ACLU defends Milo

[undergroundrr]

I thought they were a horrible tool of the liberal establishment.

830131431506485248

[heavenlyboy34]

Ya, teh ACLU gets a bad rap because of dogmatic conservatives who don't think before they talk, (and some of their bad rap is warranted) but they do some good things. They defended HL Mencken when he was arrested for distributing his magazine "Boston". They were pretty much the leading force against the Thought Police of the early-mid 20th century.

[Keith and stuff]

I thought they were a horrible tool of the liberal establishment.


Mostly correct. The ALCU will do the right thing sometimes, especially if females, homosexuals, or non-whites are involved. The state chapters have the feedom to not be horrible organizations. I actually agree with my chapter, the NHCLU, a decent amount of the time.

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

The ACLU defended Hans-Hermann Hoppe when he was under fire for saying that gays have higher time preferences. The idea that they don't defend conservatives just isn't true, not for the whole organization at least.

That said, their conception of what constitutes freedom of religion is absurd and highly ideological.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

My only dealing with them was when I talked with the North Carolina ACLU in Raleigh about the county police roadblocks in my area. I talked with the legal director (since departed) who immediately made it an issue of race and class. He told me to gather information from poor people and black people in the area. He did not really care that I don't live in a poor area, and, in fact, live in an area with middle class retired people and farm houses. That pretty much soured me on them.

If you look at their staff bios (http://www.acluofnorthcarolina.org/About-Us/about-us#OurStaff), then it's pretty clear that they all have a liberal bent. Their bios of past jobs are full of words like:

"social justice organizations"
"LGBT rights"
"racial justice"
"leverage the policy opportunities and address the challenges of a changing health care economy"
"she advocated for preserving and strengthening policies related to family economic security"


Seven of them either grew up in, or have employment ties to, Washington DC, Maryland, New York City, or Wisconsin. Only thing missing from their staff is a carpetbagger from Boston. Practically all the bios read like a who's who of effete snobs who want to use government when it suits them for their pet issues, but want government out on other issues. Freedom does not work that way. These people spend time building the government in one area, only to complain in other areas. No thanks.

I prefer the Rutherford Institute, an organization much more in tune with liberty: https://www.rutherford.org/

[Ender]

The ACLU defended Hans-Hermann Hoppe when he was under fire for saying that gays have higher time preferences. The idea that they don't defend conservatives just isn't true, not for the whole organization at least.

That said, their conception of what constitutes freedom of religion is absurd and highly ideological.

Actually my experience with them in religion issues has been very good. They are very supportive of churches combating unconstitutional zoning and I have seen them help religions keep their buildings and property.

[A. Havnes]

The ACLU isn't wholly bad, as a lot of people assume.

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

Actually my experience with them in religion issues has been very good. They are very supportive of churches combating unconstitutional zoning and I have seen them help religions keep their buildings and property.
They also sue counties that put the Ten Commandments in courthouses or nativity scenes in public spaces or religious symbolism anywhere in government. They're also the type to sue a business that doesn't want to serve a gay wedding.

Their interpretations of the First Amendment are wonky to say the least.

[agitator]

They are no good WRT the 2nd A.

[Anti Federalist]

IJ > ACLU

[Ender]

They also sue counties that put the Ten Commandments in courthouses or nativity scenes in public spaces or religious symbolism anywhere in government. They're also the type to sue a business that doesn't want to serve a gay wedding.

Their interpretations of the First Amendment are wonky to say the least.

Oh, I agree- as is most people's. The 1st Amendment NEVER speaks of separation of church and state- it speaks specifically that Congress shall make NO LAW concerning religion. The separation was a thought by Jefferson which most think is what the 1st means- it does not.

It means we are free to believe what we want and if we want to put the 10 Commandments up we can, because Congress shall make NO LAW.

No understanding of this today.

[heavenlyboy34]

IJ > ACLU

IJ? :confused:

[angelatc]

Mostly correct. The ALCU will do the right thing sometimes, especially if females, homosexuals, or non-whites are involved. The state chapters have the feedom to not be horrible organizations. I actually agree with my chapter, the NHCLU, a decent amount of the time.

They will not take 2nd Amendment cases. Other than that they're pretty principled.

[NewRightLibertarian]

The ACLU is surprisingly good on a few issues. Good for them for standing up for Milo and free speech when the rubber meets the road.

[Matt Collins]

The ACLU has even defended the Klan, on multiple occasions. Here is one of them:

https://www.aclu.org/news/aclu-em-defends-kkks-right-free-speech

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

ACLU has a qualitatively different idea of freedom than liberty people. Somebody mentioned the gay wedding cake. The Colorado ACLU said:


“While we all agree that religious freedom is important, no one’s religious beliefs make it acceptable to break the law by discriminating against prospective customers,” said Amanda C. Goad, staff attorney with the ACLU Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Project. “No one is asking Masterpiece’s owner to change his beliefs, but treating gay people differently because of who they are is discrimination plain and simple.”
http://aclu-co.org/court-rules-bakery-illegally-discriminated-against-gay-couple/



The bakery was not treating the couple different based on "who they are." There was no sign in the door that said NO GAYS ALLOWED.

The mentality of the ACLU is not freedom minded. I would have actually made their cake, but they were also free to go somewhere else or make it themselves. They were wrong to sue and need a good, swift kick in their ass. Also, If I'm that ho.mo then I tell that baker to stick a bag of flour up his ass. That goes for any business I patronize. If you don't want my business, then I am not going to beg you. F*ck you; I'll go to your competition. Or, I'll do it myself. Somebody will bake that cake. If they bake enough of them, then you're out of business.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

IJ > ACLU


IJ? :confused:




Institute for Justice. www.ij.org. Qualitatively different from the ACLU.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

By the way, a couple of state ACLUs have taken up 2nd amendment rights. One was Texas. I don't know the details off the top of my head. Matt, do you know?

[heavenlyboy34]

Institute for Justice. www.ij.org (http://www.ij.org). Qualitatively different from the ACLU.

Thnx :) ~hugs~

[Origanalist]

ACLU has a qualitatively different idea of freedom than liberty people. Somebody mentioned the gay wedding cake. The Colorado ACLU said:





The bakery was not treating the couple different based on "who they are." There was no sign in the door that said NO GAYS ALLOWED.

The mentality of the ACLU is not freedom minded. I would have actually made their cake, but they were also free to go somewhere else or make it themselves. They were wrong to sue and need a good, swift kick in their ass. Also, If I'm that ho.mo then I tell that baker to stick a bag of flour up his ass. That goes for any business I patronize. If you don't want my business, then I am not going to beg you. F*ck you; I'll go to your competition. Or, I'll do it myself. Somebody will bake that cake. If they bake enough of them, then you're out of business.

Absolutely, the mindset is not the same. They do some good work but I think it's overlap by coincidence.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Thnx :) ~hugs~

Any time, HB. I'm just glad when people see organizations like IJ and Rutherford for the first time.

[Keith and stuff]

They will not take 2nd Amendment cases. Other than that they're pretty principled.

It sounds like your state chapter is also pretty decent, if that is what you are describing :) If you mean the national ALCU, I guess we will have to agree to disagree :)

[angelatc]

It sounds like your state chapter is also pretty decent, if that is what you are describing :) If you mean the national ALCU, I guess we will have to agree to disagree :)

I forgot about all the anti-CHristian stuff when I was posting. But they're still better than nothing. They've come to the aid of several Ron Paul people when it comes to passing out literature, displaying political signs.

[timosman]

Absolutely, the mindset is not the same. They do some good work but I think it's overlap by coincidence.

ACLU has a hidden agenda. They are basically an ultra progressive organization.

[eleganz]

Didn't ACLU back Rand for his first major filibuster too? The Brennan filibuster.

[dannno]

Better late than never.

[AZJoe]

That tweet is correct. The ACLU is usually very good on free speech.
The ACLU is also mixed bag of both good and bad, but generally litigates to enforce government power against private actors. If the ACLU stuck strictly to litigating actual civil liberties (i.e. defending individual rights against the government) and only suing governmental entities to limit its power, it would be excellent. However they don’t. The ACLU is very good on free speech, and police abuse. A great deal of their efforts however are actually at expanding government power over private sector, enforcing government laws, suing private business and private entities like the boy scouts, and expanding government power through, ADA, employment, hiring, and contracts, etc., against private business, individuals, restricting private choice, freedom of association or advocating for greater statism.

For instance the ACLU supports


The bill to override Hobby Lobby (https://www.aclu.org/news/hobby-lobby-fix-bill-fails-move-forward-senate?redirect=religion-belief-reproductive-freedom/hobby-lobby-fix-bill-fails-move-forward-senate)
The Fair Pay Act (https://www.aclu.org/equal-pay-equal-work-pass-paycheck-fairness-act)” https://www.aclu.org/equal-pay-equal-work-pass-paycheck-fairness-act
The ADA
Government funding of abortions
Enforcing Affirmative discrimination (aka affirmative action) in both the government and private sector
It supports drug legalization but opposes the right of private entities to drug test employees
The ACLU advocated in the baker gay wedding cake case against the baker.
On the Second Amendment, the ACLU takes the statist position that it is a “collectivist right (https://www.aclu.org/other/second-amendment-0)” (which is no right at all) that only provides the authority for the states to have arms. In other words only government agents (police, other law enforcement, state enforcers, state troops, etc.) and the government may disarm and make helpless the populace.
ACLU opposes school choice


If libertarians could somehow rise up through the ACLU to direct and manage the positions and cases, it is a good vehicle for civil interest litigation. However, now there are new and better civil interest law firms now to support such as the Institute for Justice, Rutherford Institutes, and Pacific Legal Foundation.

[AZJoe]

Offensive or dissenting speech is the only type of speech that needs First Amendment protection from any government entity.

[angelatc]

They also sue counties that put the Ten Commandments in courthouses or nativity scenes in public spaces or religious symbolism anywhere in government. They're also the type to sue a business that doesn't want to serve a gay wedding.

Their interpretations of the First Amendment are wonky to say the least.

Their interpretations of the First Amendment are pretty consistent. Their stance on religious displays by government is sadly in line with SCOTUS.

I think the problem most conservatives have with them is their refusal to support the Second amendment and their tendency to continually endeavor to expand the boundaries of civil rights.

[The Northbreather]

They need to drop the "union" part.

It's making the organization pull to the left..