Author Topic: WTG to the ACLU (Read 3598 times)

lukster · « **Reply #90 on:** July 25, 2006, 12:37:13 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by rpm
You're going to have to spoon feed this one Sandy.

If he wants me to believe that it is illegal for a private citizen to proseltyze on public property he simply has to link the law. Otherwise I'm calling bs.

Sandman · « **Reply #91 on:** July 25, 2006, 12:40:10 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by rpm
You're going to have to spoon feed this one Sandy.

I think I need a bigger spoon.

lukster · « **Reply #92 on:** July 25, 2006, 12:47:29 AM »

If proseltyzing were illegal on public property would the ACLU be backing these religious anti-war nuts right to do so at a funeral on public property? Come on, we both know it ain't so. Everyone makes mistakes, no biggie.

The ACLU knows there is absolutely no danger of these whackos converting anyone to their faith and so they'll make a few bucks off Joe taxpayer while giving the appearance they are protecting everyone's freedoms. When there is a real possibility someone might be influenced like the instance I mentioned they fight tooth and nail to shut them up.

lukster · « **Reply #93 on:** July 25, 2006, 12:49:47 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
I think I need a bigger spoon.

If you can't admit you were wrong at least stop trying to make it look like I'm the one that's ignorant.

Sandman · « **Reply #94 on:** July 25, 2006, 12:50:08 AM »

Churches can't be public property and cemetaries are rarely public property, AFAIK.

Sandman · « **Reply #95 on:** July 25, 2006, 12:51:53 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lukster
If you can't admit you were wrong at least stop trying to make it look like I'm the one that's ignorant.

Wrong about what?

lukster · « **Reply #96 on:** July 25, 2006, 12:55:53 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
Wrong about what?

Are you serious? You said you cannot proseltyze on public property.

Sandman · « **Reply #97 on:** July 25, 2006, 12:58:08 AM »

Oh now you want to mince words.

lukster · « **Reply #98 on:** July 25, 2006, 01:02:44 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
People do not have the right to proselytize on public property.

Mince words? I say that people do have the right to proseltyze on public property. It's guaranteed by the first amendment. I have to admit that it's sometimes difficult to know when people are joking in a text forum. You've been giving me the runaround. Are you yanking my chain?

Sandman · « **Reply #99 on:** July 25, 2006, 01:05:33 AM »

Apparently, the Supreme Court does not agree. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that they are the experts.

lukster · « **Reply #100 on:** July 25, 2006, 01:08:28 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
Apparently, the Supreme Court does not agree. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that they are the experts.

How can you believe that the ruling you cited had anything at all to do with what a private citizen does on public property? Please, give me your rationale.

Sandman · « **Reply #101 on:** July 25, 2006, 01:10:02 AM »

Establishment Clause.

lukster · « **Reply #102 on:** July 25, 2006, 01:13:16 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
Establishment Clause.

This is pointless. I should have resisted Thrawn's challenge.

Sandman · « **Reply #103 on:** July 25, 2006, 01:23:23 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Thrawn
What a long way of saying, "I can't support my assertations.".

LOL.

lukster · « **Reply #104 on:** July 25, 2006, 01:28:14 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
LOL.

I'll never learn.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-2036.ZS.html

" 1. Milford violated the Club’s free speech rights when it excluded the Club from meeting after hours at the school."