ACLU WINS ANOTHER FOR THE LEFT

Today's news has it that the ACLU has won the court battle challenging the right to block pornography. It's now been ruled that doing that violates adults' rights to free speech. Another victory for the left. Let's bring out the nipple clips and drag dresses and dance in the streets till daylight tomorrow.

Comments

  • 18 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • I saw that and their premise is that it protects artists and adult learning material. What??!! x:o
    Pornography is worlds away from art and education. I say keep that garbage in the curtained off back room where no one else has to see it.
  • How 'bout that? And this from a "conservative" Supreme Court packed during the Reagan years, huh? x;-)
  • The point is that the ACLU brought the case. I'm sure you're not aware, but that's where Ruth B. Ginsberg spent most of her entire adult life as a lead attorney. While the rest of us sadly feel ourselves caught in the swirl of the toilet bowl, Parabeagle wants to yah yah about who put who on the court. It's more important now to change things than to joust about how we got here.
  • Yeah! Next thing you know those justices will rule that "battlefield detainees" are entitled to counsel! Can't trust them liberals! x:o
  • Yeha, but the point is the US Supreme Court, with the conservatives in control made the decision.

    To say that it was the ACLU that brought the case doens't mean anything unless you beleieve that America is not a place where different ideas and opinions are free to be debated and challenged. And that it should be the best argument and the most meaningful in meeting what the framers of the Consitution including the First Amendment had in mind for an open society that can take care of itself in debating ideas -- even ones that many people may not like --should "win the day."

    Besides the Court pointed out that the alw doens't stop the off shore websites. And the truly most effective way to stop porn for children is with proper blocks and filters and so on.

    P.S, you do know that President Clinton signed the bill into law. Geez, so you guys support President Clinton.

    Finally you see the light. :DD
  • >To say that it was the ACLU that brought the
    >case doens't mean anything unless you beleieve
    >that America is not a place where different
    >ideas and opinions are free to be debated and
    >challenged. And that it should be the best
    >argument and the most meaningful in meeting what
    >the framers of the Consitution including the
    >First Amendment had in mind for an open society
    >that can take care of itself in debating ideas
    >-- even ones that many people may not like
    >--should "win the day."
    >

    In support of your comments, H-man, I'll offer something that was e-mailed to me earlier today:

    Quotes to live by:

    "I have always strenuously supported the right of every man to his own
    opinion, however different that opinion might be to mine. He who denies
    another this right makes a slave of himself to his present opinion,
    because he precludes himself the right of changing it."
    -- Thomas Paine, 1783

    "Free speech exercised both individually and through a free press, is a
    necessity in any country where people are themselves free."
    -- Theodore Roosevelt, 1918

    "The truth is found when men are free to pursue it."
    -- Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1936

    "If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people
    what they do not want to hear."
    -- George Orwell, 1945

    "Any time we deny any citizen the full exercise of his constitutional
    rights, we are weakening our own claim to them."
    -- Dwight David Eisenhower, 1963

    "What is objectionable, what is dangerous about extremists is not that
    they are extreme, but that they are intolerant."
    -- Robert F. Kennedy, 1964






  • Don,

    Well stated. You da man.

    Jeff
  • All the more reason for Bush to nominate true conservatives who have strong moral values and will not sell our society out to the radical elements.
  • Don, please post your picture tomorrow wearing your drag dress and dancing in the street in front of your house.
  • I for one would like a warning before viewing that disturbing sounding picture.
  • Did you actually read the decision (and notice who was in the majority) or is this based on headlines? The actual decision takes into account real life on the internet.

  • Hi, been too busy to check in recently and now
    find Don and Parabeagle at it still. Anyway, I'm somewhere in the middle. I believe the decision
    was constitutional. My question upon hearing
    of the decision was, "Where are these children being exposed? Why aren't they being supervised
    by their #1 parental units; #2 instructional unit or # 3 legal guardian. I raised two kids and was a child myself and know how sneakly the little runts can be.
    On the other hand, I find the following more obscene. True story: a young American child
    on vacation in Mexico with her family, sees small children making and selling stone carvings along the road,asked her mother," Are they doing this for us?" She thought they were "acting". She, at age 6, was justifiably horrified to learn
    that these children were earning their supper. To me, the fact that humans allow other humans to starve and suffer, is more obscene, pornographic, and offensive than some ugly t++t with her mouth open.


  • Does anyone else feel like their minds are being controled and they just had a life altering experience? I think that's what I was doing in the 60's, but there are not enough brain cells left to remember. (see Eroj's profile)
  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 06-30-04 AT 02:10PM (CST)[/font][br][br]It's that 'great minds' thing again, Marc. I did precisely that and was going to say to her, "I rechecked your profile and understand. Help is on the way."

    P.S: It's my understanding that Al Gore made that story up about the children on the side of the road.
  • When Congress passes a law that it is illegal for quilt clubs to advertise their meeting times on the internet or elsewhere, I expect that the ACLU will challenge that one as well. I hope so, and so does my wife.
  • Your wife is one smart woman G3. She wants you out of the house at that club meeting!
  • Hey Don, don't sweat the small stuff. I read in today's paper where the American Criminals Liberal Union has now filed suit agianst a town in VA. Apparently the town has banned "teen nudity beaches" and the ACLU believes that violates the teens right to privacy. Gee, where was the ACLU when the teens wnated to carry the Bible's to school. Oooops I forgot, some how that is un-constitutional. I mean, the constitution only mentions the fact that the freedom to practice ones religion will not be infringed upon. But that issue is beneath the dignity & reproach of the ACLU. Apparently it is okay to sit out on the beach in the nude if you are a teenager but it is not okay to carry a Bible to school!


    When did the south end of a north bound mule get turned around? x:-/

  • Ah Slogan, if Don answers your last question he will probably say in 1865.
Sign In or Register to comment.