The ACLU
Thread Starter
Stuff and things.
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,972
Likes: 0
From: New York
Originally Posted by DVPGSR
My point is that just because we have the rights as individuals does not mean we have the right to them all the time. As in my "fire" example I have the right to free speach but cannot use it to the detriment of other people. Same thing if I go on a subway. I have the right not to be searched as an individual but when getting on public transportation there are times I need to be for the good of the public.
I feel there are times that the individual rights get superceded by the collective rights of the masses, the ACLU obviously seems that the individual supercedes the masses. That is my issue with the ACLU.
I feel there are times that the individual rights get superceded by the collective rights of the masses, the ACLU obviously seems that the individual supercedes the masses. That is my issue with the ACLU.
Ayn Rand, philosopher and novelist, wrote endlessly about the evils of what she called collectivism, which she seems to define as public policy geared towards the good of the masses over the rights of the individual. Ayn Rand's philosophies are generally held in very high regard among neoconservatives. To see you trumpeting the public good over the rights of the individual is ironic to say the least.
I need sleep...
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
From: NH
Originally Posted by benjamin
A quick aside:
Ayn Rand, philosopher and novelist, wrote endlessly about the evils of what she called collectivism, which she seems to define as public policy geared towards the good of the masses over the rights of the individual. Ayn Rand's philosophies are generally held in very high regard among neoconservatives. To see you trumpeting the public good over the rights of the individual is ironic to say the least.
Ayn Rand, philosopher and novelist, wrote endlessly about the evils of what she called collectivism, which she seems to define as public policy geared towards the good of the masses over the rights of the individual. Ayn Rand's philosophies are generally held in very high regard among neoconservatives. To see you trumpeting the public good over the rights of the individual is ironic to say the least.
But do not get me wrong, I value the individual greatly but feel there are limitations on what an individual can do. My big beef with the ACLU is that they seem to be working against keeping us (the collective masses) safe for the sake of individual civil liberties. The last thing I want is for more people to die in a terrorist attack because the law enforcement there to protect us has to be politically correct so as not to infringe upon any specific individual. If I have to be double or triple checked at an airport because I am sick with a fever and sweating and fit the profile of a potential terrorist then so be it. If my bag gets searched on the Boston subways because there is a potential threat then no big deal. I would much rather that than getting blown up on my way to work.
it's sarcastic dude
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
I personally think it's foolish to believe that letting our government search us harder and ignore the liberties they exist to protect will make us any safer. I mean I understand how allowing law enforcement more power suggests a safer country, but in reality a cunning terrorist will reearch and evade whatever the protection method is, and danger is an inescapable part of life. Did Germany's fasicm protect it's citizens from English/ American/French carpet bombing during world war II (bringin that up only cause the nazi's serve as a example of anti-civil liberty order taken to the extreme, german's still died in what could have been called "terrorist attacks" by allied forces and hardcore jews and natives)
And really if your bag gets searched no big deal, I agree,, but laws that let that happen are the start of a slippery slope towards a populace that let's it's governmnet hold people without being charged (only terrorists, of course) and daily harrasment by an unchecked government. It's the citizen's job to keep governmnet in it's place, I see the ACLU as taking that to the extreme, (sometimes stupid extremes, usually things I'm thankful someone's fighting for) possibly so extreme in response to the average american not giving a fuck.
"Those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither" << a terrorist (aka a forefather I can't recall who)
And really if your bag gets searched no big deal, I agree,, but laws that let that happen are the start of a slippery slope towards a populace that let's it's governmnet hold people without being charged (only terrorists, of course) and daily harrasment by an unchecked government. It's the citizen's job to keep governmnet in it's place, I see the ACLU as taking that to the extreme, (sometimes stupid extremes, usually things I'm thankful someone's fighting for) possibly so extreme in response to the average american not giving a fuck.
"Those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither" << a terrorist (aka a forefather I can't recall who)
it's sarcastic dude
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Oh and benjamin, i dunno if disagreeing with a neo-con author is really that ironic ( i assume because DVGPSR is a conservative??) the neo-cons' are pretty far away from any real conservative values, I persoanlly really really really doubt that 99% of the people who vote republican would agree with their agenda (assuming they don't own a major defense corporation)
http://www.newamericancentury.org/st...principles.htm
http://www.rotten.com/library/conspiracy/pnac/
a shame they (repub voters) don't do a little more research into who they elect eh?
http://www.newamericancentury.org/st...principles.htm
http://www.rotten.com/library/conspiracy/pnac/
a shame they (repub voters) don't do a little more research into who they elect eh?
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
I don't know if posting those links provided any credibility, especially since Rotten.com is really known as a great news source.
Both sites promote their views with liberal slants, and not surprising they even dive into the old "conspiracy theory" one more time. Kill, I don't have a problem with the ACLU questioning the government when there is, for example, a police brutality or illegal search and seizure. But when the ACLU starts dwelling into such outrageous extremes as putting other people's lives in danger? Than it's just plain stupid and ignorant.. It's almost like the ACLU is seeing like how far they can go or get away with. Like a young child who raises his volume of voice louder, and louder, and louder, until the parent settles the young child down. When the ACLU defends a sexual predator and tries to tell the legal system, Release him on the streets, give him medication.. ohh but not to much, and maybe a few hours of therapy... ohh but do not keep track of his therapy hours, that's espionage -- That should cure what ails him! Maybe nobody on this board knows but you cannot cure pedophilia. It can only be controlled to a certain degree (like the HIV Virus) but it cannot be cured. You put a former pedophile out on the streets and you risk another Amber Alert in the near future. ACLU is diving into such stupid extremes it is risking other people's lives; children at that!
Both sites promote their views with liberal slants, and not surprising they even dive into the old "conspiracy theory" one more time. Kill, I don't have a problem with the ACLU questioning the government when there is, for example, a police brutality or illegal search and seizure. But when the ACLU starts dwelling into such outrageous extremes as putting other people's lives in danger? Than it's just plain stupid and ignorant.. It's almost like the ACLU is seeing like how far they can go or get away with. Like a young child who raises his volume of voice louder, and louder, and louder, until the parent settles the young child down. When the ACLU defends a sexual predator and tries to tell the legal system, Release him on the streets, give him medication.. ohh but not to much, and maybe a few hours of therapy... ohh but do not keep track of his therapy hours, that's espionage -- That should cure what ails him! Maybe nobody on this board knows but you cannot cure pedophilia. It can only be controlled to a certain degree (like the HIV Virus) but it cannot be cured. You put a former pedophile out on the streets and you risk another Amber Alert in the near future. ACLU is diving into such stupid extremes it is risking other people's lives; children at that!
it's sarcastic dude
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Wow Civic
Both sites promote their views with liberal slants, and not surprising they even dive into the old "conspiracy theory" one more time.
The first site is the neo-con group themselves official site. As in the group Dick Cheney and all of them belong to, it's THEIR site. Do you think thet have a hardcore liberal slant against themselves or did you just say that without knowing what you're talking about? Quick edit it before some quotes! .... Doh!
And I do agree that some of the things the ACLU does are stupid, I even said that, but I think most of the cases you posted are mostly things taken out of context with langauge that makes then sound more ridiculous then they are and that it would be wrong to discredit the group entirley based on a Washington Post Op Ed.
You bring up pedophilia, and for the reasons you mention pedophiles lose a significant chunk of civil rights. But the way the law works a 17 year old who gets arrested fr having sex with his same age girlfriend gets the same treatment, technically is a pedophile. That is kinda ridiculous, I think we can agree. Of course "ACLU defends pedophiles!" makes a good headline, but if I was a guy who had to deal with that shaming the rest of my life for consentual sex with a same age girlfriend I'd be happy to have SOMEONE defending my rights.
it's sarcastic dude
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
oh and rotten, along with realy ****ed up pictures, has an EXCELLENT library of open-minded and in depth well researched essays.(they actually have a slight libertarian biased , which is a conservative party but they definitley come off anti-republican in some articles)
Everyone should really check out
www.rotten.com/library
Everyone should really check out
www.rotten.com/library
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 682
Likes: 0
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."
Ben Franklin
Taking away freedoms in this country voids the entire purpose of why we exist. As said before, it's a fine line we cross. It should continue to be debated and agrued over. Doing so creates a balance.
The ACLU may go a bit overboard sometimes, but it is better to file too many suits and get them thrown out than to not file enough. They have done many wonderful things for people in the past, and continue to do so.
Oh, and on the original post from Civic:
Declaring a 'Bible Week' and simply observing an important figure are too completely different things. The governor as a person has the right to say whatever she pleases. However, she does NOT have the right to declare a 'Bible Week". More specifics on the story are needed. Please, share them with us.
Ben Franklin
Taking away freedoms in this country voids the entire purpose of why we exist. As said before, it's a fine line we cross. It should continue to be debated and agrued over. Doing so creates a balance.
The ACLU may go a bit overboard sometimes, but it is better to file too many suits and get them thrown out than to not file enough. They have done many wonderful things for people in the past, and continue to do so.
Oh, and on the original post from Civic:
"Case in point, with former Arizona Governor Jane Hull. In 1998, then-Governor Hull issued a proclamation, declaring a "Bible Week" for her state. The ACLU immediately threatened to sue, claiming a violation of the so-called "separation of church and state." Rather than face a drawn-out legal battle, Hull backed down.
Two years later, the same Governor Hull issued another proclamation—this time commemorating the birth of Buddha. While many anticipated another threat of a lawsuit from the ACLU, none came. This time, an ACLU spokesperson said, "Although we may think proclamations are inappropriate, they may not violate the Constitution. "
Two years later, the same Governor Hull issued another proclamation—this time commemorating the birth of Buddha. While many anticipated another threat of a lawsuit from the ACLU, none came. This time, an ACLU spokesperson said, "Although we may think proclamations are inappropriate, they may not violate the Constitution. "
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Mellow, any further specifics of that story are irrelevant. Enough information in that story is there that you can gather the ACLU does not agree with Christianity. They do, however, endorse other minority's religions.
Do you honestly believe that if Gov. Hull declared December the 25th, just one day out of the year, to commemorate the birth of Jesus that the ACLU wouldn't go bizzerks? Good Grief, just look at how they've declared war on the word "CHRISTMAS" let alone if Gov. Hull set aside a day of the year to commemorate the birth of Jesus?? However, Hull, did a smart thing. She trapped the ACLU to reveal double standards against Christianity by declaring one day the "birth of Buddah." What did the ACLU do? Absolutely nothing. To declare a day "the birth of Jesus" is different than to declare a day "the birth of Buddah" --- why??
Ask the ACLU!
Do you honestly believe that if Gov. Hull declared December the 25th, just one day out of the year, to commemorate the birth of Jesus that the ACLU wouldn't go bizzerks? Good Grief, just look at how they've declared war on the word "CHRISTMAS" let alone if Gov. Hull set aside a day of the year to commemorate the birth of Jesus?? However, Hull, did a smart thing. She trapped the ACLU to reveal double standards against Christianity by declaring one day the "birth of Buddah." What did the ACLU do? Absolutely nothing. To declare a day "the birth of Jesus" is different than to declare a day "the birth of Buddah" --- why??
Ask the ACLU!