ACLU & the tea-party (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

marshalp -> ACLU & the tea-party (5/24/2010 3:41:18 PM)

I wonder why there is such animosity on the part of tea-party movement towards the ACLU. According to my understanding any organization who's stated mission is "to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States", should be the perfect partner for the tea-party. It should seem like, apart form the tax-reduction platform, the ACLU & the tea-party have a common platform. Your thoughts???



pahunkboy -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/24/2010 3:48:57 PM)

Define  "tea party"-



tazzygirl -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/24/2010 6:02:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: marshalp

I wonder why there is such animosity on the part of tea-party movement towards the ACLU. According to my understanding any organization who's stated mission is "to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States", should be the perfect partner for the tea-party. It should seem like, apart form the tax-reduction platform, the ACLU & the tea-party have a common platform. Your thoughts???


The two are at odds for obvious reasons. The ACLU does not care what race you are until you are discriminated against.



TheHeretic -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/24/2010 6:19:07 PM)

I think you would do better to ask about conservative animus towards the ACLU, rather than trying to jump aboard the tea-party bandwagon. Plenty of moderate folks who vote Dem. are going to regard them with anything from distaste to disgust, depending on what the sick fuck of the day wants to do with his free expression. It is very easy for people to view them as aggressively anti-Christian.

I'm a free speech kind of guy, and I'm not especially fond of them. Their habit of claiming to be defenders of the Constitution needs an asterisk that they are defenders of the parts they approve of. Good luck getting them interested in infringements of the right to keep and bear arms.

At a better rate than blind squirrels and broken clocks though, they are the only ones to pick up vitally important issues, and make the case that needs to be made. Even at the tea table, you will find people who recognize this.




Real0ne -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/24/2010 6:37:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

I think you would do better to ask about conservative animus towards the ACLU, rather than trying to jump aboard the tea-party bandwagon. Plenty of moderate folks who vote Dem. are going to regard them with anything from distaste to disgust, depending on what the sick fuck of the day wants to do with his free expression. It is very easy for people to view them as aggressively anti-Christian.

I'm a free speech kind of guy, and I'm not especially fond of them. Their habit of claiming to be defenders of the Constitution needs an asterisk that they are defenders of the parts they approve of. Good luck getting them interested in infringements of the right to keep and bear arms.

At a better rate than blind squirrels and broken clocks though, they are the only ones to pick up vitally important issues, and make the case that needs to be made. Even at the tea table, you will find people who recognize this.




Thats possibly one of the best bulls eyes I have seen you hit out here.

as long as it fits their agenda...



servantforuse -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/24/2010 8:38:00 PM)

As there are probably no stats available, I'm willing to guess that 90% of the cases the ACLU files are in support of a more liberal agenda. The tea party supporters are much more conservative. Gas and oil do not mix.



DomKen -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/24/2010 8:46:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
I'm a free speech kind of guy, and I'm not especially fond of them. Their habit of claiming to be defenders of the Constitution needs an asterisk that they are defenders of the parts they approve of. Good luck getting them interested in infringements of the right to keep and bear arms.

Why people believe this bullshit is beyond me.

http://leftagenda.wordpress.com/2009/07/04/aclu-defends-2nd-amendment-not-really-a-surprise-to-aclu-supporters-but-maybe-to-conservatives/
http://reason.com/blog/2007/04/06/the-aclu-defends-gun-rights



TheHeretic -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/24/2010 9:14:06 PM)

But it is notable that the gun angle did not prevent the Texas chapter from getting involved, despite the national organization's position that the Second Amendment does not protect an individual right to keep and bear arms.[/i]


Still not bothering to read your own links, huh, Ken?



pahunkboy -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/25/2010 2:16:04 AM)

No one knows what a tea party is.

To me it is a silly - thing- maybe it started off as good- but now some neocons want the left right thing. and that is not what the original intent was.



Vendaval -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/25/2010 3:16:03 AM)

The ACLU takes on a wide variety of cases including; freedom of speech, freedom of religion, torture, terrorism, privacy, equal pay, abortion, the death penalty, gay rights, etc. All of which tend to be very divisive, controversial issues.

http://www.aclu.org/our-work







DomKen -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/25/2010 7:12:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

But it is notable that the gun angle did not prevent the Texas chapter from getting involved, despite the national organization's position that the Second Amendment does not protect an individual right to keep and bear arms.[/i]


Still not bothering to read your own links, huh, Ken?

Sort of proves my point while also proving that you were willfully distorting the facts.

The ACLU is not a monolith. Differences of opinion are allowed. Incluidng how to interpret the various amendments. The national ACLU holds the position held by the SCOTUS rulings for at least 150 years while the Texas branch holds the shall we say Scalia version of the 2nd. That doesn't mean the national is throwing out the Texas branch nor is it interfering in the Texas branch's decisions on what cases to take.

Quite simply the ACLU has and does take 2nd amendment cases which you claimed they did not.



pahunkboy -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/25/2010 7:16:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vendaval

The ACLU takes on a wide variety of cases including; freedom of speech, freedom of religion, torture, terrorism, privacy, equal pay, abortion, the death penalty, gay rights, etc. All of which tend to be very divisive, controversial issues.

http://www.aclu.org/our-work







After the SPLC- I am not sure what to think.



rulemylife -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/25/2010 8:03:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic



I'm a free speech kind of guy, and I'm not especially fond of them. Their habit of claiming to be defenders of the Constitution needs an asterisk that they are defenders of the parts they approve of. Good luck getting them interested in infringements of the right to keep and bear arms.




ACLU Defends Gun Rights in New Orleans


While some folks think the ACLU is a left-wing organization, this latest defense from the organization might put that to rest. It is defending a man’s right to own a gun under circumstances some from the left might question.

It has been reported a New Orleans man is suing the district attorney as well as the City of New Orleans because his gun wasn’t given back to him when it was seized at the time he was arrested for drug and firearm charges.

Errol Houston Jr’s advocate, The American Civil Liberties Union, this week filed a lawsuit on his behalf. Houston was arrested in 2008 at a traffic stop. The suit maintains even though the district attorney’s office decided not to prosecute Houston, it failed to return his .40 caliber firearm.



tazzygirl -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/25/2010 8:07:56 AM)

If he wasnt charged with a crime, his property should have been returned.



Moonhead -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/25/2010 8:12:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

No one knows what a tea party is.


Well, the thread that was there to clear up misconceptions and define it got locked, didn't it? Not that any of the apologists in there were trying all that hard to explain its agenda.



rulemylife -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/25/2010 8:13:56 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

But it is notable that the gun angle did not prevent the Texas chapter from getting involved, despite the national organization's position that the Second Amendment does not protect an individual right to keep and bear arms.[/i]


Still not bothering to read your own links, huh, Ken?


You're still not bothering to learn anything about the subjects you attempt to discuss.

ACLU state chapters have often gone against the views of the national orginization.


Nevada ACLU Supports An Individual's Right To Bear Arms

“The Nevada ACLU respects the individual’s right to bear arms subject to constitutionally permissible regulations,” a statement on the organization’s Web site said. “The ACLU of Nevada will defend this right as it defends other constitutional rights.”




pahunkboy -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/25/2010 8:29:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead


quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

No one knows what a tea party is.


Well, the thread that was there to clear up misconceptions and define it got locked, didn't it? Not that any of the apologists in there were trying all that hard to explain its agenda.


So is it the end the fed party?



Moonhead -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/25/2010 8:46:59 AM)

More "end the fed so long as there's a Democrat in the white house", I think. As people kept pointing out (and apologists kept ignoring) nobody who went on to join the tea party seemed to give a hoot about all of the money Bush was wasting to no purpose, but suddenly started throwing a hissy fit as soon as Obama was elected. A racial aspect has been suggested as well, and if that's the main thrust of the tea party, then of course they won't get on with the ACLU, will they?



TheHeretic -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/25/2010 5:53:39 PM)

Ken, it looks like you did as good a job reading what I wrote as you did reading your own link. I said "good luck," getting them interested in 2nd issues, not that there was no chance.

Rulemylife, I have decided that there is little hope of you ever posting, or engaging in a discussion, in good faith. You are dismissed.



DomKen -> RE: ACLU & the tea-party (5/25/2010 5:56:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Ken, it looks like you did as good a job reading what I wrote as you did reading your own link. I said "good luck," getting them interested in 2nd issues, not that there was no chance.

Spin baby spin.

The fact is you claimed the ACLU was not involved in defending the 2nd amendment. I proved they were and you tried to squirm out but simply proved the point that you don't care about the truth only your preconceptions.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
3.100586E-02