A Response to Anti-ACLU Sentiment

Great Debates
21

[QUOTE=JohnnieEnigma]
That is very fair-minded of you to understand all sides of the abortion argument… and it was indeed unfair to take away a person’s right to protest simply because the aclu did not agree with what they are protesting (that’s how it appears anyway). It’s this type of lawsuit that makes the aclu appear slanted or as though they’re harboring an agenda.
[/QUOTE]

I’d hold off on that - I don’t understand all sides. I put Operation Rescue in the same boat as I put the Klan. I hold my nose and defend their right to protest.

And the ACLU did not take anyone’s right away to do anything. The government passed laws prohibiting certain types of protest. I personally think those laws have issues, though I fully understand where they are coming from. I can quite understand the motivation to roll an M1-Abrams tank over Operation Rescue people, but I think the law should probably prevent me doing that.

Even if the ACLU wasn’t going to oppose said laws, I think they should have not supported them. And this is all going from memory so I could be totally wrong. It just struck me as a wrong message to be sending.

And your last sentence confuses me. Of course the ACLU is slanted and of course they harbor an agenda. They are pretty open about that. What you mean is that they are slanted against your beliefs, and they harbor an agenda you don’t like. I don’t think that is necessarily a bad thing.

22

[QUOTE=Richard Parker]
I believe your first example is the case of Joyce Brown. What, exactly, do you find objectionable about representing someone who was involuntarily committed who, according to the testimony of expert witnesses, may not have been mentally ill?

Your second example, Kreimer v. Morristown, is at least debatable. The ACLU’s position was that the behavioral rules set by the library were overbroad and could be used to expel patrons with legitimate purposes. In addition, the rule limited legitimate activity to “reading, studying, or using library material,” which the ACLU felt would hinder the role of libraries for other important purposes.

Perhaps more importantly, a library is what is called a “designated public forum.” In free speech law, that means they fall somewhere between parks and private homes. Any decision made with respect to this designated public forum could apply equally to others, which include university campuses, school board meetings, and the like. So, while allowing a library to kick out an annoying homeless guy may seem like no big deal, allowing the government to reject people from designated public forums on vague grounds could be a big deal.

But even if you disagree with both these cases, that doesn’t seem to justify your overall contempt for the organization. Do you think they do nothing of benefit?
[/QUOTE]

In the case of Ms. Brown, a complaint had been brought against her, by the owner of a restaurant that she had camped out in front of. Besides scaring off patrons, Ms. Brown did use the stree in front as a bathroom. Now, perhaps you don’t care about human faeces in front of an eating establishment. But consider the man who is trying to earn a living , running the restaurant.Doesn’t he have the right to serve his patrons, without having a mentally ill person on the sidewalk?
For all of you liberals-I used to be one! That ended when i lived in a city, and had to contend with taggers, homeless drunks, and ex mental patients. Sorry, i don’t wish to be subjected to this kind of assault.

23

[QUOTE=Algher]
I have issues with the Scouts with their anti-gay stance as well - but I work from the inside. It really saddens me when people say they are ashamed of having been a Scout - it means that you are focusing on one aspect without remember the rest that it did for you.

[/quote]

The second troop I was in had two kids were were mentally challenged. Their being in the scouts was good for them, and good for the rest of us.. Now, kids weren’t openly gay back then, but my impression was that the scouts were inclusive.

Remember that they exclude gays and atheists. Some troops around here say that they are inclusive, but if BSA catches them… The UN Boy Scout Troop dropped the Scout is Reverent part, and they did just fine.

I think they can pay for it - they just don’t get it free. And what about gay kids, or atheist kids? If they want to sail they are told to go to hell by the Sea Scouts. That’s the whole point. They shouldn’t whine about the “right” kids getting excluded when they exclude the kids they don’t like.

As DMC said, I chose my words carefully. The molestation is horrible, but I’m glad that the hypocritical scumbag got caught. Not just because he deserves it, but because it shows loud protestations of faith don’t mean a lot. I have no statistics, but I wouldn’t be surprised if openly gay men working with children had a lower abuse rate. And, as I said, I got this guy’s rabid rantings about how freedom of religion should allow him to be a bigot, so let’s just say he deserves whatever he gets.

24

[QUOTE=ralph124c]
For all of you liberals-I used to be one! That ended when i lived in a city, and had to contend with taggers, homeless drunks, and ex mental patients. Sorry, i don’t wish to be subjected to this kind of assault.
[/QUOTE]

Are you under the impression that this kind of a statement has some persuasive power?

25

[QUOTE=JohnnieEnigma]
That is very fair-minded of you to understand all sides of the abortion argument… and it was indeed unfair to take away a person’s right to protest simply because the aclu did not agree with what they are protesting (that’s how it appears anyway). It’s this type of lawsuit that makes the aclu appear slanted or as though they’re harboring an agenda.
[/QUOTE]

Imagine being a black person going to the polls to vote, and the Klan stood outside the voting booth. They don’t have any weapons on them, but they say degrading things to every black that passes by them and how they “better not vote.” Would it be unreasonable to restrict their presence to 100 feet outside the voting booth instead of right at the threshhold?
There’s free speech, and then there’s intimidation. Many women who go to abortion clinics feel threatened when trying to exercise their rights. I don’t think it’s too much to ask that people who want to hinder them can’t block the door or stand next to the door and intimidate people who want to go in.

You may not like my comparison between anti-abortion groups and the Klan, but both have used violence and intimidation in the past.

26

That’s why I was so torn on it Blalron. I believe in the right to picket as part of a labor dispute, and trust me, I have heard some pretty unpleasant things yelled at scabs. But I do recognize the right of authority to exercise some control over demonstrations. And some of the laws on abortion protests were and are right - my bottom line point was that I don’t feel comfortable with the ACLU taking a position in favor of these laws. I am quite happy with them not taking a position against them, if that makes sense…

And don’t even start me on the use of Civil RICO against groups like Operation Rescue.

27

[QUOTE=villa]
my bottom line point was that I don’t feel comfortable with the ACLU taking a position in favor of these laws. I am quite happy with them not taking a position against them, if that makes sense…
[/quote]

I don’t agree with everything the ACLU does, but I think their overall mission is worth supporting. My comfort with everything they do is not required for me to support them (I’m a card carrying member :cool: )

28

[QUOTE=ralph124c]
For all of you liberals-I used to be one! That ended when i lived in a city, and had to contend with taggers, homeless drunks, and ex mental patients. Sorry, i don’t wish to be subjected to this kind of assault.
[/QUOTE]

In Canada, conservatives (who are literally called Conservatives; I expect you would vote for them if you lived here) cannot get elected in the three biggest cities. Here, at least, people who contend daily with taggers, homeless drunks and mental patients tend to vote Liberal (liberal) or NDP (socialist), but never Conservative.

How surprising that your experience does not generalize widely!

29

[QUOTE=cowgirl]
In Canada, conservatives (who are literally called Conservatives; I expect you would vote for them if you lived here) cannot get elected in the three biggest cities. Here, at least, people who contend daily with taggers, homeless drunks and mental patients tend to vote Liberal (liberal) or NDP (socialist), but never Conservative.

How surprising that your experience does not generalize widely!
[/QUOTE]

It’s the same in the United States. Liberalism is more prevalent in high density populations where people learn that living in a free society means that you can’t avoid every annoyance, inconvenience, or less-than-pleasant sight. Seeing someone shitting on the sidewalk isn’t the best thing in the world, but it’s minor compared to important individual rights.

30

It is also somewhat news to me that you cannot prevent people taking a dump on the street without involuntary commitment proceedings. Might there not be some kind of middle path between letting the city streets become public conveniences for the homeless and locking the homeless up in mental asylums?

But then again, that would get in the way of bashing the ACLU and other reds.