Pleasant surprise....

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by mkrishnan, May 12, 2004.

  1. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #1
    There was a flame war going on a little earlier about the ACLU and their notion of freedom of speech (i.e. they don't support religious freedom of speech). Anyway, not to re-ignite it or to call this news article decisive, but I always enjoy being pleasantly surprised:

    http://www.freep.com/news/education/utica12_20040512.htm

    BTW I'm not an ACLU member or particularly a supporter, but also not an enemy.
     
  2. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #2
    Interesting...not that I think it should have come to this...it is only a yearbook quote...

    BTW mkrishnan, not to be anal, but is that supposed to be "subtle" in your quote at the bottom? (where subtil is now...)
     
  3. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #3
    Not to be a know-it-all, but that's the archaic spelling....and is correct. :rolleyes:
     
  4. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #4
    i no spel so gud, aniweigh...I stanned curectid...apreechiate it..
     
  5. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #5
    You are most welcome! ;)
     
  6. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #6
    Youse nid to go to skuul, get ahn educashun
     
  7. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #7
    No child left behind, huh?
     
  8. Neserk macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #8
    That is a common misconception about the ACLU. Their only goal is to protect constitutional rights. It only *appears* that they pick on religious nuts because they are frequently trying to violate the constitutional rights of others.
     
  9. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #9
     
  10. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #10
    They protect our civil liberties and often use the Bill of Rights as the cornerstone of their defense.

    Which four are you going to say they're not protecting? I know you'll say the 2nd, but they don't agree with you that it's being violated.

    What are the remaining three, and are they civil liberty-related?
     
  11. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #11
    Also, this is no "surprise" coming from the ACLU. Anyone who knows anything about the ACLU for real and not just what they think they know or what they've been told to think know that the ACLU takes up many of these types of cases where they defend individual right to religious expression.
     
  12. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #12
    Remaining 3...

    5th Amendment: ...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

    If the ACLU observed the 5th Amendment, they would be on the side of private property owners against the environmental lobby that seek to prevent any development of lands.

    9th/10th Amendment:

    If the ACLU observed the 9th/10th amendment, they would be fighting for a reduction of federal power and an increase in states power.
     
  13. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #13
    They do intervene in cases of private property seizures. As far as development of land, there are zoning ordinances and in the same vein there are environmental restrictions. Neither are unconstitutional on the face.

    Not an individual civil liberty issue.
     
  14. Voltron macrumors newbie

    Voltron

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    #14
    I don't recall which admendment gave us the right to bear cars?
     
  15. poopyhead macrumors 6502a

    poopyhead

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Location:
    in the toe-jam of greatness (Fort Worth)
    #15
    I don't recall there being an unlimited right to bear arms
     
  16. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #16
    What part of 'shall not be infringed' do you not understand? Writings of the era suggest that the arms indicated in the 2nd Amendment were the same type of arms that would be of use to a standing army or to the militia that would help support the standing army.

    Even the last 2nd Amendment case heard by the SCOTUS states this as well.

    I would put the upper limit of arms guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment to be whatever the front line infantry soldier is using at this present moment. Back then, it was muzzleloading muskets and rifles, today, its M16 and M249SAWs. Tomorrow, it could be Type 2 Phasers and Light Sabers. :eek: :D :D

    Thinking about it some more though, if more of us law-abiding citizens are armed, we probably would not need as much Defense Spending as we are currently spending. How much does Switzerland spend on defense? How many wars have Switzerland waged in the past 600 years?
     
  17. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #17
    Private property seizures by government, but what about private property seizures by lawsuits brought on by environmentalists? I would think the ACLU would be unwavering in its support for these causes no matter which group was the one doing the 'seizing'. (But somehow, I don't see the ACLU going against the Sierra Club.)

    If all the power the federal or state government has comes from the people... and the federal and state governments have been becoming more and more powerful... from where are the new powers coming from? Sounds pretty individual civil liberty issue to me.
     
  18. poopyhead macrumors 6502a

    poopyhead

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Location:
    in the toe-jam of greatness (Fort Worth)
    #18
    you may be correct but the constitution is an organic and living document. at the time it was written people lived in sparsely populated communities in the north and relative wilderness in the south in which a firearm was needed as much to protect yourself against your fellow man as against bears and other wildlife.
    I am all for a right to bear arms
    but
    if we were to limit our understanding of the document to the mores and public opinion of that time then the US would be a much less free country than it is today.
     
  19. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #19
    You really can't have a sensible discussion about this issue with Frohickey. He claims to be a "strict constructionist" where the Constitution is concerned, but his strict constructionism is limited to interpreting selected phrases in the way he'd like to see them interpreted.
     
  20. SPG macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #20
    Didn't the ACLU file a friend of the court brief on behalf of Rush limbaugh on his doctor shopping charges?
    Oh the irony!
     
  21. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #21
    Is this a discussion about the ACLU and religious freedom? Or has Frohickey hijacked another thread for a guns rant? :rolleyes:
     
  22. Voltron macrumors newbie

    Voltron

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    #22
    Have a problem with the constitution then make an amendment. Do not usurp it. Its only a living document when you have 3/4 of the vote.
     
  23. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #23
    Good call. I made the mistake of aiding and abetting.
     
  24. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #24
    It was about the ACLU and their selective protection of the Bill of Rights. I'm pointing out that if the ACLU were strident in the protection of the entire Bill of Rights, I'd be mailing them regular checks.

    Besides, if you check the thread history, I made one reference to the 2nd Amendment which is an individual civil right, and is pertinent to the discussion. Its the ones that call the US Constitution a living organic document. How could a document open for interpretation depending on the era protect and guarantee civil rights? That's just like saying it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is. :eek:
     
  25. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #25
    When was the last time the NRA challenged a gun control law on Second Amendment grounds? Answer: never. Still, I suspect they get your checks regularly.
     

Share This Page