The ACLU Is Anything But American

[MarcATL]

What's funny is, all these so-called conservatives and RWers would go absolutely bananas if and when any public display or monument of Muslim origin were placed around them. Many of these liars pretend to not have a problem with it only for the sake of argument, however their response to the Mosque in downtown Manhattan and Mufeebro (sp), TN proves exactly how much they have a problem with it.

How about if Korans and/or Muslim religious leaders statues were placed in public places?

How would that work out for you righteez?

 

[bodecea]

I could use your own link.

Would that work for you?

I'm not the dip-shit that keeps claiming that Separation of Church and state is in the establishment clause.



Meaning that the line you claim is in the constitution is not there. It is only in the letter.

Also, Thomas Jefferson did not mention anything about state laws on religion...only national laws.

Not my link.

uber fail

And you're a liar.
But what else is new.

This statement of yours is about as true as anything else you said in this thread....which is....not very much.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Well, you can be like one of the silly judge ruling that stated that a Christian cross is NOT a specific religion's symbol....I'd laugh just as much.

And a Christian symbol as a war memorial does WHAT exactly, Mr. "I am opposed to one individual imposing his personal preferences on everyone else"?

i can ask you the same thing Bo.....i drive by all kinds hills with crosses on them and im sure you do too .....not once have i ever stopped the car got out and said"WELL ILL BE A SONOFABITCH,a fucking cross....this is going to end right now,im fucking offended".....the guys is a loon....

We have dozens if not hundreds of crosses on hills here in San Diego Co.....on PRIVATE property. Mount Soledad is PUBLIC property.

Do we need to go into the difference between PRIVATE vs. PUBLIC? Do we need to go over the issue of what the GOVERNMENT can or cannot do in relation to the 1st amendment again? Mudwhistle already got his peepee whacked on that one.

the guy and everyone else involved with banning this cross bullshit is a busybody Bo...."we are offended,and by golly,so are you going to be,whether you like it or not"

 

[Harry Dresden]

What's funny is, all these so-called conservatives and RWers would go absolutely bananas if and when any public display or monument of Muslim origin were placed around them. Many of these liars pretend to not have a problem with it only for the sake of argument, however their response to the Mosque in downtown Manhattan and Mufeebro (sp), TN proves exactly how much they have a problem with it.

How about if Korans and/or Muslim religious leaders statues were placed in public places?

How would that work out for you righteez?

Marc you know godamed well that a hell of a lot of Democrats would freak out too....its funny how guys like you and Dean just cant grasp that....its all Republicans in your world.....

 

[bodecea]

i can ask you the same thing Bo.....i drive by all kinds hills with crosses on them and im sure you do too .....not once have i ever stopped the car got out and said"WELL ILL BE A SONOFABITCH,a fucking cross....this is going to end right now,im fucking offended".....the guys is a loon....

We have dozens if not hundreds of crosses on hills here in San Diego Co.....on PRIVATE property. Mount Soledad is PUBLIC property.

Do we need to go into the difference between PRIVATE vs. PUBLIC? Do we need to go over the issue of what the GOVERNMENT can or cannot do in relation to the 1st amendment again? Mudwhistle already got his peepee whacked on that one.

the guy and everyone else involved with banning this cross bullshit is a busybody Bo...."we are offended,and by golly,so are you going to be,whether you like it or not"

The guy involved was a VET and was offended by a lie perpetrated by the City of San Diego about a RELIGIOUS symbol on PUBLIC land....and when they were caught at it, belatedly tagged it as a Veterans Memorial.

I don't blame him in the least. As a Vet, I don't care about being used as a tool for a lie either.

 

[bodecea]

What's funny is, all these so-called conservatives and RWers would go absolutely bananas if and when any public display or monument of Muslim origin were placed around them. Many of these liars pretend to not have a problem with it only for the sake of argument, however their response to the Mosque in downtown Manhattan and Mufeebro (sp), TN proves exactly how much they have a problem with it.

How about if Korans and/or Muslim religious leaders statues were placed in public places?

How would that work out for you righteez?

Marc you know godamed well that a hell of a lot of Democrats would freak out too....its funny how guys like you and Dean just cant grasp that....its all Republicans in your world.....

I don't know what you were reading....but I notice that Marc expressly DID NOT say Republicans.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Actually the ACLU is about the 1st...but let me ask you something. If you want a 2nd amendment defense...why would you NOT go to the organization that is all about it? Or.....maybe you want to start a thread complaining that the NRA doesn't defend us in 1st amendment cases. Is that what you want to do?

thats because they are called the FUCKING NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION....not the Rifle and free speech association....as compared to the other guys who call themselves the CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION.....which i would assume by the name......MEANS ALL FUCKING CIVIL LIBERTIES....not just free speech.........and i do notice you not taking TM to task for what she said.....any reason why?......she wont bite....

You are getting a little testy....wouldn't you want the best experts on a 2nd amendment case? I sure would.

I wouldn't go to a car repair shop for dishwasher....nor would I go to an appliance repair shop for my car. How is this hard to understand?

As to the ACLU and the 2nd Amendment:

Second Amendment | American Civil Liberties Union

Please read that while they disagree with the recent court ruling in D.C. vs Heller...they did not become involved in that court case at all and have no plans to get involved with 2nd amendment cases since they interpret the 2nd amendment as a collective right as opposed to an individual right which is what they SPECIALIZE in.
I would imagine the NRA doesn't get involved in 1st amendment rights because they SPECIALIZE in 2nd amendment cases.

nice dance Bo.....i guess thats why they have defended groups in the past.......i notice you still dont want to say anything to TM as to what she said....which is that they defend ANY case involving the Constitution.....according to you and me they dont.....but yet.....she said they do.....i questioned what she said.....and you questioned me,which is fine.....but yet you ignored her,when her statement said WE are both wrong.....interesting....

 

[Avatar9]

And the first Amendment isn't just about government.

Epic fail.

Do not pass go.

Do not collect $200.

STFU and go read a book about the US Constitution, dumbass.

See, now you're trying to silence his free speech! Where is the ACLU?

this is correct......i notice they never seem to defend the 2nd Amendment....usually they stay away from it....

That's for the NRA...on the flip side, the NRA never seems to defend the 1st Amendment.

the NRA is about Guns.....the ACLU is supposed to be about Civil Liberties.....which includes the 2nd Amendment..... so like i said....the ACLU does not defend the 2nd because it is against their agenda....

ACLU petitions court to get man's guns returned from Broward Sheriff's Office - Sun Sentinel

You're just confused.

^ This from the guy who says the 1st Amendment isn't just about government in one post and then after quoting the 1st Amendment in a subsequent post says it's about limiting government. Confusion thy name is mudmissile.

I think mudwhistle must be a colloquial term for bullshit

I'll give you that one.

Course I did mention discrimination. Manifold was trying to act like everything I said only applied to the 1st Amendment which I didn't say.

He steered it to a 1st Amendment argument and accused me of something I never said. He's the one that started going off about the 1st.

you said it applied to *not just the government*

megafail

Nope. It applied to private citizens.

I prevents government from infringing on private citizen's rights.....not on other government's rights.

anything with the word UNION in it makes me shiver and makes me think Anti American.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union,
establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common
defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to
ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the
United States of America.

How'd that kick in the nuts feel, Willow?

It must've hurt

Hi, you have received -597 reputation points from WillowTree.
Reputation was given for this post.

 

[Article 15]

Willow is definitely the kind of person who would neg rep The Constitution.

 

[Missourian]

What's funny is, all these so-called conservatives and RWers would go absolutely bananas if and when any public display or monument of Muslim origin were placed around them. Many of these liars pretend to not have a problem with it only for the sake of argument, however their response to the Mosque in downtown Manhattan and Mufeebro (sp), TN proves exactly how much they have a problem with it.

How about if Korans and/or Muslim religious leaders statues were placed in public places?

How would that work out for you righteez?

People of the Book - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I disagree.

We are all "People of the Book".

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The right shouldn’t be directing its anger at the ACLU, conservatives have only themselves to blame.

The ACLU is a private entity – it passes no laws nor makes any judgments. It exercises its First Amendment right to ‘petition the Government for a redress of grievances’ in Federal court as authorized by the Constitution.

The issues the ACLU brings to the courts receive full review and evaluation. The merits of their cases are examined by judges and justices in the context of Constitutional case law and precedent – the rulings are based on facts of the law.

That conservative plaintiffs or defendants fail to prevail in these proceedings isn’t the ‘fault’ of the ACLU, it’s the weakness of the cases conservatives litigate.

In Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), for example, the ACLU won a victory for all Americans as the Supreme Court compelled the state of Florida to afford an indigent defendant legal counsel when accused of a felony. Today the ‘right to an attorney’ is an established, accepted component of our fundamental rights and freedoms, just as stated in the Constitution, per the Framers’ original intent.

Hence, the notion that the ACLU is ‘un-American’ is pure idiocy.

 

[mudwhistle]

And the first Amendment isn't just about government.

Epic fail.

Do not pass go.

Do not collect $200.

STFU and go read a book about the US Constitution, dumbass.

See, now you're trying to silence his free speech! Where is the ACLU?


ACLU petitions court to get man's guns returned from Broward Sheriff's Office - Sun Sentinel



I think mudwhistle must be a colloquial term for bullshit

How'd that kick in the nuts feel, Willow?

It must've hurt

Hi, you have received -597 reputation points from WillowTree.
Reputation was given for this post.

You must be a sock puppet for Manifold.

You're so into dog-piling that it makes me wonder.

 

[mudwhistle]

The right shouldn’t be directing its anger at the ACLU, conservatives have only themselves to blame.

The ACLU is a private entity – it passes no laws nor makes any judgments. It exercises its First Amendment right to ‘petition the Government for a redress of grievances’ in Federal court as authorized by the Constitution.

The issues the ACLU brings to the courts receive full review and evaluation. The merits of their cases are examined by judges and justices in the context of Constitutional case law and precedent – the rulings are based on facts of the law.

That conservative plaintiffs or defendants fail to prevail in these proceedings isn’t the ‘fault’ of the ACLU, it’s the weakness of the cases conservatives litigate.

In Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), for example, the ACLU won a victory for all Americans as the Supreme Court compelled the state of Florida to afford an indigent defendant legal counsel when accused of a felony. Today the ‘right to an attorney’ is an established, accepted component of our fundamental rights and freedoms, just as stated in the Constitution, per the Framers’ original intent.

Hence, the notion that the ACLU is ‘un-American’ is pure idiocy.

The ACLU is an anti-American group that uses our laws to wreck havoc on our institutions and our private citizens.

The founder of the ACLU was a communist anti-war demonstrator that changed it's name calling it all of the sudden the AMERICAN Civil Liberties Union to provide cover for libs that want to feel a little bit patriotic when they support the group.

They do just enough good to placate liberals and Progressives and keep them from turning against it.

They're only popular because they're firmly intrenched in our legal system and because they raise hell with the right people and make their lives miserable....which is what makes a Lib feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Often liars on this board have said that the ACLU protects everyone's rights, but then they have admitted that some groups are beneath their concern blowing their claims all over the place.

To the left they are a godsend because their primary target seems to be conservatives and particularly Christians, so what's not to love about the ACLU.

 

[mudwhistle]

Willow is definitely the kind of person who would neg rep The Constitution.

Most definitely Article 15. (of the UCMJ)

 

[mudwhistle]

Would like to ask mudwhistle which of the three known versions of the Ten Commandments he would want posted?

I don't give a fuck.

I'm not a Bible Banger.

I think that we should be able to post whatever we want as long as it's not obscene. I just don't want the GOVERNMENT telling us we can't.

 

[Ravi]

Great thread showcasing muddie's stupidity.

 

[mudwhistle]

Great thread showcasing muddie's stupidity.

Great post showcasing your lack of relevance.

 

[del]

The ACLU uses this phony argument of the establishment clause to stifle religious expression. They act like posting the Ten Commandments in a courthouse is the same as shoving religion down someone's throat.

that would be because it is.

Just because you say it is doesn't mean it is so.

Shoving religion down one's throat is making laws that force you to pray before every meal, or forcing you to pray before school events, not simply displaying religious symbols in public.

You act like the cross or any mention of God causes you to go shrieking out of the room.

"If thy eye offendeth thee pluck it out."

actually, it doesn't bother me at all

take it up with scotus

 

[mudwhistle]

that would be because it is.

Just because you say it is doesn't mean it is so.

Shoving religion down one's throat is making laws that force you to pray before every meal, or forcing you to pray before school events, not simply displaying religious symbols in public.

You act like the cross or any mention of God causes you to go shrieking out of the room.

"If thy eye offendeth thee pluck it out."

actually, it doesn't bother me at all

take it up with scotus

Then try to be more tolerant and it won't appear so.

 

[del]

Just because you say it is doesn't mean it is so.

Shoving religion down one's throat is making laws that force you to pray before every meal, or forcing you to pray before school events, not simply displaying religious symbols in public.

You act like the cross or any mention of God causes you to go shrieking out of the room.

"If thy eye offendeth thee pluck it out."

actually, it doesn't bother me at all

take it up with scotus

Then try to be more tolerant and it won't appear so.

your perception of my tolerance is your problem, ace, not mine.