Wednesday, January 28, 2009

ACLU.....only SOME of its agenda...Quickly read through this's a stunner!

“Freedom of speech” cases rank among the ACLU’s highest priorities. For example, the organization asserts that the First Amendment “protects” child pornography, and that there should be no governmental restriction on its distribution, reproduction, sale, or use. In August 2006 the ACLU objected to new Los Angeles City Council rules of decorum banning the use of slurs and profanity; the organization deemed such standards a violation of First Amendment rights. On the same grounds, the ACLU opposes laws prohibiting the disruption of military funerals by radical antiwar demonstrators, and has fought such restrictions in Kentucky, Louisiana, Ohio and elsewhere. (Z: um. child pornographers protected. By US. Welcome to the new America)

Among the American Civil Liberties Union’s additional issues of concern are the following:

The ACLU seeks to prohibit security personnel at National Football League games from searching fans for weapons before they enter the stadiums. It similarly aims to prevent New York City subway police officers from searching passengers they deem suspicious. (By contrast, the ACLU adamantly reserves the right to have its own security guards search the possessions of anyone entering its New York City headquarters building.) (Z: and a less safe America)

The ACLU was an Organizer of the April 25, 2004 "March for Women's Lives" a Washington, DC rally that drew more than a million demonstrators advocating the right to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand. (Z: WHY do we have to PAY?)

In recent years, the ACLU has waged an advertising campaign and filed numerous lawsuits aimed at overturning felon-disenfranchisement laws (which bar convicted felons from voting in political elections) in Florida, California, Georgia, and other states. (Z: ACORN....congratulations! Democrats; You just got a few million more votes...putting votes before common sense. GREAT!)

The ACLU sued the state of Florida for having banned publicly funded universities from using state money to finance trips to countries designated as sponsors of terrorism: Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, and Syria.

In July 2006, the ACLU asked officials in a Detroit suburb to reject a proposal that would require businesses with foreign-language signs to add English translations – characterizing the proposal as “unconstitutional, anti-immigrant and unnecessary." (Z: "English in AMERICA? WHAT's the BIG DEAL?" HAA)

The ACLU’s policy guide states that all civil and criminal laws prohibiting bigamy and polygamy should be repealed.

In June 2006, the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the City of Indianapolis because of a newly passed local ordinance that would fine convicted child molesters, predators, and rapists $600 if they were found within 1,000 feet of playgrounds, swimming pools, recreation centers, or sports fields when children were present.

In 2007 the ACLU condemned draft regulations for the implementation of the Real ID Act (H.R. 418), a system (passed by Congress in 2005 and scheduled to take effect in May 2008) aimed at stiffening federal laws to: protect against terrorists’ entry into the U.S.; prevent people from abusing the state driver's license process to obtain false identification; and expand the legal definition of "terrorist organization" and “engaged in terrorist activity,” as those terms pertain to U.S. immigration law. According to the ACLU, the measure would constitute a "real nightmare" for America that “will only lead to a national identity card system that violates personal privacy …” (Z: "Come one, come all...America will be safe because WE LIKE YOU!" OY)

(Z: READ THIS ONE CAREFULLY....your health might be at risk):

In July 2007, the Capital Research Center reported: “With the help of the American Civil Liberties Union, aircraft maker Boeing is being sued by three suspected al-Qaida operatives transported by the CIA to Arab countries for interrogation … The lawsuit alleges a Boeing subsidiary helped the intelligence agency fly the detainees to Egypt and Morocco knowing they would be tortured by authorities there under its controversial ‘rendition’ program. ACLU executive director Anthony Romero said U.S. companies should not profit from a program that is ‘unlawful and contrary to core American values,’ and that such businesses ‘should be held legally accountable.’ The action was brought under the Alien Tort Statute using a legal technique perfected by the Center for Constitutional Rights … (Z: I can't comment. I'm snarling right now)

In September 2007 the ACLU won a court victory when federal judge Victor Marrero struck down a key part of the USA Patriot Act. At issue was a post-9/11 law that gave broader investigative powers to law-enforcement officials. Reported the Associated Press: "The ACLU had challenged the law on behalf of an Internet service provider, claiming that the law allowed the FBI to demand records without the kind of court supervision required for other government searches. Under the law, investigators can issue so-called national security letters to entities like Internet service providers and phone companies and demand customers' phone and Internet records." (Z: Why's SAFETY such a big deal? There's no terror threat!! Right? OH, there IS? Uhoh!!)

The ACLU has received funding from the Open Society Institute, the Arca Foundation, the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the Columbia Foundation, the Nathan Cummings Foundation, the Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. Macarthur Foundation, the Mertz Gilmore Foundation, the Minneapolis Foundation, the Jessie Smith Noyes Foundation, the Open Society Institute, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the Scherman Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Columbia Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the JEHT Foundation, the Joyce Foundation, the Lear Family Foundation, the Public Welfare Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Woods Fund of Chicago.

SO....there you have it, folks...the ACLU, only part of their plans. What do you think!?


(thanks for the info, P!) Z



highboy said...

The ACLU isn't even a good organization in theory. Any good civil rights lawyer can do what they are theoretically suppose to be doing without all the political moves. The 9th Circuit Court is the chief court on their payroll. Most other judges see the nonsense in most of their law suits.

CJ said...

I suppose I'm particularly irked by the abuse of the concept of Free Speech, but really, they've racked up such an impressive record of achievements, how can I choose among them?

Anonymous said...

Good post Z! EVERYTHING about the ACLU burns my rear! I got SO mad at them around three years ago that I took the time to write a long "thought piece" about their actions. I attempted to reach numerous ACLU offices here in the Southeast to confirm some of what I read on the net, and they REFUSED to talk to me!

It's entitled "Public Enemy #1, the ACLU."
Keep up the heat on these horse's.....Well, you know.


Anonymous said...

The ACLU makes me ill.
The protection of child porn and pedofiles irks me.

This is a sad representation of the law.

Anonymous said...

It's impossible to pick one. The ACLU is the terrorists' best friend as it is the pedophile's best friend, and more.

This is a private, self appointed, unelected group of lawyers, which exists under the guise of protecting "rights", when in reality, they have been instrumental in tearing down this country bit by bit.

Morality, ethics, standards, and national security have no place in their agenda.

Even victims like children are not free from their grasp. They are in the business of destroying America, and doing a pretty complete job of it.

While the ACLU continues in their assault on Judeo-Christian values, they conveniently overlook the activist actions of Islamists in our public schools, who seek set asides for their worship practices.

The ACLU is a political organization which shrouds itself in the concept of "rights" and uses our own freedoms and laws against the majority or for the advantage of any group it deems to be worthy of their protection no matter how dangerous like terrorists or criminal like NAMBLA, who prey on young children.

The ACLU could certainly vie for the award for the most dangerous organization in America.


highboy said...

To the point of child porn, they've defended their position in that it is not that sexual conduct with children is a right, but that actually possessing the porn is a right and not a criminal act. Also they like to point out that as long as actual children are not involved it is not a crime, as most child porn they say is computer generated images. The fact that this group goes that far to nuance the situation to make it look more defensible makes me want to take a bath.

Anonymous said...

With the ACLU, one man's civil liberty is another man's tax...

Brooke said...

How can I pick a top issue out of such a list?

The whole thing is vile.

Chuck said...

(By contrast, the ACLU adamantly reserves the right to have its own security guards search the possessions of anyone entering its New York City headquarters building.)

We had a situation here years ago where the local Teamsters office was trying to keep it's headquarters office workers from organizing.

No hypocrisy on the left.

Pasadena Closet Conservative said...

You're being much too hard on them. After all, they only have our best interests at heart.

Khaki Elephant said...

I just want to say thanks for getting me all bent out of shape about the ACLU right before I go to bed!

Z said...

Khaki..nag, nag, nag (smile!)
Ya, right...then, as you saw when I commented at your site after I saw your comment here.YOU posted on the STIMULUS PACKAGE and now I CAN'T SLEEP! So, we're even!

Does anybody else feel like they want to bury their head in the sand and pretend there's no such THING as politics anymore??

Average American said...

What would you call it when a boat load full of lawyers on a convention cruise sinks and all the lawyers drown?

Average American said...

A damned good start!

Ducky's here said...

This would be a more productive post if you quoted sources and didn't frame your language inaccurately.

The ACLU has never started a case defending any use of children in pornographic poses.

It has opposed legislation that would have called for severe criminal penalties against drawings and other expressions.

I think the question is reasonable and the Ashcroft bill, which many think was entirely to broad, was defeated.
That bill was largely a reaction to Mapplethorpe and the right's strong desire for censorship.

Z said...

Ducky, I didn't write this list...anyway, most of it's right out of their playbook, you know that.

To defend even animated child porn disgusts me.

This country needs people with a 'strong desire for censorship" because that usually translates to a strong desire for DECENCY. And yes, now you'll ask how I define DECENCY and where do I get off thinking America should live by MY definition...but, really, Ducky, we should all know what decency is , the Left and Right...The fact that we don't anymore is pretty upsetting and very telling.

I.H.S. said...

"the ACLU opposes laws prohibiting the disruption of military funerals by radical antiwar demonstrators,"

Are you kidding me? Why would any, half way thinking, person want to disrupt a time of great pain that is experienced when you lose a loved one. I tell you what let's not stop at demonstrating at military funerls, let's demonstate at police officer, and firefighters funerals. But wait; let's protest at the funeral of doctors, lawyers, school teachers and coaches. I'm sure we can find a reason to do it. What about protesting the funerals of people that had heath and life insurance; how about people that worked for a living and tried to be productive in society.

I'm done. (shaking my head in disbelief)


Ducky's here said...

This country needs people with a 'strong desire for censorship" because that usually translates to a strong desire for DECENCY.


I refer you to noted commie John Milton and his Areopagitica.

Probably the best essay extant against censorship and made by a Puritan.

We need people making sensible choices from free will, not brownshirts controlling content.

Ducky's here said...

"the ACLU opposes laws prohibiting the disruption of military funerals by radical antiwar demonstrators,"


Yes, I.H.S. the statement is complete nonsense.

There has never been an instance of such disruption by anti-war demonstrators but only disruption caused by the Landover Baptist cult.

Landover Baptist has been successfully sued (they haven't been around much lately). I don't believe the ACLU took a position on the case.

Brooke said...

Oh, really? That's not the impression I got from your comments here, Ducky.

Ducky's here said...

oops, my bad. The cult is Westboro Baptist Church (yes, I know it is NOT a church but a cult) not Landover.

Ducky's here said...

Brooke, that's Dutch law.

Europeans do get touchy about comparisons to Nazis.

I don't have any control over Dutch law.

As I said, if it's a political persecution it should be resisted.

Ducky's here said...

I'd also point out, Brooke that if that were an American case I am virtually certain the ACLU would support his case.

Brooke said...

So in Europe it's OK for the brownshirts to control content?

Just because a law is so doesn't make it right. Why should we all look the other way and say, "Not my problem"? That didn't work out so well before...