall under the category of seperation of Church and State, some of these cases are in the category of seperation of Church and Public space. I think what the ACLU needs to do is tell some of these people who are so easily offended by anything religious to get a life or move out of the US.
Well, public space is OWNED by the government, and thus these things would be payed for by taxpayer funds. It is nitpicking a bit, I'll admit, in some cases.

I plan on being a card carrying member of the ACLU once I have money that I can donate to them. They protect me from having to be spoonfed the christian religion, and stop discrimination. Most things people accuse the ACLU of are blatantly untrue. They are not anti-religion, they just work to make all the religions equal in the eyes of the government.

No, I mean this (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,141488,00.html)

And this (http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=13330&c=38)

Both violate the freedom of speech. Why doesn't the ACLU defending them?
:headbang:
Okay, first-step away from the Fox News teat. Hannity is an opinion show. You wouldn't have accepted a link to Michael Moore's website, would you have?

Second-Seperation of church and state. How can someone who is not christian (or part of the abrahamic religions) being judged in that court room feel equal under the law with the doctrine of judeo-christianity in the lobby?

Establishment isn't a one method only thing. By giving preference in public settings, especially a courthouse, it violates the seperation of church and state. If the judge wanted to live in a giant sculpture of the ten commandments and spend his off time walking around carrying giant stone replicas of the original, he's more than welcome. To put them in the courthouse is a violation of the first amendment.

No, I mean this (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,141488,00.html)

And this (http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=13330&c=38)

Both violate the freedom of speech. Why doesn't the ACLU defending them?
:headbang:
Besides the fact Roy Moore is a nutcase, putting a religious monument IN a government building, not in his personal quarters either, WITHOUT permission, refusing to add any other important historical documents, while claimnig the 10 Commandments were part of our legal history, and the nrefusing to remove it under court order? Free speech my foot.

No, I mean this

And this
Okay, I DONT want nativity scenes in my school, being that I'm not a christian and a nativity scene has OBVIOUS religious implications. The schools shouldn't start laying out prayer rugs during ramadan or drawing pentagrams during the winter solstice either. Not to mention government funds being spent on something in schools that's religious when they should be spent on, I don't know, learning?
Also, I don't want to be forced to sing silent night, and neither should anyone else who isn't a christian. We shouldn't be forced by the schools to single ourselves out.

And the second one: A judge does not have a constitutional right to build a monument to the ten commandments in a courthouse with taxpayer money, being that the money and the land both belong to the government.

Niether of these violates free speech.