Author Topic: ACLU: Did you know.... (Read 1638 times)

Gunslinger · « **Reply #45 on:** December 20, 2004, 12:13:24 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Suave
I don't know, why do you think?

They fought for those people's freedom to exercise religion, and again I agree with the ACLU here.

this proves the point suave......how can you be for one thing but against the other when they are both examples of civil liberties being infringed apon.

The fair use of the parks in SD means that the Boy Scouts had to allow open access to the parks to the public.

The ACLU took a win win situation wich did not show AT ALL any religious encroachment on govt.

Plain and simple the ACLU has an agenda. They are for civil liberties unless it's the boyscouts. They are for privacy but wont subject themselves to the same standards.

How can you be a champion of civil liberties when you discriminatly defend one right but not another.

ALSO:

This whole fiasco with the LA County seal with a cross on it. The majority of the people did not mind the cross and it could easily be proven that the cross is their for historical and not religious reasons.

But here's the real kicker.

LA county chose not to fight the ACLU and give in to its demands. The council was quoted as saying that the cost would outweigh the rewards. BUT after the coucil ruled on the seal it was estimated that it would cost $1 MILLION in taxpayer money to replace it on all city property.

So here we have an organization going after a citys historical NOT religious reference that nobody minded in the first place and costing LA taxpayers $1million. had the city chose to fight it the lawyer fees would still have cost the taxpayers money.

AGENDA

Suave · « **Reply #46 on:** December 20, 2004, 12:16:37 AM »

Right, so your only problem with them is that they don't do enough, they're selective. Isn't that better than doing nothing at all?

Even if they fought only for the civil rights for a tiny demographic like say cuban's who can't dance, they are still fighting for someones liberties. Why do you think that is wrong?

Anymore examples? The boyscouts in the city park isn't enough to make me dislike them.

Suave · « **Reply #47 on:** December 20, 2004, 12:18:10 AM »

What do you think the secret agenda is ?

Gunslinger · « **Reply #48 on:** December 20, 2004, 12:19:43 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Suave
What do you think the secret agenda is ?

did you even read the post? they specifically target the Boy Scouts.

They specifically target Christian symbols.

Suave · « **Reply #49 on:** December 20, 2004, 12:25:08 AM »

You mean the post about them fighting for jesus followers to practice their religion ?

rpm · « **Reply #50 on:** December 20, 2004, 12:30:45 AM »

I think Riptroll is still mad about Miranda v. Arizona. Before that cops had it sweet and easy. It did'nt matter if you actually did the crime or not. It did'nt matter if you wanted an attorney or could afford one. It did'nt matter if they beat you with rubber hoses to get a confession. It did'nt matter if police violated The Constitution of The United States. Stupid ACLU.

Mighty1 · « **Reply #51 on:** December 20, 2004, 07:45:07 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Suave
That's nice. But I don't think organizations that discriminate against atheists and homos should get any kind of support from our government, and I'm right. And the ACLU seems to agree with me.

Does anybody have any examples that would change my opinion of the ACLU?

This one should have changed your mind.

Putting Gays with young boys is like putting a fox in the hen house.

AKS\/\/ulfe · « **Reply #52 on:** December 20, 2004, 07:46:57 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mighty1
This one should have changed your mind.

Putting Gays with young boys is like putting a fox in the hen house.

Now THAT is funny!

Be sure to confess your sins little boy, mm mmmmmm.
-SW

lazs2 · « **Reply #53 on:** December 20, 2004, 08:07:09 AM »

suave... it is perfectly fine to dicriminate against homsexuals so far as haveing men take young boys out on camping trips.. this is exactly the same kind of discrimination that prevents a hetro man from takintg young girls out on a camping trip. try to be a little logical.

the rights the aclu standw up for rarely interest me except in a peripheral way and the rights they espouse are gerneraly ones that I don't care about or, are oppossed to. I am not all hot about the seperation of church and state so far as saying the G word. I am not enraged by nativity scenes or confederate flags.. I don't get all warm and fuzzy about KKK rights either. I don't think there is a place for homo scout leaders.

lazs

slimm50 · « **Reply #54 on:** December 20, 2004, 08:18:24 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Suave
Other than fanatics, why do people dislike the ACLU ?

Are you serious?? How old are you?

slimm50 · « **Reply #55 on:** December 20, 2004, 08:19:59 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by rpm
I think Riptroll is still mad about Miranda v. Arizona. Before that cops had it sweet and easy. It did'nt matter if you actually did the crime or not. It did'nt matter if you wanted an attorney or could afford one. It did'nt matter if they beat you with rubber hoses to get a confession. It did'nt matter if police violated The Constitution of The United States. Stupid ACLU.

Problem with the ACLU is they threw the baby out with the dirty bath water.

Suave · « **Reply #56 on:** December 20, 2004, 08:48:51 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
suave... it is perfectly fine to dicriminate against homsexuals so far as haveing men take young boys out on camping trips.. this is exactly the same kind of discrimination that prevents a hetro man from takintg young girls out on a camping trip. try to be a little logical.

the rights the aclu standw up for rarely interest me except in a peripheral way and the rights they espouse are gerneraly ones that I don't care about or, are oppossed to. I am not all hot about the seperation of church and state so far as saying the G word. I am not enraged by nativity scenes or confederate flags.. I don't get all warm and fuzzy about KKK rights either. I don't think there is a place for homo scout leaders.

lazs

I didn't think about gay scout leaders, I was thinking about gay scouts.

Gunslinger · « **Reply #57 on:** December 20, 2004, 09:40:38 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Suave
I didn't think about gay scout leaders, I was thinking about gay scouts.

but why would that matter. The US govt. today endorses or respects the establishment of many organizations that are in fact discriminatory in nature and in some sense religious.

So you like the fact that the ACLU likes to cost the taxpayers $1million for a reference to a historical heratige?

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #58 on:** December 20, 2004, 10:34:55 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Why would the ACLU be for a religious group using a park on the east coast and against it on the west coast?

Quote

Originally posted by Suave
I don't know, why do you think?

They fought for those people's freedom to exercise religion, and again I agree with the ACLU here.

The ACLU fought against it on the west coast, for it on the east coast.

I'm confused... you are both for it and against it, or do I misinterpret your stance?

Suave · « **Reply #59 on:** December 20, 2004, 10:41:05 AM »

I said that I agraid with their stance protecting peoples right to have religious rites and ceremonies on land that they lease from public parks. So obviously I can't agree with the opposite.