| Find, explore and network a cause. |
|
Go  |
New |
Find |
Notify |
|
Reply |
|
Admin |
New PM! |
Registered: December 14, 2005
Posts: 204
|
Anyone else support their views?
|
Registered: December 14, 2004
Posts: 5770
|
What is the definition of child porn? What if the pornographic images of children are not of real children and were simply created with a computer? Is that as bad? Is that illegal?
They'll like us when we win - Toby Ziegler.
|
Registered: April 15, 2003
Posts: 1357
|
quote: Originally posted by the ACLU: ACLU Statement on Defending Free Speech of Unpopular Organizations (8/31/2000) FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE NEW YORK--In the United States Supreme Court over the past few years, the American Civil Liberties Union has taken the side of a fundamentalist Christian church, a Santerian church, and the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. In celebrated cases, the ACLU has stood up for everyone from Oliver North to the National Socialist Party. In spite of all that, the ACLU has never advocated Christianity, ritual animal sacrifice, trading arms for hostages or genocide. In representing NAMBLA today, our Massachusetts affiliate does not advocate sexual relationships between adults and children. What the ACLU does advocate is robust freedom of speech for everyone. The lawsuit involved here, were it to succeed, would strike at the heart of freedom of speech. The case is based on a shocking murder. But the lawsuit says the crime is the responsibility not of those who committed the murder, but of someone who posted vile material on the Internet. The principle is as simple as it is central to true freedom of speech: those who do wrong are responsible for what they do; those who speak about it are not. It is easy to defend freedom of speech when the message is something many people find at least reasonable. But the defense of freedom of speech is most critical when the message is one most people find repulsive. That was true when the Nazis marched in Skokie. It remains true today.
Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the roar of its many waters. Frederick Douglass
|
Registered: March 08, 2004
Posts: 1685
|
I wouldn't make opposition to restricting a group trying to abolish the age of consent my main talking point for renewing my ACLU membership. But that's just me. For the record, I have no idea what the ACLU's actual stance on NAMBLA is.
And then, as the books were told, Fina replied: "A can of worms, my dear friend? What has this to do with reason?"
|
Registered: November 05, 2006
Posts: 32
|
quote: Originally posted by Aguagon:
Disturbingly, NAMBLA is a real organization, and it's living proof that civil liberties have to end somewhere.
Your logic is living proof of why we need the ACLU around. Thanks for reminding me why I need to renew my membership this year. |
Registered: February 22, 2004
Posts: 13926
|
quote: that's affirmative action gone nuts
okay so who do I go to for that?
"The very existence of flamethrowers proves that sometime, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done"."
|
Registered: March 08, 2004
Posts: 1685
|
That's not civil liberties, that's affirmative action gone nuts. 
And then, as the books were told, Fina replied: "A can of worms, my dear friend? What has this to do with reason?"
|
Registered: February 22, 2004
Posts: 13926
|
Is it possible to set up a Civil Liberties group that rally for the goverment to provide all US citizens of Irish descent a free case of Guiness stout every month? oh and gets us reperations for years of shit-poor and practically unpaid working conditions working on the transcontinental rail system? Or can the ACLU handle that for me?
"The very existence of flamethrowers proves that sometime, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done"."
|
Registered: March 08, 2004
Posts: 1685
|
Disturbingly, NAMBLA is a real organization, and it's living proof that civil liberties have to end somewhere.
And then, as the books were told, Fina replied: "A can of worms, my dear friend? What has this to do with reason?"
|
Registered: April 24, 2005
Posts: 872
|
this reminds me of southpark's NAMBLA - The North American Man Boy Love Association, was it a satire?
'it's better to have your ministers inside the tent pissing out than outside, pissing in'
|
Registered: November 05, 2004
Posts: 6008
|
quote: The ACLU is nothing more than an extreme leftist organization
Which will sometimes protect the rights of extreme right wing organizations and all those between the two extremes. The ACLU is not concerned solely with promoting a "leftist" agenda (I'm interested to see what you feel constitutes such). They are concerned with keeping our freedoms. Possession of child porn is one such freedom. The government has no right to say what we should look at or read. That's something we call "censorship" and it's bad. You hate child porn. I hate Ann Coulter. But would it be fair to ban Ann Coulter books? Of course not. Censorship, remember? It's not our call.
The more you know, the less you don't know.
|
Registered: December 14, 2004
Posts: 5770
|
I do not agree with everything that the ACLU does and supports. However, in principle, the organization is a very good thing and has done and achieved very good things for the American people. Most recently, the ACLU has challenged the government's warrantless wiretapping. Often, It does defend morally repugnant people and practices, however such a defense is necessary in order for the person or practice to be judged and examined fairly and objectively. Every side of an issue should be explored and explained before the government takes a stand or passes a law about it. I am curious what constitutes "child porn". For instance, what if a porn distributer was able to contruct pornographic images of fictional children. Is that the same?
They'll like us when we win - Toby Ziegler.
|
Registered: May 03, 2005
Posts: 258
|
child porn and porn itself are absolute filth. This should not be legalized under any amendment, law, or circumstance. The ACLU is the most retarded organization in the US. Not only do they take offense to everything, but they contradict their very principles and attack everything because they're afraid the "mean old government" is trying to fuck over its people all the time. The ACLU is no better than extreme conservatives, both of which are ruining the progress of our nation. To those of you who think the ACLU is helping us to ensure we are protected, please open your eyes. The ACLU is nothing more than an extreme leftist organization promoting its leftist values and trying to gain more and more power. Who on earth would say it should be legal to possess child porn and call themselves the CIVIL LIBERTIES union. As far as I can see, civil liberties is the last phrase you would see or hear associated with child porn. It was a fine organization at first, but we do not need what it has become. We stand a better chance of protecting our rights in court and protecting our rights through fair elections, the way things have always been done.
"No, this trick won't work...How on earth are you ever going to explain in terms of chemistry and physics so important a biological phenomenon as first love?" - Albert Einstein
|
Registered: February 27, 2003
Posts: 2216
|
quote: Originally posted by Aguagon:
It's satire, for those of you who are satirically challenged.
LMAO You shouldn't have told them that, then we could've seen how many of them actually fell for it. I love stuff like the Onion, when it's well done it's absolutely beautiful.
"I know of no safe repository of the ultimate power of society but the people. And if we think them not enlightened enough, the remedy is not to take power from them, but to inform them by education." Thomas Jefferson
|
Registered: March 08, 2004
Posts: 1685
|
|
Registered: November 05, 2006
Posts: 32
|
I know this is an old thread but wanted to clarify something...the ACLU once took a position that possession of child pornography was protected by the First Amendment and should not be prosecuted. They have never been in favor of "legalizing" the production of it. This is a distinction that is usually lost on some of the TV talk show screamers.
|
Registered: February 22, 2004
Posts: 13926
|
exactly still THE BOY SCOUTS!!!??? No one can sue the Boy Scouts and not be on some type of drug even if it's only power
"The very existence of flamethrowers proves that sometime, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done"."
|
Registered: November 05, 2004
Posts: 6008
|
The ACLU takes offense at everything, which is why I don't like them.
The more you know, the less you don't know.
|
Registered: February 22, 2004
Posts: 13926
|
I'd rather have sane people repping the average american holy hell the sued the BOY SCOUTS!
"The very existence of flamethrowers proves that sometime, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done"."
|
Registered: March 30, 2005
Posts: 3628
|
quote: with ACLU everything is related to drugs
Why precisely? quote: The ACLU is crazy.
Would you rather we had no organization for the average American's civil rights?
"I imagine a lot of people tune in simply to watch reporters get bitch-slapped by Mother Nature, and frankly, who can blame them?� Anderson Cooper
|
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
