America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 20 years ago by eleltea. 85 replies replies.
2 Pages12>
ACLU
tailgater Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Defending NAMBLA pro bono in the Jeffrey Curley case.

Jeff was a 10 year old boy who was raped and murdered by two perverts from the National Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA).
The Curley family is taking legal action against NAMBLA in order to dissolve the organization which give advice on how to lure a boy into your car, etc.

The ACLU has sided with this group and will represent them for FREE.
But additionally, they tried to put a gag order on the Curley prosecution.

The group that touts "freedom of speech" as their mainstay tried to put a gag order on the victims family.

Can you believe this?

The far liberal left has gone over the edge. It's a freak show.
And it's one of the main reasons for the decline in American Values.
jdrabinski Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
The ACLU is not a 'liberal' group. They are a libertarian group, dedicated to the defense of the first amendment, whatever the consequences. They have done countless defenses of causes non-liberal, many that conservatives would like. So don't make them into a con vs. lib party.

How could this defense be construed as liberal? I could just as easily construe it as conservative:

nearly all sexual abusers of children are straight white men;

most straight white men are republicans;

the ACLU is defending sexual abusers of children;

Therefore, in defending a group dominated by straight white men, the ACLU is defending republicans.

Simple logic.

John
coma-one Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 07-09-2003
Posts: 1,264
why do people allways make it a political issue?
It never ceases to amaze me!! Where do we draw the line?
xrundog Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 01-17-2002
Posts: 2,212
A free USA needs the ACLU. But I hope they lose this one.
xibbumbero Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2002
Posts: 12,535
What Chris and Xrun said. X
cwilhelmi Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 07-24-2001
Posts: 2,739
X - what did I say?? :)

But I agree, it's not a political issue, it's a values issue. The ACLU is wrong on this, people are free to have their fantasies and such, but they can't act on them if it's harmful to others or obviously illegal.
tailgater Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
The ACLU is not needed in America.

Any group that supports NAMBLA needs to be disolved.
And anybody that supports the groups who support NAMBLA should reconsider their priorities.

If it were someone you knew who was molested, would you want the ACLU to continue?
They have overstepped their bounds.

Chripes, people want Rush Limbaugh fired for saying one comment. Those same folks think NAMBLA should continue because they once fought the brave fight.

As for the Liberal comment, I'd like to have that stricken. Upon further review, I guess it's not a left vs right issue.
My thought process revolved around the fact that so many bogus lawyers support liberal agendas.

Funny how the liberals were so jolted by my (uninformed) assertation that this was a left wing fiasco that they don't comment on the ACLU's decision to support child molestors.
Common sense is not a strong suit on the left.
tonester666 Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 05-07-2003
Posts: 1,324
Can't say I have ever seen a reason for the ACLU to exist. Show me.
eleltea Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 03-03-2002
Posts: 4,562
Anyone who thinks it is necessary, in order to protect an American's right to free speech, to defend the right of perverts to instruct other perverts on how to seduce and rape little children, has serious mental problems.

Evidently the ACLU is full of mentally disordered people. When will they get around to defending our right to yell "FIRE!" in crowded theaters?
GTofMurphy Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 05-16-2002
Posts: 341
"Put the crack pipe down", If you don't understand that the ACLU is step with the liberal wing of the DNC and does thier bidding, you are on something.

I would like some examples where the ACLU has come to the defense of a conservatives rights to "free speech"
GT

xibbumbero Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2002
Posts: 12,535
Chris,it was Jdrabinksi. Either I'm drunk,old or both,LOL. X
jdrabinski Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
Conservative case: defending the rights of the KKK to march in Skokie, IL.

John
sketcha Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 03-26-2003
Posts: 3,238
Simply put, the ACLU is DEAD wrong on this! I may think it a bit premature to disolve them, but their support of NAMBLA definitely raises questions.

F***in' Bastards!

GTofMurphy Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 05-16-2002
Posts: 341
God save the US from the ACLU and the "left" . This will give you a good picture of how they would like to shape our country by the use of the court systems and go around the voters with thier agenda.

Lets see here are some of the issues the ACLU has jumped in on in the past:

Support of legalized child pornography
Support of Legalized drugs
Support of Tax-exempt status for Satanists,
Support of Legalized prostitution
Support of Abortion on demand
Support of Mandatory sex education in schools
Support of Forced busing
Support of Legalized polygamy
Support of special rights and privileges for homosexuals.
Support of NAMBLA members “rights” to have sex with children
Oppose voluntary school prayer
Oppose tax exemptions for churches
Oppose religious displays in public places (such as a manger scene at Christmas),
Oppose parental-consent laws involving minors seeking abortion,
Oppose education vouchers
Oppose home schooling
Oppose public-demonstrations against abortion

It's not a pretty picture
GT
tonester666 Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 05-07-2003
Posts: 1,324
Skokie, hey that's where a competing site resides.

So the ACLU is for radical left and radical right.
GTofMurphy Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 05-16-2002
Posts: 341
jdrabinski:

So in your mind the KKK = Conservative? With that logic you must agree that Liberal = Communist

Wow! You need to get out of the house more often and experience the "real world"

I have never played in the Misc area. This is fun!
GT

sketcha Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 03-26-2003
Posts: 3,238
It can be GT. Just don't let it get personal.
GTofMurphy Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 05-16-2002
Posts: 341
Sketcha,

I didn’t think I was making it personal. Not my intent.
I just wish there was more common sense in this Country when comes to a simple issue like this one. Everyone should be able to agree the ACLU is WRONG in this case. IMHO they are also wrong in a majority of the other cases they take up.
GT

I guess when you replace rhetoric with facts there is no response just silence on this issue.
GT
barryneedleman Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 08-23-2000
Posts: 1,689
jdrabinski, nice try on the "logic" that in this case the ACLU is defending conservatives, but no cigar. There are plenty of middle and upper class white males that are not conservatives. Statistics that show that a majority of white males are conservatives (if such statistics exist) can not prove that these particular white males are conservative.

Others, I think that a number of so called "liberals" stated in this thread that the ACLU is wrong to defend this case. I also disagree with ACLU in this case. This tye of speach can be compared to yelling fire in a crowded theatre - it incites behavior that is directed to and harmful to a segment of our population that can not protect itself. Therefor this type of speach should be (and could be legally) limited.
sketcha Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 03-26-2003
Posts: 3,238
Sorry GT,

I didn't intend to imply that you had. Just a friendly reminder to a new Misc. poster from a voice of experience. Funny how I just accidently proved, yet again how easy it is to be misunderstood when you're not talking face to face.

Go on and have fun. I'll be right along with you.

Take care,
sketch
Tobasco Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2003
Posts: 2,809

This is one of the most outragous, unproven, illogical statements I've seen.

"nearly all sexual abusers of children are straight white men;

most straight white men are republicans;

the ACLU is defending sexual abusers of children;

Therefore, in defending a group dominated by straight white men, the ACLU is defending republicans.

Simple logic."

Here is a link to set the record strait about Republican & Democrat demographics. JD is incorrect.

http://plsc.uark.edu/arkpoll/fall99/party/PAGE4.HTM

Mag
sketcha Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 03-26-2003
Posts: 3,238
Good work, Mag. Nicely put too. You started off strong and finished up smoothly and respectfully.

O.K. jd, whatd'ya' got?
Tobasco Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2003
Posts: 2,809
sketcha

Thanks, I'm learning...hehe!...:>)

Mag
jdrabinski Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
Mike, you are tone deaf. I was showing how absurd it is to align this issue with any political party. Of course I don't believe that argument.

Funny thing...no one here actually seems to know what the issue is in court. Or at least we aren't discussing it. Let's think about it. You realize the implication here: if someone bombs a building and looked at my website where there are directions for building a bomb, then I am culpable for their crime. That's a serious breach of my right to free expression. So, while you and I have no sympathy with NAMBLA (we can agree on that), there are big issues in this case.

If the ACLU tends to draw liberals, well, that says something about how conservatives are very comfortable with violating constitutional rights in the name of THEIR morality and religion. Read up on the ACLU. They defend the principles of this country regardless of the belief system of those they defend. Makes me uncomfortable...I could never do it. But that says something about their courage and commitment to this country. Thank god they exist. And, further, if they are so liberal, why did they defend the KKK? That association is just so much nonsense and misunderstanding.

John
Tobasco Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2003
Posts: 2,809

John

Going to start with the first insult, huh? Go ahead, you are the one that was unclear, not me. If you didnt really mean what you said, then why not say that this is just a scenario.

Another thing, how is the KKK Republican related?

Mag
Tobasco Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2003
Posts: 2,809

Oh, one thing. Dont dig up some ancient history to make your point. Something current please.

Mag
jdrabinski Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
What party did David Duke run with in Louisiana?
Tobasco Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2003
Posts: 2,809
JD

He ran as a Republican. Not embraced by the party though. He was repudiated by the Republican party quite some time ago.

Nice try, but that doesnt cut it. He only ran as a Republican in an attempt to mainstream his racist beliefs.

Give me another one.

Mag
jdrabinski Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
Yeah, right, he just 'happened' to run as a republican! LOL! Please.

Trent Lott regularly addressed the Council of Conservative Citizens in Mississippi, a new version of the White Citizens Council. Both are known as the 'gentleman's Klan.'

John
cwilhelmi Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 07-24-2001
Posts: 2,739
Mag - Your proof was for Arkansas only, anything with national info?
cwilhelmi Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 07-24-2001
Posts: 2,739
Strom Thurmond? (sp)
Tobasco Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2003
Posts: 2,809

John, do you think I made that up? Yea, right. I dont try to mislead, just to support my position. If it seems that way to you, you are wrong. Below is a copy & paste of what I read about him.


As Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan in the 1970s, David Duke urged Klan members to "get out of the cow pasture and into hotel meeting rooms." For the past 25 years, he has increasingly attempted to follow his own advice, by using code words, and increasingly disguising his ideas behind more mainstream conservative-sounding rhetoric. As a result, in 2000 David Duke remains one of the most dangerous extremists in America.

Starting as a small-time leader of a campus white supremacist organization at Louisiana State University in the early 1970s, Duke, now 49, has had many incarnations. In an attempt to demystify Klan ritual, he renamed the position of Grand Wizard "National Director," and referred to cross burnings as "illuminations." In 1980, Duke resigned from the KKK and formed a "political organization" to promote the cause of "White Rights," The National Association for the Advancement of White People (NAAWP). He has also unsuccessfully attempted to host a racist radio talk show program in Louisiana.

Another tactic in Duke's strategy of "mainstreaming" racism has been his effort to run for political office. Although he was elected to the Louisiana State Legislature in 1989, as a political candidate Duke has been largely unsuccessful, losing bids for Governor and the U.S. Senate in Louisiana, and for President of the United States in 1988 and 1992. Most recently, in May, 1999, he lost the race for US Congress. Although he has been repudiated by the national leadership of the Republican Party, currently he is serving as party chairman for the St. Tamany Parish in Louisiana.

In November 1998, he self-published My Awakening, a 700-page autobiographical magnum opus of Duke's racism, anti-Semitism, and bigotry.

In January 2000, Duke announced the formation of a new organization, NOFEAR (The National Organization For European American Rights), whose purpose is to "defend the civil rights of European Americans."

Since the formation of his new organization, Duke has made no secret of his allegiances to other racist and anti-Semitic organizations. He has reportedly appeared at a variety of extremist events, including a meeting of The American Friends of the British National Party in March, and an American Renaissance conference in April, 2000. In addition, in keeping with the stated goals and political ideology of NOFEAR, he has appeared at various pro-Confederate flag, anti-immigrant, and anti-affirmative action rallies. He also claims to have completed another book, which will be entitled "The Ultimate Supremacism," which he says will be released in the fall of 2000, and is currently working on another book "about the spiritual aspect of the struggle to preserve and protect our heritage."

The following three decades of quotations demonstrate that, no matter how David Duke attempts to recreate himself, his own words reveal that he has always been and remains David Duke, the hatemonger.

Main Entry: re·pu·di·ate
Pronunciation: ri-'pyü-dE-"At
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -at·ed; -at·ing
Etymology: Latin repudiatus, past participle of repudiare, from repudium rejection of a prospective spouse, divorce, probably from re- + pudEre to shame
Date: 1545
1 : to divorce or separate formally from (a woman)
2 : to refuse to have anything to do with : DISOWN
3 a : to refuse to accept; especially : to reject as unauthorized or as having no binding force b : to reject as untrue or unjust (repudiate a charge)
4 : to refuse to acknowledge or pay
synonym see DECLINE

Sorry its so long.

Mag
jdrabinski Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
Bob Barr?
jdrabinski Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
Jesse Helms?
jdrabinski Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
And what was that with the bizarre Arkansas link?
Tobasco Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2003
Posts: 2,809

Chris, if you read on. It says that this states percentages closely mirror the national stats. Thats why I still went with it.

Mag
cwilhelmi Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 07-24-2001
Posts: 2,739
found it, I'd still like to see how closely it's mirrored, but that's just cause I'm a data geek!!
cwilhelmi Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 07-24-2001
Posts: 2,739
if you look at this I think JD is actually right based on actual voting.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/epolls/US/P000.html
sketcha Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 03-26-2003
Posts: 3,238
Chris,

I don't think that exit poll link you posted has any real bearing on this discussion. I expect a little more from a self described "data geek". : )
cwilhelmi Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 07-24-2001
Posts: 2,739
exit polls have proven to be quite accurate actually, and it's more informative that Arkansas based info. I didn't say it was the grail of data, just another source with data based on actual voting.
sketcha Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 03-26-2003
Posts: 3,238
People DO sometimes vote against party lines, Chris. Keep looking.
Tobasco Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2003
Posts: 2,809

Chris I've looked at your link. It does show that JD would be correct. But it's not like its a landslide by any means.

I dont believe anyone can assume anything when its that close. also, I really dont know how accurate exit polls are, so I will assume they are legit. Unless I find otherwise.

Mag
GTofMurphy Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 05-16-2002
Posts: 341
Hell Sen. Robert Byrd the long time Dem from West Virginia was a "member" of the KKK. I have always wondered where the outrage is on this. I forgot, he is a Dem and he has delivered more "pork" than Jimmy Dean.

If he was a member of the GOP, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and the other "poverty pimps" would still be protesting on the Capital steps. The media would start any coverage of him by saying "Former clan memeber and current GOP Sen. Robert Byrd..."
GT
jdrabinski Offline
#44 Posted:
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
Yep, Robert Byrd should have been thrown out of the Senate. I'm with you on that one.

Problem is that he is the only one conservatives trot out on this issue. He's an old fart who spoke against integration on the Senate floor, condemned MLK, Jr. publicly...he and others (Helms and Thurmond chief among them) should have been tossed out. My opinion.

Mike, if you think the 'repudiation' of Duke was anything other than a wink-and-nod, then you don't understand conservative Southern politics. That's ok. Neither did I until I spent many years in the South. I was there when Duke ran. Very wink-and-nod.

Thank god he lost...but to a crook! Louisiana, a state I love for many reasons, is flat out crazy. Normal rules do not apply. When fishing, drinking, listening to live music...this is a good thing. When doing politics, well, sometimes it is better to just look the other way. LOL!

John
GTofMurphy Offline
#45 Posted:
Joined: 05-16-2002
Posts: 341
jdarbinski,

You make my point quite nicely. Byrd has a racist past and just didn't speak out on race issues, he was "Klan". Helms and Thurmond also have pasts that they should not be proud of. But look at how they are portrayed differently in the media and by opposing parties. Anytime Helms and Thurmond are mentioned in the news or by Democrats they bring up their past to frame them as evil and bad no matter what the issue is.

I don’t recall this being said in the GOP controlled Senate “The floor recognizes the ex-Klan racist from the great State of West Virginia Sen. Byrd. And I certainly don’t remember NBC, ABC,CBS,CNN,MSNBC or any other news org mentioning his past during his daily assaults against the Bush administration position on Iraq.
GT
jdrabinski Offline
#46 Posted:
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
I disagree. I hear all of the time about Byrd's past. It isn't some kind of secret, you know.

The fact remains, however, that Byrd is a lone example, whereas the Republican examples stretch VERY far indeed. Byrd seems an exception, but the Republican examples seem to point to a pattern.

John
tailgater Offline
#47 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
we're straying from the issue.

How can you be against NAMBLA but support their right to advertise, teach, organize and exist.

This isn't some sciecne experiment dealing with theoreticals. "HOW" to build a bomb and actually building one are two distinct concepts.

But organizing a group of perverts and teaching them how to lure innocent kids into their grasp deserves NO respect nor representation.

I honestly don't see any grey area here. The ACLU has outlived it's usefulness. Period.
jdrabinski Offline
#48 Posted:
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
With that dangerous moron Ashcroft in power, we need the ACLU more than ever. The guy thinks it is immoral to dance! How did anyone ever take this guy seriously? I mean, hey, after Footloose, I thought we settled the idea that dancing is the tool of the devil.

But seriously, defenders of principles are NEVER not needed. If the principles matter, their defenders are needed. Maybe you don't value freedom of speech much?

I don't see the difference between the NAMBLA case and the bomb building instructions. Both promote destructive actions. But to put people in jail for what they say criminalizes speech...and that's a violation of the first amendment.

Sorry! It just is. No two ways about it.

John
jdrabinski Offline
#49 Posted:
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
"How can you be against NAMBLA but support their right to advertise, teach, organize and exist."

I am just as opposed to the Christian right-wing as I am to NAMBLA, but I don't want laws to prevent them from existing. Again, you cannot be prosecuted in this country for your ideas. Sorry, that's the price of freedom. Uncomfortable, but a pretty decent system.

John
Tobasco Offline
#50 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2003
Posts: 2,809

John, I respectfully, but strongly disagree. To even put NAMBLA and Christians in the same catagory, whether Christian extremist or not, is wrong.

NAMBLA's policy is to encourage sex between adults and minors. And even give information on how to lure in children to take advantage of them.

There has definately been some Christian priests,(especially Catholic,which I am)that have taken advantage of children. That is terrible, but not the policy of the Church.

To say that they are equally looked upon, is unfair in my opinion.

Mag
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>