Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Someone is forcing you to participate in a gay marriage? They can do that? Who knew?
You are confused about the point. The issue is whether Clergy should be forced by the Power of the State to perform, preside over, Gay Weddings, under Penalty of Law.
Take a step back and recheck your premise.
Ok.... I didn't read all the way through this thread... but in case no one brought it up....
There was an amendment passed to the very same bill that protected churches from HAVING to perform these weddings. This amendment was passed before the final vote on the gay marriage bill.
Those churches that don't want to marry same sex couples, won't have to... AS IT SHOULD BE.
NAMBLA does not deserve free speech.
No but this is exactly the kind of crap the ACLU loves to do to prove a point.
But ACLU has to have a client to make a case.
ACLU everyone loves to hate. But Jerry Falwell used them in his case and ACLU is the leader in defending street preachers against no preaching in street municipal ordinance violoation cases. They win everyone and also won the Falwell v. Virginia case.
I dont care if the ACLU could walk on water. There methods and motivations are corrupt.
NAMBLA does not deserve free speech.
NAMBLA does not deserve free speech.
Neither does the KKK or other hate group. But that is hat makes the first amendment so powerful. You don't get to decide who deserves it and who doesn't
But ACLU has to have a client to make a case.
ACLU everyone loves to hate. But Jerry Falwell used them in his case and ACLU is the leader in defending street preachers against no preaching in street municipal ordinance violoation cases. They win everyone and also won the Falwell v. Virginia case.
I dont care if the ACLU could walk on water. There methods and motivations are corrupt.
True freedom is when you seek to protect the rights of those you may despise the most.
Corrupt cases get thrown out of court. Something about The US Constitution.
NAMBLA does not deserve free speech.
Neither does the KKK or other hate group. But that is hat makes the first amendment so powerful. You don't get to decide who deserves it and who doesn't
NAMBLA does not deserve free speech.
Neither does the KKK or other hate group. But that is hat makes the first amendment so powerful. You don't get to decide who deserves it and who doesn't
NAMBLA advocates an illegal activity they dont deserve free speach.
If the ACLU can advocate for that group then they will take on any cause with no thought to if its right or wrong.
Neither does the KKK or other hate group. But that is hat makes the first amendment so powerful. You don't get to decide who deserves it and who doesn't
NAMBLA advocates an illegal activity they dont deserve free speach.
If the ACLU can advocate for that group then they will take on any cause with no thought to if its right or wrong.
I would acquit you if you put a bullet in the forehead of anyone that raped a child.
In the case of a NAMBLA member if you emptied the clip.
It is real easy to defend speech when it is speech you agree with.
But we do not have free speech unless we protect the speech of those we hate, despise and want to put that bullet in if they committ crimes against people which is different than speech.
NAMBLA advocates an illegal activity they dont deserve free speach.
If the ACLU can advocate for that group then they will take on any cause with no thought to if its right or wrong.
I would acquit you if you put a bullet in the forehead of anyone that raped a child.
In the case of a NAMBLA member if you emptied the clip.
It is real easy to defend speech when it is speech you agree with.
But we do not have free speech unless we protect the speech of those we hate, despise and want to put that bullet in if they committ crimes against people which is different than speech.
So you are saying that NAMBLA has the right to publish a website advocating molesting children and giving those sicko perverts a place to trade tactics with each other so they can be more effective? Thats insane.
The ACLU really screwed up when they defended that bunch.
Listen I have no problem with free speech what I have a problem with is the ACLU.
For Gods sake NAMBLA.
They will call anything speech and defend it.
The ACLU are also the people that defend NMBLA
ACLU Statement on Defending Free Speech of Unpopular Organizations | American Civil Liberties Union
You have an issue with free speech?
******************************
I'm not a contributor, nor do I support all actions taken by the ACLU (but in truth there are few large orgnizations where that would be different).
So with that said here are some examples of the ACLU defending the rights of indivudual religious freedoms (which is very different then challenging imposition of religion).
ACLU of New Jersey Defends Second-Grader's Right to Sing Religious Song | American Civil Liberties Union
ACLU of Georgia and Baptist Church File Religious Discrimination Lawsuit | American Civil Liberties Union
ACLU of Rhode Island Files Appeal on Behalf of Christian Prisoner Barred from Preaching at Religious Services | American Civil Liberties Union
ACLU of Michigan Defends Catholic Man Coerced to Convert to Pentecostal Faith in Drug Rehab Program | American Civil Liberties Union
ACLU Helps Free New Mexico Street Preacher From Prison | American Civil Liberties Union
ACLU Applauds Supreme Court Ruling Protecting Religious Liberty in Prisons | American Civil Liberties Union
ACLU of New Jersey Successfully Defends Right of Religious Expression by Jurors | American Civil Liberties Union
http://www.aclu.org/religion/frb/16347prs20040811.html"]http://www.aclu.org/religion/frb/16347prs20040811.html
LINCOLN --The American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska today announced that it would defend a Presbyterian church from a forced eviction by the city.
"There's no reason for the city to force the Church of the Awesome God from its home, and the city is violating both the First Amendment and federal law in doing so," said Tim Butz, Executive Director of the ACLU of Nebraska.
http://www.aclu.org/religion/frb/16354prs20040720.html"]http://www.aclu.org/religion/frb/16354prs20040720.html
DETROIT - The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan today asked the state Supreme Court to hear the case of a Catholic man who was criminally punished for not completing a Pentecostal drug rehabilitation program, which prevented him from practicing his own religious faith. His request to be transferred to another program that would allow him to practice his own faith was denied and he was sentenced to six months in jail and boot camp.
http://www.aclu.org/religion/gen/16374prs20041222.html"]http://www.aclu.org/religion/gen/16374prs20041222.html
NEWARK, NJ-- The State Supreme Court ruled today that a prosecutor violated the New Jersey Constitution when he removed two jurors from a jury pool, one for wearing Muslim religious clothing and another for having engaged in missionary activity.
"In this country, people have a right to express their religious beliefs without fear of discrimination by the government," said ACLU of New Jersey Legal Director Ed Barocas. "Excluding people from jury pools based on their religious belief or expression violates the principles of freedom found in the Bill of Rights."
ACLU of Georgia and Baptist Church File Religious Discrimination Lawsuit | American Civil Liberties Union
ACLU of Rhode Island Files Appeal on Behalf of Christian Prisoner Barred from Preaching at Religious Services | American Civil Liberties Union
Florida Officials Agree to Protect Free Speech, Suspend Insurance Requirement for Public Displays During the Holidays | American Civil Liberties Union
ACLU of New Jersey Joins Lawsuit Supporting Second-Grader's Right to Sing ""Awesome God"" at Talent Show | American Civil Liberties Union
ACLU Helps Free New Mexico Street Preacher From Prison | American Civil Liberties Union
ACLU Applauds Supreme Court Ruling Protecting Religious Liberty in Prisons | American Civil Liberties Union
Following Threat of ACLU of Virginia Lawsuit, Officials to Agree Not to Ban Baptisms in Public Parks | American Civil Liberties Union
http://aclu.org/studentsrights/expre...s20040511.html
Following ACLU Lawsuit, Town Officials Settle Lawsuit Over Denial of Zoning Permit to Pittsburgh Area Church | American Civil Liberties Union
http://aclu.org/studentsrights/expre...s20030221.html
In Win for Rev. Falwell (and the ACLU), Judge Rules VA Must Allow Churches to Incorporate | American Civil Liberties Union
Eleven-Year-Old Muslim Girl Harassed After Declining Bible From School Principal, ACLU of LA Charges | American Civil Liberties Union
ACLU Files Lawsuit on Behalf of Ohio Firefighters Forced to Attend Church Service or Face Discipline | American Civil Liberties Union
ACLU of San Diego Defends 15-Year-Old High School Honors Student Disciplined for Wearing an American Flag in Her Back Pocket | American Civil Liberties Union
http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/gen/1...s20020108.html
Battle to feed hungry at church goes on
ACLU Fights for Christmas Tree
http://www.mauinews.com/story.aspx?id=26128
ACLU Files Suit to Protect Free Speech Rights of Christian Protesting Wal-Mart's Policy on Gays
http://www.laaclu.org/News/2006/Crayton_102706.htm
ACLU of Georgia and Baptist Church File Religious Discrimination Lawsuit
ACLU of Georgia and Baptist Church File Religious Discrimination Lawsuit | American Civil Liberties Union
ACLU of WA Wins Right of Christian Minister to Preach in Spokane Plaza
ACLU of Washington
ACLU Fights for Baptist Preacher in Illinois
ACLU of Washington
ACLU Backs Christian Abortion Protester in Ohio
freedomforum.org: ACLU backs abortion protester cited for graphic poster
ACLU Defends Christian Group's Anti-Abortion Ads On Phoenix Buses
ACLU Press Release - 01/23/97 -- Phoenix Bus Advertising Policy Challenged
2004: Indiana Civil Liberties Union defends the rights of Baptist minister to preach his message on public streets: LINK
2004: After ACLU intervention on behalf of Christian valedictorian, Michigan high school agrees to stop censoring religious yearbook entries: LINK
2004: ACLU of Washington defends right of evangelical minister to preach on sidewalks: LINK
2004: ACLU of Virginia threatens lawsuit and officials agree not to prohibit baptisms on public property in Falmouth Waterside Park in Stafford County: LINK
2004: ACLU of Nevada supports free speech rights of evangelists to preach on the sidewalks of the Strip in Las Vegas: LINK
2004: ACLU of Nebraska defends church facing eviction by the City of Lincoln: LINK
2003: ACLU of Rhode Island supports rights of carolers to sing outside women's prison on Christmas Eve. Prison officials back down, agree to let the caroling take place.
2003: ACLU of Massachusetts defends students punished for distributing candy Canes with religious messages: LINK
2002: ACLU of Pennsylvania files discrimination lawsuit over denial of zoning permit for African American Baptist church: LINK
2002: ACLU of Massachusetts files brief supporting right of Church of the Good News to run ads criticizing the securalization of Christmas and promoting Christianity as the "one true religion" after the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Agency refuses to allow the ads on subways.
2002: ACLU of Iowa supports right of students to distribute Christian literature in public schools during non-instructional times. Files amicus brief in case for students barred from doing so in Davenport: LINK
2002: ACLU helps Reverend Jerry Falwell win ruling that state of Virginia must allow churches to incorporate: LINK
2002: ACLU defends Christian church's right to run "Anti-Santa" ads in Boston subways: LINK
2001: ACLU of Utah negotiates settlement enabling evangelical Christian ministry to set up booth at state fair on same terms as other vendors. Group previously had been excluded from the fair because some patrons objected to content of their message.
2000: ACLU of Maryland supports Baltimore police officer suspended for wearing his hair in locks for religious reasons.
1999: The ACLU of Maryland assists the March for Life Committee in getting a permit for an anti-abortion march in Annapolis without having to pay a $5,400 fee the city was seeking. The ACLU worked with the American Center for Law & Justice to revise a proposed city ordinance so as to keep free speech free.
1999: ACLU of West Virginia files suit on behalf of a minister who declined, for religious reasons, to have his photograph taken for a driver license.
1998: ACLU of New Jersey files a lawsuit on behalf of the right of two police officers in Newark to wear beards as a matter of religious freedom. As Muslims, the officers wore beards as part of their religious beliefs.
1998: ACLU of Eastern Missouri win job back and permission to wear pin for a nurse who lost her job because she refused to remove a cross-shaped lapel pin from her uniform. The hospital had claimed the nurse violated its employee dress code when she expressed her Christian beliefs by wearing the pin.
1997: Arizona Civil Liberties Union sues City of Phoenix to challenge an ordinance under which the City refused to allow the Children of the Rosary, an anti-abortion group, to place ads on City buses. The lawsuit was filed jointly with the American Center for Law and Justice.
1996: ACLU of Virginia files lawsuit for church in Richmond threatened with closure of its Sunday meal program by city officials because of zoning regulations.
1995: ACLU of Washington supports right of a Baptist minister to distribute religious tracts in a park in Renton after police asked him to desist because he lacked City permission. The City relented after the ACLU pointed out that the law cited against the minister applied only to commercial activities.
1995: ACLU of Vermont wins ruling from state Human Services Board waiving state Social Welfare Dept. requirement for use of Social Security numbers by students receiving Medicaid and food stamp benefits. Their parents believed that such permanent numbers represent mark of the Anti-Christ, according to the Book of Revelations. ACLU argued that their religious beliefs could be protected by use of random identifying numbers.
1995: ACLU of Massachusetts successfully defended rights of prisoners to possess and use religious articles in their cells. Worcester County Sheriff had seized rosaries, prayer beads, religious medals, books and symbols, claiming they were signs of gang membership. ACLU of MA filed suit on behalf of the prisoners' rights to practice their religion under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 and the state constitution.
1995: ACLU of Massachusetts filed friend of the court brief in support of two women who were fired for refusing to work at the racetrack on Christmas Day.
1995: ACLU of Iowa successfully sued City of Waterloo to defend right of conservative Christian activist to broadcast on public access television.
1994: ACLU of Rhode Island files a federal lawsuit on behalf of the RI State Right to Life Committee, the RI State Rifle and Revolver Association and numerous other non-profit groups challenging a House of Representatives rule that bars private, but not government, lobbyists from the floor of the House while it is in session.
1994: ACLU of Pennsylvania assisted a pregnant 17-year-old whose parents wanted her to have an abortion she didn't want. She had moved away from home to continue her pregnancy, but her parents called police to have her brought home. ACLU convinced officials to let her continue her pregnancy and live away from parents.
1993: ACLU successfully defends the right of a woman to refuse, on religious grounds, to submit to a court-ordered caesarian section.
1993: ACLU of Northern California defends an 8th-grade student's right to wear a shirt saying "Real Women Love Jesus" in school by writing letters to principal. Result: School district lifts ban on shirt. LINK
1993: ACLU of New Jersey files an amicus brief on behalf of anti-abortion picketers. "Our defense of freedom of speech clearly cannot vary, and has not varied, with the views expressed." -- ACLU attorney Frank Corrado.
1993: ACLU of Florida offers legal assistance to Operation Rescue, who refused the offer.
1993: ACLU joins battle to overturn a court ruling which banned a minister from holding meetings at a public school in New York State.
1992: ACLU of Rhode Island files a friend-of-the-court brief challenging a state judge's increase of bail for anti-abortion defendants, charged with obstructing a clinic, who refused to provide their Social Security numbers.
1991: ACLU of Northern California offers support for man arrested for displaying photographs of human fetuses. "The ACLU is pro-choice, but the fact that we might disagree with their message would never dissuade us from defending their right to speak out." --Elaine Elinson, Public Information director, ACLU-Northern California.
1990: ACLU of Southern California files a brief supporting Operation Rescue's appeal of a federal judge's ruling upholding the use of "pain compliance" techniques by L.A. police.
1990: ACLU of Rhode Island files a friend-of-the-court brief in state Supreme Court in support of anti-abortion protesters challenging the constitutionality of a town ordinance limiting residential picketing.
1990: ACLU of Central Florida backs televangelist Tammy Faye Bakker's attempt to challenge to zoning laws in Orlando, claiming the law's prohibition of churches in industrial zones violates church/state separation.
1990: ACLU of Iowa supports anti-abortionists' challenge to an Iowa City picketing ordinance.
1989: ACLU of Connecticut offers assistance to Operation Rescue demonstrators subjected to pain compliance holds. ACLU state director calls for state legislature to hold hearings on the issue and consideration forbidding their use.
1988: ACLU of Rhode Island favorably settles an administrative complaint challenging the use on police applicants of a standardized psychological test which asks questions relating to fundamentalist religious beliefs.
1982: ACLU of Rhode Island mounts a successful federal challenge on behalf of an unendorsed Democratic right to life candidate, to a state law allowing only political party committees to hold raffles to raise funds for political campaigns.
Midtopia: The ACLU and religious liberty
>>>>
NAMBLA does not deserve free speech.
Fully agree.
Same with the KKK and Neo-Nazis.
NAMBLA does not deserve free speech.
Fully agree.
Same with the KKK and Neo-Nazis.
We each have a Right to Free Speech. What we do not necessarily have a Right to is an Audience. Nobody is forced to listen.
Fully agree.
Same with the KKK and Neo-Nazis.
We each have a Right to Free Speech. What we do not necessarily have a Right to is an Audience. Nobody is forced to listen.
He nailed it.
Now stop complaining about it.
Noticing how this information is being ignored.
intense said:We each have a Right to Free Speech. What we do not necessarily have a Right to is an Audience. Nobody is forced to listen.
Noticing how this information is being ignored.
intense said:We each have a Right to Free Speech. What we do not necessarily have a Right to is an Audience. Nobody is forced to listen.
Free speech cannot be taken out of context with the rest of the First Amendment and Bill of Rights.
Many people already cited not to abuse free speech to cause panic or disruption (which violates the right of the people PEACEABLY to assemble by causing a breach of the PEACE) Also, I agree that speech cannot be used to induce "illegal activity" (whether slander, libel, fraud, death threats or other hate speech considered harassment or criminal, or anything that contributes to conspiring to violate the civil rights of others, deny due process and equal protection of the laws, etc. etc.)
There is also the responsibility for redressing grievances, and for respecting the free speech and protests of others "equally" as you ask for yourself!
If what you say invokes correction or protest from others, then you get what you give.
If you ignore or deny those petitions, if you refuse to redress grievances, then you tend to get DENIED the same way in return!
In general I find the law of reciprocity/Golden Rule applies here. That is just the natural laws at work that govern how people behave and respond in connection by conscience to one another.
These people who want to exercise free speech "one way" and refuse to hear rebuke or correction for what they are saying, end up complaining when their free speech is denied.
A lot of times they do it to themselves, deny others' rights and then incur the same reaction.
The best way to protect and enforce free speech is to respect the same of others so that you merit the same respect in return. Try it, it works. As long as I listen to others, even objections and opposing views that may be wrong and I don't agree with, then when I ask to be heard and I offer my views and information however dissenting, that is not rejected as much as a threat because I do not try to insult or cut the other person off.
You get the free speech you give. Same with the right to petition.
Respect the same of others, and this encourages other people to reciprocate and meet you halfway.
Noticing how this information is being ignored.
intense said:We each have a Right to Free Speech. What we do not necessarily have a Right to is an Audience. Nobody is forced to listen.
Free speech cannot be taken out of context with the rest of the First Amendment and Bill of Rights.
Many people already cited not to abuse free speech to cause panic or disruption (which violates the right of the people PEACEABLY to assemble by causing a breach of the PEACE) Also, I agree that speech cannot be used to induce "illegal activity" (whether slander, libel, fraud, death threats or other hate speech considered harassment or criminal, or anything that contributes to conspiring to violate the civil rights of others, deny due process and equal protection of the laws, etc. etc.)
There is also the responsibility for redressing grievances, and for respecting the free speech and protests of others "equally" as you ask for yourself!
If what you say invokes correction or protest from others, then you get what you give.
If you ignore or deny those petitions, if you refuse to redress grievances, then you tend to get DENIED the same way in return!
In general I find the law of reciprocity/Golden Rule applies here. That is just the natural laws at work that govern how people behave and respond in connection by conscience to one another.
These people who want to exercise free speech "one way" and refuse to hear rebuke or correction for what they are saying, end up complaining when their free speech is denied.
A lot of times they do it to themselves, deny others' rights and then incur the same reaction.
The best way to protect and enforce free speech is to respect the same of others so that you merit the same respect in return. Try it, it works. As long as I listen to others, even objections and opposing views that may be wrong and I don't agree with, then when I ask to be heard and I offer my views and information however dissenting, that is not rejected as much as a threat because I do not try to insult or cut the other person off.
You get the free speech you give. Same with the right to petition.
Respect the same of others, and this encourages other people to reciprocate and meet you halfway.
Noticing how this information is being ignored.
intense said:We each have a Right to Free Speech. What we do not necessarily have a Right to is an Audience. Nobody is forced to listen.
Free speech cannot be taken out of context with the rest of the First Amendment and Bill of Rights.
Many people already cited not to abuse free speech to cause panic or disruption (which violates the right of the people PEACEABLY to assemble by causing a breach of the PEACE) Also, I agree that speech cannot be used to induce "illegal activity" (whether slander, libel, fraud, death threats or other hate speech considered harassment or criminal, or anything that contributes to conspiring to violate the civil rights of others, deny due process and equal protection of the laws, etc. etc.)
There is also the responsibility for redressing grievances, and for respecting the free speech and protests of others "equally" as you ask for yourself!
If what you say invokes correction or protest from others, then you get what you give.
If you ignore or deny those petitions, if you refuse to redress grievances, then you tend to get DENIED the same way in return!
In general I find the law of reciprocity/Golden Rule applies here. That is just the natural laws at work that govern how people behave and respond in connection by conscience to one another.
These people who want to exercise free speech "one way" and refuse to hear rebuke or correction for what they are saying, end up complaining when their free speech is denied.
A lot of times they do it to themselves, deny others' rights and then incur the same reaction.
The best way to protect and enforce free speech is to respect the same of others so that you merit the same respect in return. Try it, it works. As long as I listen to others, even objections and opposing views that may be wrong and I don't agree with, then when I ask to be heard and I offer my views and information however dissenting, that is not rejected as much as a threat because I do not try to insult or cut the other person off.
You get the free speech you give. Same with the right to petition.
Respect the same of others, and this encourages other people to reciprocate and meet you halfway.
Many people already cited not to abuse free speech to cause panic or disruption (which violates the right of the people PEACEABLY to assemble by causing a breach of the PEACE) Also, I agree that speech cannot be used to induce "illegal activity" (whether slander, libel, fraud, death threats or other hate speech considered harassment or criminal, or anything that contributes to conspiring to violate the civil rights of others, deny due process and equal protection of the laws, etc. etc.)
It's done everyday, in News, in Advertising, in Politics. Once you open the door to censoring, it becomes a tool of the Powers of the moment. There are lines in the sand, true enough, just not always where we think they should be.
