Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   "Ironic" tag working overtime as ACLU announces support for Larry Craig   (cnn.com) divider line 257
    More: Ironic  
•       •       •

5695 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Sep 2007 at 5:58 AM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



257 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-09-18 10:38:20 AM  
Theaetetus: What has the ACLU done that was not politically neutral?

It's sad to say but the constitution is a decidedly liberal document. In terms of the ideals the ACLU serve to defend they are liberal; in terms of who they are willing to work with in order to defend those liberal principles, they are neutral.

It is fairly plain to see that the liberal mind is more open to bypartisanship, just look at congress' voting records: Republicans (who, like it or not, represent the conservative half of the coutry)consistently vote as a block, choosing to play for the team; Democrats (who regretfully represent the more liberal leaning half of the country) consistently see their votes split.

Oh and you might remember the article on Fark from about week ago about the study that proved such diference between the left-wing mind and the right wing mind:
Link (new window)
 
2007-09-18 10:39:33 AM  
Crap, one more time...

Link (new window)

http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-politics10sep10,0,5982337.story?coll= la-home-center
 
2007-09-18 10:40:50 AM  
CagedDepravity: Then why did they defend Rush?

Privacy concerns pertaining to his medical records. Different issues. See, the world is more complex than (D) vs (R), and there is overlap between the two.
 
2007-09-18 10:40:59 AM  
The ACLU is liberally biased. And, at least as far as civil rights go, that is a very good thing

what_now: That's because there are no cases where anyone's second ammendent rights have been violated, save maybe when the national guard took the guns away from residents of New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina.

That pissed me off so much. Anything ever become of that? Last time I was in NOLA, National Guard tanks were still on the streets (and this was still a year or so after Katrina). That pissed me off too. I never thought I'd live to see the day when New Orleans became the least American-like city, especially when the United States wouldn't be anywhere near what it is today, culturally or economically, without New Orleans.

Goddamnit, I'm depressing myself. Sorry for the threadjack.
 
2007-09-18 10:41:10 AM  
"Engaging in public sex in a bathroom is a crime and most people understand that without putting up a sign," Hogan said. "We saw a lot of communication about this particular bathroom on Web sites, and if we make it known that we're aware of it we can't be expected to enforce the law as effectively we can't make as much money if we only bust one person in the act"
 
2007-09-18 10:42:22 AM  
Thorndyke Barnhard: It's sad to say but the constitution is a decidedly liberal document.

No.
The constitution, being that it specifically limits government intervention in people's lives, is a fundamentally conservative document.
 
2007-09-18 10:43:05 AM  
I think this might be the worst use of the ironic tag that I have ever seen on Fark, and that is really saying something...

Here's to you subby
 
2007-09-18 10:44:07 AM  
Yellowbeard: Besides that, it is dropping the space between that word and the preceding word....

Mods?


It's in the FARQ. Let's say for the sake of argument, I were to post up that it is "a bit" then a space, then "chilly today." The filters read that as "bit" no space "ch-illy" and renders it "biatchilly" to filter out the pejorative term for female. Your's caught something else.
 
2007-09-18 10:49:00 AM  
Theaetetus: No.
The constitution, being that it specifically limits government intervention in people's lives, is a fundamentally conservative document.


Says who?

Give me ONE example of someone commonly thought of as conservative who successfully pulled back government intervention into people's lives. Not vague lip-service, action. Just one.

"Small government" is just a smokescreen for the Reaganites to pull back Welfare and Social Security. It has nothing to do with civil rights. Conservatives (those who value law and order, preservation of the cultural status quo) could care less about the Bill of Rights. Nothing I have ever seen has been contrary to this. Just a whole lotta No True Scottsmen.

Sorry, the Bill of Rights is still a "liberal" document. 220 years later.
 
2007-09-18 10:53:10 AM  
www.global-air.com
 
2007-09-18 10:59:06 AM  
I thnk Senator Craig got the shaft on this one. He didn't plead guilty to soliciting sex. To get on his way and catch his plane home, he plead guilty to an offered lesser charge of "disorderly conduct" for arguing with the cop, paid a fine, and was on his way.

Now, the way this thing has played-out, I don't blame him for going back to try to unwind the plea.
 
2007-09-18 11:03:28 AM  
Random Reality Check: ...I said that if the arresting officer believes a law has been broken, it is his duty to arrest you.

That may have been what you meant, but it's most certainly not what you said:

Here's the deal, if you solicit sex in a public bathroom, you may not be
breaking any specific law but you are crossing a line society has put in
place
and that has nothing to do with sexual orientation ... If
you choose to extend that behavior from what can be done outside
the bathroom, you have crossed that boundary - law or no law.


Which you stated in the context of a response to this comment about Craig's arrest:

Craig TECHNICALLY even if every signal he made was a communication to have gay sex DID NOT violate a damned law in the state he was in

My interpretation of your intention may have been wrong, but I don't think it was an unreasonable one given the wording.
 
2007-09-18 11:06:34 AM  
planes: I thnk Senator Craig got the shaft on this one. He didn't plead guilty to soliciting sex. To get on his way and catch his plane home keep the fact that he was trolling public restrooms for gay sex out of the papers, he plead guilty to an offered lesser charge of "disorderly conduct" for arguing with the cop, paid a fine, and was on his way.

Now, the way this thing has played-out, I don't blame him for going back to try to unwind the plea.


FTFY.
 
2007-09-18 11:07:32 AM  
DrJesusPhD: Says who?

Give me ONE example of someone commonly thought of as conservative who successfully pulled back government intervention into people's lives. Not vague lip-service, action. Just one.


upload.wikimedia.org

Want another?

upload.wikimedia.org

"Small government" is just a smokescreen for the Reaganites to pull back Welfare and Social Security. It has nothing to do with civil rights. Conservatives (those who value law and order, preservation of the cultural status quo) could care less about the Bill of Rights. Nothing I have ever seen has been contrary to this. Just a whole lotta No True Scottsmen.

Sorry, the Bill of Rights is still a "liberal" document. 220 years later.


No... You could claim that the Republican party has abandoned conservatism, you could claim that NeoCons are doing the exact opposite of conservatism, but you cannot claim that the Bill of Rights is not conservative.
Well, you can, but you're completely wrong and clearly know nothing about what "conservatism" actually means.
 
2007-09-18 11:08:29 AM  
Theaetetus: Want another?

Uh... Obviously, Madison was very large.

Second one was supposed to be:
www.visitingdc.com
 
2007-09-18 11:10:17 AM  
planes: I thnk Senator Craig got the shaft on this one. He didn't plead guilty to soliciting sex. To get on his way and catch his plane home, he plead guilty to an offered lesser charge of "disorderly conduct" for arguing with the cop, paid a fine, and was on his way.

He plead guilty two months after he was arrested. He didn't plea to a lesser charge so he could make his flight. Your posts would be better if you actually knew something about the issue at hand.
 
Ra_
2007-09-18 11:11:34 AM  
As much as I enjoy kicking Larry,
it is ludicrous that we persecute our leaders for sex preferences,
while basically ignoring how most of them sell their influence to the highest bidder.

We should provide them with whatever kind of whores they enjoy
and prosecute them for abusing things that affect us
 
2007-09-18 11:12:11 AM  
fireclown: CagedDepravity: Then why did they defend Rush?

Privacy concerns pertaining to his medical records. Different issues. See, the world is more complex than (D) vs (R), and there is overlap between the two.


I get that - my question was rhetorical, responding to someone who claimed that the ACLU was defending Craig to keep him in the senate to make the Republicans look bad.
 
2007-09-18 11:12:35 AM  
Theaetetus

Jefferson was a "conservative"? Thanks for the laugh.
 
2007-09-18 11:13:30 AM  
img1.fark.com

for the ACLU.

img1.fark.com for Craig.
 
2007-09-18 11:15:38 AM  
Madison and Jefferson would beat the snot out of "conservatives" of today.
 
2007-09-18 11:17:13 AM  
And let's not forget that the ACLU worked to get the felony Iran/Contra conviction of Colonel-turned-traitor Oliver North thrown out on a technicality.
 
2007-09-18 11:19:10 AM  
con·serv·a·tive
-adjective
1.disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.


Because if there's anything the Bill of Rights was meant to do, was preserve the status quo.

3.traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: conservative suit.

Again, the Bill of Rights and the Revolution was anything but "avoiding showiness" or "traditional".

As a homework assignment, look up the definition of "liberal".
 
2007-09-18 11:21:08 AM  
Thing is, Craig was never actually charged with soliciting sex. He was charged with peeping (that is, he "checked out" the officer through the crack in the stall (several times), in a place one would expect to have privacy-no different than hiding in the bushes in a backyard to see a woman getting out of the shower through the bathroom window), and a completely generic disorderly conduct charge (which is what Craig pled guilty to). I gather that the charges are filed this way to avoid the constitutional issues the ACLU is bringing up here.
 
2007-09-18 11:21:09 AM  
DrJesusPhD: Theaetetus

Jefferson was a "conservative"? Thanks for the laugh.


he probably thinks jesus was a conservative, too.
 
2007-09-18 11:22:21 AM  
DrJesusPhD: Jefferson was a "conservative"? Thanks for the laugh.

You don't think that someone who, when faced with a government that is oppressing his rights, fights back is a conservative? You don't think that someone who wants to limit government intervention is a conservative? Thanks for the laugh.
 
2007-09-18 11:25:51 AM  
Theaetetus: The constitution, being that it specifically limits government intervention in people's lives, is a fundamentally conservative document.

Your belief that "government intervention in people's lives" is limited to liberal politics is preposterous and laughable.
 
2007-09-18 11:26:21 AM  
Your one line definition is woefully lacking.

The Founding Fathers created the single most important set of political ideas in American history, known as republicanism, which all groups, liberal and conservative alike, have drawn from. The Federalist Party, followers of Alexander Hamilton, developed an important variation of republicanism that can be considered conservative. Rejecting monarchy and aristocracy, they emphasized civic virtue as the core American value. The Federalists spoke for the propertied interests and the upper classes of the cities. They envisioned a modernizing land of banks and factories, with a strong army and navy.

On many issues American conservatism also derives from the republicanism of Thomas Jefferson and his followers, especially John Randolph of Roanoke and his "Old Republican" followers. They idealized the yeoman farmer as the epitome of civic virtue, warned that banking and industry led to corruption, that is to the illegitimate use of government power for private ends. Jefferson himself was a vehement opponent of what today is called "judicial activism". The Jeffersonians stressed States' Rights and small government.
 
2007-09-18 11:30:36 AM  
Theaetetus

Your questionable source is woefully lacking. If you can use that, I can use (from the same article):

The Loyalists of the American Revolution were mostly political conservatives
 
2007-09-18 11:33:06 AM  
So presumably, those who feel that Craig's actions were not lewd or disorderly conduct, also believe that men should be able to solicit sex from women by reaching into stalls occupied by women correct?

Say like at portable unisex facilities at concerts and stadiums, changing rooms at department stores, changing rooms at public pools, locker rooms at gyms, etc.

It's perfectly okay for a man to find a stall occupied by a woman and peep into it then start reaching into it?

Is there any "he didn't commit a crime" person who would like to address this?
 
2007-09-18 11:37:13 AM  
img178.imageshack.us

/stay classy senator
 
2007-09-18 11:37:25 AM  
See this is what the differences between liberals and Republicans.

Liberals believe the rules should apply the same for all people.

Republicans believe that there are two set of rules. Ones for them and ones for everyone else.
 
2007-09-18 11:37:37 AM  
ThrobblefootSpectre:
Say like at portable unisex facilities at concerts and stadiums, changing rooms at department stores, changing rooms at public pools, locker rooms at gyms, etc.

Is there any "he didn't commit a crime" person who would like to address this?


what world do you live in?

\am i allowed there?
 
2007-09-18 11:38:37 AM  
I think there are a several of reasons for all the ACLU hatred by Republicans.

1. In the South, there is a left-over resentment of the Civil rights movement.

2. As the Christian majority has pushed to get organized prayer into school and the 10 commandments into the courthouse, it is the ACLU that is pushing back.

3. As the Bush administration has roll back our civil rights it is the ACLU who is fighting for privacy, hebus corpus, and Freedom of information.
 
2007-09-18 11:43:05 AM  
Bartleby the Scrivener: what world do you live in?
\am i allowed there?


Read my post. I'm am talking specifically about unisex facilities such as porta-potties, changing rooms, fitting rooms at clothing stores, etc.
 
2007-09-18 11:45:55 AM  
ThrobblefootSpectre
It's perfectly okay for a man to find a stall occupied by a woman and peep into it then start reaching into it?

Interesting comparison. The 'peeping' would be out of line any way you look at it, I think. By which I mean, there's no way you could have established at that point if your advances were at all reciprocated by the other person. At that point, you're just a pervy peeping Tom, be it male or female.

As for the reach...may be a slightly less clear line there. By then, Craig (or whatever other tearoom lurker) has semi-established that the other party is playing along; that they're a willing participant. (the foot tapping, which was then answered by the other man's foot tapping). So it's not necessarily harassment, given the bizzare glory hole mating dance they go through to get to the groping part.
 
2007-09-18 11:47:04 AM  
Theaetetus
Your one line definition is woefully lacking.

The Founding Fathers created the single ...**Something, Something, about Republicans being against monarchy, aristocracy, and corruption AND being FOR States' Rights and small government.


I would argue that today's GOP is the opposite of everything you just wrote. What the hell happened?
 
2007-09-18 11:48:55 AM  
Theaetetus 2007-09-18 11:22:21 AM: "You don't think that someone who, when faced with a government that is oppressing his rights, fights back is a conservative? You don't think that someone who wants to limit government intervention is a conservative? Thanks for the laugh."

The concepts of limiting the powers of government are one the fundamental tenets of Philosophical Liberalism (along with: market economies, rule of law, and gov't transparency). The founding fathers were radicals and revolutionaries. Their opponents were Torries (sometimes called Loyalists/Royalists) who were conservatives.

Your misunderstanding is part of the problem with the term "conservatism". What is a "conservative"? (Obviously) One who conserves. However what is it they are conserving? The way things are *now*? The way things were last year? 10 years ago? 100 years ago? 1000 years ago? ... ?
 
2007-09-18 11:49:59 AM  
I suppose that he could just walk into court and say, "Your honor, I want to withdraw my guilty plea for disorderly conduct on the grounds that I only plead guilty with the understanding that it would keep my bumbling attempt at hot gay bathroom sex out of the media, and that clearly didn't work."
 
2007-09-18 11:52:42 AM  
I think my computer's broken. I just did a search for 'NAMBLA' in this thread and it said 'Text Not Found'. Could someone else check?
 
2007-09-18 11:59:37 AM  
Openly homosexual Republicans who support gay rights are referred to as Log Cabin Republicans.

I have heard it proposed that closeted homosexual Republicans who oppose gay rights be now and forever known as Wide Stance Republicans.
 
2007-09-18 12:00:33 PM  
llDayo
I think my computer's broken. I just did a search for 'NAMBLA' in this thread and it said 'Text Not Found'. Could someone else check?

I just did, I found exactly one occurence of the text. Maybe your computer is broken.
 
2007-09-18 12:01:12 PM  
I just did, I found exactly one occurence of the text. Maybe your computer is broken.

My bad. I tried again. There are two, now.
 
2007-09-18 12:03:09 PM  
Hickory-smoked: Openly homosexual Republicans who support gay rights are referred to as Log Cabin Republicans.

I have heard it proposed that closeted homosexual Republicans who oppose gay rights be now and forever known as Wide Stance Republicans.


I recently compared being a log cabin republican because of some sort of fiscal belief to being a Jew who supports the NAZI party because they think that "other than the whole persecution of Jews, thing, they have a fairly intelligent governmental structure."

Not attempting any sort of Godwin, here. I just don't get that mentality. Or maybe I do, but am just amazed at their dedication to their fiscal beliefs in the face of direct persecution....

/No, I don't think that what is being done to homosexuals in this country is anywhere close to what was done to Jews, homosexuals, Gypsies, and others in NAZI Germany.
 
2007-09-18 12:10:35 PM  
Dramadairy:

Craig TECHNICALLY even if every signal he made was a communication to have gay sex DID NOT violate a damned law in the state he was in

Okay, let me ask you a question.

If I am sitting in a men's room stall and some guy is "peeking" in through the crack in the door, then takes up in the next stall beside me and then makes signals that he wants to have a sexual contact with me, has my right to be left in peace been violated? If so, is this something that would fall under a public nuisance (new window)? If not, how many people would someone have to disturb with this behavior before they would be considered a nuisance?

My interpretation of your intention may have been wrong, but I don't think it was an unreasonable one given the wording.

I accept your correction and admit that my wording was very poorly
constructed. I'm sorry, I was not trying to pick a fight with you.

At the same time, I do believe that the Senator did do something that
was illegal and if not was bordering on illegal. Let me be clear about this, I am not referring to anything sexual here, I am strictly confining what I believe he did wrong as intentionally and repeatedly bothering someone.

I can assure you that if some pervert was peeking in through the crack of the door at my child in a public restroom, someone would be getting arrested and someone else would be carried out on a stretcher. I'll gladly plead guilty on that one. As an afterthought, I am not suggesting that homosexuality is in any way linked to pedophilia.
 
2007-09-18 12:15:52 PM  
kid_icarus: As for the reach...may be a slightly less clear line there. By then, Craig (or whatever other tearoom lurker) has semi-established that the other party is playing along; that they're a willing participant. (the foot tapping, which was then answered by the other man's foot tapping).

I don't think that the foot tapping would legally be a defense as in "I had established initial consent".

It is far too vague a signal because certainly many people tap their feet in circumstances that are not consent to sex. It's just normal common body movement that was arbitrarily (and secretly) decided upon by a small demographic as a covert signal. This is not a sound legal definition of willing participant.
 
2007-09-18 12:18:45 PM  
Random Reality Check: right to be left in peace been violated?

What is this "right to be left in peace" you mention?
 
2007-09-18 12:20:33 PM  
Random Reality Check: At the same time, I do believe that the Senator did do something that
was illegal and if not was bordering on illegal. Let me be clear about this, I am not referring to anything sexual here, I am strictly confining what I believe he did wrong as intentionally and repeatedly bothering someone.


Oh, and this is probably best compared to sexual harassment statutes, which require that the harassee notify the harassor that they are not interested in the advances.
Under those guidelines, if the "someone" Craig was intentionally and repeatedly bothering didn't say anything, he's not guilty.
 
2007-09-18 12:27:05 PM  
Theaetetus: What is this "right to be left in peace" you mention?

It's a right he's claiming he has. If you are implying that he doesn't, might I ask what grounds you have for denying it?
 
2007-09-18 12:33:25 PM  
lawmaker's bathroom bust was likely unconstitutional.

No shiate!
 
Displayed 50 of 257 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report