Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They've also defended Rush Limbaugh and Jerry Falwell.
The reason they are out favor with right wingers is that the right wing today is the main culprit in trying to take away civil liberties. On issues such as pornography, gay rights, warrantless wiretapping, and government secrecy.
Listen, I am not about to call myself or align myself with wiretappin' govenment secrecy lovin' right wingers.
But, while I do support or at least understand the majority of the ACLUs work, I do not nor will I ever condone or support their intensive efforts on behalf of NAMBLA. On that one issue alone, the ACLU has countless victims on their conscience.
Listen, I am not about to call myself or align myself with wiretappin' govenment secrecy lovin' right wingers.
But, while I do support or at least understand the majority of the ACLUs work, I do not nor will I ever condone or support their intensive efforts on behalf of NAMBLA. On that one issue alone, the ACLU has countless victims on their conscience.
Do you even know what the NAMBLA case was about? It had nothing to do with pornography. The group was advocating for a change in the law.
Since when is it a crime to organize and petition a government for a change in the law? Even those with those you vehemently disagree with?
This shouldn't come as a surprise. The ACLU is for civil liberties for ALL. Regardless of stance. By their very nature, they WILL support people with whom you disagree in their fight for free speech and other liberties. They play a very important role in this country, precisely BECAUSE they defend the people who say things we ALL disgree with.
Listen, I am not about to call myself or align myself with wiretappin' govenment secrecy lovin' right wingers.
But, while I do support or at least understand the majority of the ACLUs work, I do not nor will I ever condone or support their intensive efforts on behalf of NAMBLA. On that one issue alone, the ACLU has countless victims on their conscience.
Do you even know what the NAMBLA case was about? It had nothing to do with pornography. The group was advocating for a change in the law.
Since when is it a crime to organize and petition a government for a change in the law? Even those with those you vehemently disagree with?
Would I have brought it up if I didn't know what the case was about?
We are not talking about a group trying to revise the tax codes, or to raise the speed limits on interstates or repeal motorcycle helmet laws --- we are talking about pedophiles wanting to legalize child rape. Not consenual sex with a 17 year old boy --- children. Cut it anyway you want, but attempting to legalize a practice that leaves victims in its wake is at best disturbed. That the ACLU would give this organization any amount of credibility disgusts me.
I did say that I do understand and support the basic premise of the ACLU. The right to free speech is something that should be protected.....but protecting pedophiles should not fall underneath that heading.
The Curleys v. NAMBLA case was, legally speaking, garbage, and was found to be such by the proper authorities. It was not a close case at all, legally.
I say they are brave to go after muslims because in the past if anyone tries to be critical of the muslim religion, whether intentionally or unintentionally, a fatwa is issued for the death of that person. Let's ask Van Gough about the fatwa,....oops he's not available at this time. Let's ask Rushdi about the fatwa,...oops he's still in hiding right now.
I say they are brave to go after muslims because in the past if anyone tries to be critical of the muslim religion, whether intentionally or unintentionally, a fatwa is issued for the death of that person. Let's ask Van Gough about the fatwa,....oops he's not available at this time. Let's ask Rushdi about the fatwa,...oops he's still in hiding right now.
Then I apologize, sailordave, I thought you were being sarcastic.
I say they are brave to go after muslims because in the past if anyone tries to be critical of the muslim religion, whether intentionally or unintentionally, a fatwa is issued for the death of that person. Let's ask Van Gough about the fatwa,....oops he's not available at this time. Let's ask Rushdi about the fatwa,...oops he's still in hiding right now.
No, Rushdie's not in hiding. He probably has some extra security, but that's it. In your fear of Islam you exaggerate the situation. That probably explains the bedwetting and the need for a stern father figure like Cheney.
Salman Rushdie, to put it mildly, is not a fan of Bush or of any other religious nuts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
