ACLU: Marriage checklist unfairly targets illegal immigrants

Judged:

1

1

1

Chrgrfan wrote:

The ACLU is a disgusting organization that does nothing to help the citizens of this country.
Does anyone remember the last time the ACLU did anything to protect the CIVIL RIGHTS of CITIZENS?
I don't.

Judged:

1

1

1

ACLU wrote:

Flabioso keeps writing they helped Rush Limbaugh. Gee I'm impressed.
Was it Rush or the pharmaceuticals in his posession they were really representing?

Judged:

2

1

1

Jedi Squirrel wrote:

The ACLU is out of control, if I didn't know better, I'd think they were a storefront for socialist agendas in this country.

Fabioso wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually I never brought that one up.
I do like to bring these cases up, however, since none of you anti-ACLU blowhards seem to be able to explain why they exist:
http://www.aclufightsforchristians.com

Judged:

2

1

1

ACLU wrote:

<quoted text> Yes you did. Remember Sam? You wrote someday I might need their help. I responded I'd never ask for their help and would represent myself before they got involved. You later explained that the ACLU went to bat for Limbaugh. For someone believing they're in the know, you sure fell flat on your face in another thread. The INS? lol It's been ICE now for quite a while. How could you possibly do pro-bono work for illegal alien border jumpers without knowing which Federal Agency is after them? lol You're such a joke!

Judged:

1

1

1

Carol wrote:

New immigrants or illegals? This is getting to be quite a joke with their word twisting.
I do also beleive that the ACLU is a storefront for socialism, fascism and communism and perversions in general .

Judged:

1

1

1

Fabioso wrote:

<quoted text>
Hopefully you know better.

Judged:

1

1

1

Jedi Squirrel wrote:

<quoted text>
I know they protected NAMBLA and thats enough to put them in my crosshairs.

Judged:

1

1

1

Fabioso wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you? But do you REALLY know what happenedi in that case?
I'm guessing you don't. The ACLU never promoted or defended pediophila, did you know that?
Google Curley v. NAMBLA and try to understand what the ACLU was doing in that case.

Judged:

1

1

1

Jedi Squirrel wrote:

<quoted text>
I know exactly what the case was about; hell it's been posted everywhere.
In a nutshell they defended the right for NAMBLA to publish what they want (freedom of speech) not as an endorsement of NAMBLA's actions or intended actions.
What the ACLU did was help an organization survive and continue to provide useful information, like how to pick an underage victim, separate him from the herd and have unlawful sex with that minor.
NAMBLA is not just publishing material that says it's all right to have sex with children, it is actively training their members how to rape children and get away with it.
NAMBLA’s publication is known as "The Rape and Escape Manual." The actual title is "The Survival Manual: The Man's Guide to Staying Alive in Man-Boy Sexual Relationships."
Its chapters help explain how to build relationships with children, and how to gain the confidence of children's parents. Where to go to have secret sex acts with children so as not to get caught.
Also there’s advice, on when to leave the country and how to finance your flight from justice, if a child’s parents or the authorities find you out.
NAMBLA also advocates changing the laws concerning the age of consent, so that younger aged males can give legal consent to have sex. It’s easier for an adult to take advantage of minors who have no experiences and are easily swayed.
The ACLU offers support for those who openly preach pedophilia and kidnapping and rape. All the while the ACLU is hostile to organizations like the Boy Scouts that try to turn boys into men (without sex being part of the process).
While I appreciate the ACLU’s stance that if NAMBLA fell it could lead to lawsuits being leveled at abortion rights groups by the anti-abortion crowd (among other possibilities), that’s a chance I’d rather take.
The ACLU's supporters should reflect and contemplate where this organization has placed itself in regards to NAMBLA. The ACLU seems to believe everyone deserves a lawyer, no matter who he or she is or what he or she does.
An organization that would rather support child molesters, than child mentors, deserves a second hard look by its supporters and advocates.

Judged:

1

1

1

Fabioso wrote:

<quoted text>
As I understand it, NAMBLA didn't exactly benefit from the publicity surrounding the case, so I hardly think you can claim the ACLU helped them. If anything, they have shone a brighter light on the organization, which is the last thing those people want.
NAMBLA's opinions are controversial (read: repulsive). But unless they are engaging in some illegal activity, they have a right to their repulsive opinions. And there is an argument to be made that they SHOULD be handed a megaphone - under the "give them enough rope" theory.
This phrase "The ACLU offers support for those who openly preach pedophilia and kidnapping and rape." Is patently untrue and ignores the real issue that brought the ACLU into the case. It is the kind of thing I would expect to see on WorldNutDaily or Fox, conveniently leaving out the real details of the case to make it seem as if the ACLU is promoting pedophilia.
"The ACLU seems to believe everyone deserves a lawyer, no matter who he or she is or what he or she does."
Have you read the 6th Amendment lately? This is an American idea, not an ACLU one.