|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: What's the beef with the ACLU? | |||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1487 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I was simply referring to the fact that you and I don't see eye to eye real often, and our discussions have gotten rather heated at times. But mainly, it was a joke. Heh, gotcha. If it's been heated in the past, it's just a reflection of my passion for the issues. It was never personal. And I'm sorry if you took it that way. Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled demolition of the opponents of civil liberties...
|
|||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1487 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
-Dick Morris; former Campaign Advisor to President Clinton Well, shit, NJ - they never start the erosion with the good people. They always start the erosion by eroding the liberties of those nobody else will stand up for. Why do you think Hitler started with the Jews?
Because they commiserate and collaborate. What's your evidence that they did so in this case? This is nonsense at best, NJ. The topic is the ACLU, not the NLG.
Kidnapping and molestation aren't bad enough? They're not enough to support your assertions, no. Where does it advocate murder in the document you linked to?
The murder by Jaynes and Sicari should be on their own heads. For doing something that they never advocated? Advocated against, in fact? I realize I'm drawing some fine distinctions, but what you're doing is ridiculous. To go from a pamphlet that advocates "consensual" relationships between adults and minors to "the ACLU supports raping and murdering children" is a flight of fancy, NJ. It's ridiculous.
The plain fact about this nation is that it is predominantly comprised of Christians. Fascinating but I don't see how that justifies special privileges. The nation is also comprised predominantly of white people. Should we all get a check from the government or something?
Maybe they should go visit Iraq or Syria where Christians are shot inside their homes. That's some real hardship. Maybe you didn't notice, but they're the ACLU. As in "American." Not "Iraqi" or "Syrian." But I recognize that issues of geography are troublesome for you. This isn't the first time you've been unable to recollect exactly which country you live in.
Wait, huh? Who are you referring to? The ACLU and who? The Boy Scouts. Try to keep up, ok?
The reality is that allowing gay men to be a scoutmaster will go against the tenets of a religion, thus discriminating against their beliefs. I don't see the relevance; the Boy Scouts is non-denominational.
That's just one instance. An instance of what? The ACLU defended the religious school. On what planet is that evidence of an anti-religious agenda? You're not making a lick of sense, NJ.
It shows that they go against Christian ideals a particular ardor. They defended a Christian school! NJ, how does this statement make any sense at all? You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1487 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I know I replied already, but I'm going to break this section out because I think it basically proves my point about how conservatives approach the ACLU.
You said:
It shows that they go against Christian ideals a particular ardor. If there is even a little wiggle room for interpretation, they're all over it. Which was a continuation of a point you've made several times:
quote: quote: quote: Now, I don't know if you misread the article, or you're being deliberately dishonest, or what; but you've completely misrepresented the facts of this case by portraying the ACLU as against the Adventist school, when in fact, from your own link:
quote: Now, I don't see how the actual circumstance of the case could possibly be consistent with NJ's description of the issue. What I think happened is what almost always happens with conservatives - NJ already believed that the ACLU was anti-Christianity, believed it because that's what conservatives told him to think about it, and so when he saw an article that said "ACLU" and "Christian school", he naturally leaped to the conclusion that the ACLU was suing the school, or otherwise arguing on the side against the school - rather than advocating for the school's right to not be excluded from championship games simply because of religious beliefs about when it was appropriate to be involved in sports. At this point, I don't see how it could possibly be consistent with the facts for NJ to claim that this action by the ACLU represents anti-Christian bias on the part of the ACLU. That's a completely incoherent claim on his part, and I patiently await his retraction.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1487 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
NJ, it's astounding your links prove my point about conservative criticisms not being reality-based. In addition to your bizarre habit of posting cases the ACLU isn't even involved in as though that somehow impeaches them, your Media Matters link is a great example of how conservatives like Tucker Carlson ignore the facts to present a biased picture of how the ACLU operates:
quote: Now, of course, you completely misrepresent the situation when you say:
The only reason why the ACLU chimed in was because they were questioned on why they hadn't supported him on [the Tucker Carlson show]. Apparently you're having some trouble with the timeline, here? Let me lay it out for you. First The ACLU defends Rush Limbaugh in his drug case, then Tucker Carlson accuses them of not defending Rush Limbaugh in his drug case. Not the other way around, as you state. As I've said, conservatives, finding no basis in reality to conclude that the ACLU plays favorites or has an anti-Christian agenda, apparently feel it's completely appropriate to simply argue from falsehoods to prove their point. What I can't understand is how you would read an article where Calrson criticizes them for not doing something they actually did do, and conclude that the ACLU only did it in response to Carlson's accusations. What, they responded two years before he made them? In what world is that supposed to make sense to us?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1487 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Fundamentalists see the world in black-and-white. There are no "maybes" or even uncertainties, and there certainly cannot be anything like a "difference of opinion". Eh. You could style the beliefs of many liberals that way if you wanted, too. For instance, myself. I can't think of anything more abhorrent than the idea that a 14-year-old rape victim would be forced to go to her rapist for permission to expunge the hideous, incestuous aberration growing within her, and I can't see any room for a "difference of opinion" on that. Making a girl do that is unconscionable, and it outweighs whatever social benefit is supposed to stem from parental consent laws in general. (What social benefit is supposed to stem from parental consent laws, anyway? More 14-year-olds raising children they didn't want in the first place, just because their parents told them to? How on Earth is it a parent's decision whether or not a child should become a parent themselves?)
|
|||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1487 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I think that my sentence is a pretty good description of a fundamentalist in general: someone who believes that they are absolutely right, that no other belief is legitimate, and that everyone else absolutely must live according to their beliefs. Ok, but I am somebody that believes that everybody else absolutely must live according my my belief - and my belief is that people must live according to their own beliefs. So if we're lumping everybody together who doesn't see room for compromise, I find myself in the ridiculous position of having my adamant position that people be free lumped in with people who believe that a 2000-year-old book is going to tell you how to live, whether you like it or not. Which is why I find your construction somewhat ridiculous. No compromise can be possible between the position that prizes individual self-determination and the position that determines for everybody else what is best. Recognizing that isn't an act of fundamentalism; it's an act of sense.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1487 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
So what is the beef with the ACLU? The ACLU seems to have a pretty rigorous definition of what they stand for as an organization and take legal cases based on that definition regardless of how their members might feel about the parties they're defending (Rush Limbaugh, Christian schools, NAMBLA, etc.) They appear to have very little bias in who they take on. You see? By simply inverting your post I've answered your question. To conservatives, the idea of an organization that defends civil liberties and individuals from government expansion is anathema. (What, did you think they were the party of small government, or something?)
|
|||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1487 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
LOL!
Oh man, NJ. I just want you to know that I'm not responsible for this, either; obviously I'm nearly in complete disagreement with your views but only on my worst day would I respond to you in the tone they use over there. Which is not to say that it isn't funny; but I think arguments - even transparently silly ones - that people take the time to write down deserve to have their silliness unpacked and refuted, not simply ridiculed. (Although I thought the picture of "Even Jesus wants you to STFU" was pretty funny.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1487 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I can't believe neither of you remembered Carico! She's responsible for something like half of the remarks quoted on the FSTDT page, and we certainly had a fair number of her doozies here, too.
She certainly keeps herself busy. It's too bad that she didn't, apparently, learn anything while she was here. Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024