ACLU taking a case involving Westboro Baptist Church protest

[Spazz]

Well they should change the name if they only gonna defend the 1st amendment.

[Lyion]

Lyion, seriously, wtf i?

The NRA doesn't pretend to be a guardian of civil liberties, but a gun advocacy group, Min. Vast difference.

Where did I ever say the NRA was? Where did anyone? The NRA picks and chooses which gun advocacy issues they will back as the ACLU picks and chooses which constitutional rights they'll back. The similarities end there and no others were implied.

Maybe I'm wrong but I thought the NRA pretty much backed all gun advocacy positions. Gun lawsuit or hint of infringement on the 2nd, and the NRA is going to be on the pro gun side everytime, correct? The NRA doesn't always throw cash around, but they are pretty much fixed on where they are. I could be off, as I'm anti NRA and anti second amendment, so.....

The ACLU is VERY selective about the issues it addresses, and it caters to it's own goals, and most certainly not the spectrum of the first amendmend or constitutionality.

[Diekan]

Look people, this is not an issue of the First Amendment. Everyone knows the ACLU is ultra left. Everyone knows the ultra left hates the military and its troops with a venom. This is nothing more than the ACLU using the law to legalize and or legitimize the protests at soldier’s funerals. The First Amendment is just the mask they're hiding behind to push this issue.

Yes, it IS just that simple. So let’s stop pretending that they’re simply fighting for the First Amendment.

[Arlos]

I disagree strongly about the ACLU being purely ultra-left. If they were, they'd never have defended the Nazis. They've similarly gone to bat for other highly unpopular people or groups before as well.

Likewise, I disagree on the left "hating soldiers". The WAR they hate, sure, that's undeniable. Then again, 2/3 of the country is currently against the war. But anti-soldier, no, that I don't buy.

Not to mention, remember who the group is they're defending: ultra-right wing christian sect, rabidly anti-gay. It's an EXTREME reach to suggest that the ACLU would go out of its way to back a group so opposed to their supposed "ultra-left" stance just to allow for infrequent protests at soldier's funerals as some cunning plan because they "hate soldiers". That's pretty goddamn far-fetched, reaching the realm of tinfoil-hattery.

-Arlos

[Spazz]

Look people, this is not an issue of the First Amendment. Everyone knows the ACLU is ultra left. Everyone knows the ultra left hates the military and its troops with a venom. This is nothing more than the ACLU using the law to legalize and or legitimize the protests at soldier’s funerals. The First Amendment is just the mask they're hiding behind to push this issue

The left Hates the military and the troops. Gimmie a break you raging fucking idiot. Like it or not homie the aclu does indeed defend both sides to say whatever they like.

But its cool now days in america to hate the left and call them names not to mention they make a good punching bag to take out your frustrations on how fucked the state of the cuntry is in cuz they dont hit back. Your not the only dude who used to be kind of a lefty and then after being exposed to 6 years of madness joined the trend and started spewin the venom. Chill out old man your gonna start knockin years off your life.

[Lueyen]

You guys can say the ACLU is not a left orginization all you want, but that doesn't make it true, look at its positions on the following:

Taken from the wikipedia entry on the ACLU:

* separation of church and state; under this mandate, the ACLU:
o Opposes the government-sponsored display of religious symbols on public property;
o Opposes official prayers, religious ceremonies, and some kinds of "moments of silence" [10] in public schools or schools funded with public money;

* full freedom of speech and of the press, including school newspapers;
(except of course if the school paper wants to publish something religious)

* reproductive rights, including the right to use contraception and to have an abortion;

* full civil rights for homosexuals, including government benefits for homosexual couples equal to those provided for heterosexual ones;

* affirmative action as a means of redressing past discrimination and achieving a racially diverse student body [11];

* the rights of defendants and suspects against unconstitutional police practices;

* the decriminalization of drugs such as heroin, cocaine and marijuana [12];

* privacy as it "works to preserve the American tradition that the government not track individuals or violate privacy unless it has evidence of wrongdoing." [13]

* immigrants' rights by "challenging unconstitutional laws and practices, countering the myths upon which many of these laws are based." [14]

The ones I've bolded I think would generally be perceived as the left's position on these issues. The non bold I think would be common to both left and right. Granted some conservatives will see the bolded as their views, and some liberals will see the bolded as contrary to their views, but for the most part as a general rule these are leftist positions.

Does anyone really look at this list and think about any of those stances listed, "hey they are taking more of a conservative side"?

Arlos you can call Diekan's response tinfoil hat material, but really your arguments thus far pretty much support a portion of it. You say the ACLU isn't a left leaning organization, yet the only evidence of this that you site is the organizations support for the rights of Nazis and the Westboro Baptist Church. Both of these groups hate what the US stands for. So what you leave us with is the ACLU fighting for liberal interests, and the interests of those who hate this country.

Ask yourself this, if it was not the funerals of soldiers, but simply that of homosexuals that were being "graced" with the presence of these protests, do you think the ACLU would still step up to defend them? Frankly I don't, and not because the ACLU is biased toward homosexuals, but because the argument that the law violates the first is completely stupid. The law does not prevent these idiots from voicing thier opinion, it prevents them from being disruptive to burial services.

Why isn't the ACLU defending the rights of the mourners to not have to to have these religious ideals cramed down thier throats? I mean this is an orginization that has historically fought very hard to to stop situations where forced exposure of religious views could possibly occur.

[Minrott]

Maybe I'm wrong but I thought the NRA pretty much backed all gun advocacy positions. Gun lawsuit or hint of infringement on the 2nd, and the NRA is going to be on the pro gun side everytime, correct? The NRA doesn't always throw cash around, but they are pretty much fixed on where they are. I could be off, as I'm anti NRA and anti second amendment, so.....

The NRA has over 4 million members. At the very least, each of these members contributes $35 a year. That's $140 million a year minimum that runs through that organization yearly. Like any large group of people, there is a hierarchy. Leaders and followers, boards and members. And like any hierarchy, those at the top of the pack grow accustomed to being there and eventually will do whatever it takes to stay there, where the money is.

Because of this, the NRA waffles on things like the Firearm Owners Protection Act. This was orginally a law designed to protect gun owners who live in one state that has little gun control, who are travelling with their cased and locked firearms through a more restrictive state, from being prosecuted for simply passing through. What happened however, was that the Anti's used this law and tacked on a debilitating tailer which prevented the BATFE from accepting any new registrations of machine guns, drop in auto sears, or any other similiar device that falls under the definition of a machine gun.

The NRA, rather than sinking the bill and proposing it again at a later date, backed it all the way through. They new it was only a small number of gun owners who owned or wanted to own machine guns (Approx 100,000 at the time) and would do little to hurt their standing with the rest of their membership.

They pick and choose, and this is only one (glaring) example, of which gun rights they'll defend and which they'll piss away to the wolves. The NRA while the largest pro-gun organization, is probably the most liberal in their give and take.