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.

(The Raw Story)   "Hi, ACLU? I would like to report some discrimination. I was banned from the neighborhood because of my faith. What? Oh, sure it's White Supremacy...hello?"   (rawstory.com) divider line 171
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

2257 clicks; posted to Politics » on 26 Jun 2014 at 5:42 PM (25 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



171 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-26 12:59:09 PM  
 
2014-06-26 01:12:54 PM  
Right, the ACLU is well-known for not protecting the free speech of racists.  Sure.
 
2014-06-26 01:23:30 PM  
No case. If your religious beliefs cause a hostile work environment for others, the business would be required to fire you
 
2014-06-26 01:46:14 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: (frustratingly, unless it's a 2nd Amendment violation).


Yeah, they count funny.
 
2014-06-26 01:51:23 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Seriously, the ACLU will back anyone - even the KKK - if their civil liberties have been violated (frustratingly, unless it's a 2nd Amendment violation).


ACLU does take 2nd amendment cases but generally will refer you to the NRA or similar group who eagerly take such cases and have deep pockets rather than spending thier own limited resources on them
 
2014-06-26 01:58:36 PM  

Magorn: Gecko Gingrich: Seriously, the ACLU will back anyone - even the KKK - if their civil liberties have been violated (frustratingly, unless it's a 2nd Amendment violation).

ACLU does take 2nd amendment cases but generally will refer you to the NRA or similar group who eagerly take such cases and have deep pockets rather than spending thier own limited resources on them


This.  There's no shortage of gun rights advocates.  The ACLU has their hands full protecting the rest of the constitution.
 
2014-06-26 02:12:41 PM  

Magorn: Gecko Gingrich: Seriously, the ACLU will back anyone - even the KKK - if their civil liberties have been violated (frustratingly, unless it's a 2nd Amendment violation).

ACLU does take 2nd amendment cases but generally will refer you to the NRA or similar group who eagerly take such cases and have deep pockets rather than spending thier own limited resources on them


Lionel Mandrake: This. There's no shortage of gun rights advocates. The ACLU has their hands full protecting the rest of the constitution.


Link

Look, I love the ACLU. I donate to them. They do some *very* good work. They do a lot of work that most folks would rather they didn't, but which needs doing. But to claim that they have anything but contempt for the Second Amendment is delusional.
 
2014-06-26 02:18:37 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Magorn: Gecko Gingrich: Seriously, the ACLU will back anyone - even the KKK - if their civil liberties have been violated (frustratingly, unless it's a 2nd Amendment violation).

ACLU does take 2nd amendment cases but generally will refer you to the NRA or similar group who eagerly take such cases and have deep pockets rather than spending thier own limited resources on them

Lionel Mandrake: This. There's no shortage of gun rights advocates. The ACLU has their hands full protecting the rest of the constitution.

Link

Look, I love the ACLU. I donate to them. They do some *very* good work. They do a lot of work that most folks would rather they didn't, but which needs doing. But to claim that they have anything but contempt for the Second Amendment is delusional.


Until    Heller the ACLU's position was more or less sync'ed up with the law of the land, and until  McDonald it was an open question whether the 2nd was an "incorporated" right, meaning it was protected by the 14th Amendment, and therefore applied to states, or whether it was only Guaranteed by the 5th amendment and was therefore solely a limitation on federal power
 
2014-06-26 02:22:43 PM  
I guess if atheism is a religion then white supremacy can be one too.

/ducks and runs
 
2014-06-26 02:27:09 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Magorn: Gecko Gingrich: Seriously, the ACLU will back anyone - even the KKK - if their civil liberties have been violated (frustratingly, unless it's a 2nd Amendment violation).

ACLU does take 2nd amendment cases but generally will refer you to the NRA or similar group who eagerly take such cases and have deep pockets rather than spending thier own limited resources on them

Lionel Mandrake: This. There's no shortage of gun rights advocates. The ACLU has their hands full protecting the rest of the constitution.

Link

Look, I love the ACLU. I donate to them. They do some *very* good work. They do a lot of work that most folks would rather they didn't, but which needs doing. But to claim that they have anything but contempt for the Second Amendment is delusional.


"... the ACLU has long taken the position that the Second Amendment protects a collective right rather than an individual right"

So by "contempt" I guess you mean "a different view than my own"
 
2014-06-26 02:40:24 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: So by "contempt" I guess you mean "a different view than my own"


They can use their fancy lawyer-talk however they'd like, but the bottom line is that they don't think people should own guns. Their position that it's a "collective" right and one reserved only for "state militias" flies in the face of over two centuries of legal private gun ownership. Furthermore, they go on to state that they disagree with the SCOTUS's decision in Heller, so they're simply going to drag their feet changing their position because "This position is currently under review and is being updated by the ACLU National Board in light of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in D.C. v. Heller in 2008." It's been 6 years. The SCOTUS, by the ACLU's own admission, said private gun ownership is legal. How could they not have had time to change their position, unless they have no intention of doing so.
 
2014-06-26 03:14:22 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: The SCOTUS, by the ACLU's own admission, said private gun ownership is legal. How could they not have had time to change their position, unless they have no intention of doing so.


The just don't feel like changing it back in ten years when Heller gets gutted by Hillary's judges.
 
2014-06-26 03:25:37 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Lionel Mandrake: So by "contempt" I guess you mean "a different view than my own"

They can use their fancy lawyer-talk however they'd like, but the bottom line is that they don't think people should own guns. Their position that it's a "collective" right and one reserved only for "state militias" flies in the face of over two centuries of legal private gun ownership. Furthermore, they go on to state that they disagree with the SCOTUS's decision in Heller, so they're simply going to drag their feet changing their position because "This position is currently under review and is being updated by the ACLU National Board in light of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in D.C. v. Heller in 2008." It's been 6 years. The SCOTUS, by the ACLU's own admission, said private gun ownership is legal. How could they not have had time to change their position, unless they have no intention of doing so.


So they have no intention of doing so.  So what?

It still comes down to a difference of interpretation/opinion.

Do you think that everyone who holds an opinion not in accordance with precedent is showing "contempt" for the Constitution?
 
2014-06-26 03:39:58 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: So they have no intention of doing so. So what?

It still comes down to a difference of interpretation/opinion.


The only arbiter of what's is or isn't Constitutional is the court. The supreme arbiter is the SCOTUS. The ACLU can disagree with the SCOTUS's opinion all they want. What they cannot do is state the something that the Court has held to be Constitutional isn't.

Lionel Mandrake: Do you think that everyone who holds an opinion not in accordance with precedent is showing "contempt" for the Constitution?


How can the answer be anything other than, "Yes."?
 
2014-06-26 03:40:37 PM  
 
2014-06-26 03:42:36 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: state the something that the Court


state that something the Court


/Ugh.
 
2014-06-26 05:13:24 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Lionel Mandrake: Do you think that everyone who holds an opinion not in accordance with precedent is showing "contempt" for the Constitution?


How can the answer be anything other than, "Yes."?


By disagreeing with but abiding by court decisions?

Do you believe the ACLU is breaking the law or undermining people's gun rights?  Are they sending out thugs to take away guns or something?

Gecko Gingrich: The ACLU can disagree with the SCOTUS's opinion all they want.


Have they done more than this?
 
2014-06-26 05:30:34 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: Gecko Gingrich: Lionel Mandrake: Do you think that everyone who holds an opinion not in accordance with precedent is showing "contempt" for the Constitution?


How can the answer be anything other than, "Yes."?

By disagreeing with but abiding by court decisions?

Do you believe the ACLU is breaking the law or undermining people's gun rights?  Are they sending out thugs to take away guns or something?

Gecko Gingrich: The ACLU can disagree with the SCOTUS's opinion all they want.

Have they done more than this?


Before we continue, do you know what "contempt" means? I'm asking that seriously, because unless you do (and all indications so far are that you don't), there's no point in furthering this discussion.
 
2014-06-26 05:44:01 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Seriously, the ACLU will back anyone - even the KKK - if their civil liberties have been violated (frustratingly, unless it's a 2nd Amendment violation).


They will back the collective right based second amendment that we had until recently.
 
2014-06-26 05:49:16 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: But to claim that they have anything but contempt for the Second Amendment is delusional.


Yeah they take people to court to take their guns all the time.. or something.. what?


The ACLU has not once stood up for the 3rd amendment.  Why do they let Obama quarter Hessians in our houses?
 
2014-06-26 05:49:21 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: Gecko Gingrich: Magorn: Gecko Gingrich: Seriously, the ACLU will back anyone - even the KKK - if their civil liberties have been violated (frustratingly, unless it's a 2nd Amendment violation).

ACLU does take 2nd amendment cases but generally will refer you to the NRA or similar group who eagerly take such cases and have deep pockets rather than spending thier own limited resources on them

Lionel Mandrake: This. There's no shortage of gun rights advocates. The ACLU has their hands full protecting the rest of the constitution.

Link

Look, I love the ACLU. I donate to them. They do some *very* good work. They do a lot of work that most folks would rather they didn't, but which needs doing. But to claim that they have anything but contempt for the Second Amendment is delusional.

"... the ACLU has long taken the position that the Second Amendment protects a collective right rather than an individual right"

So by "contempt" I guess you mean "a different view than my own"


If by "a different view than my own" you mean "a view that is demonstrably contrary to established law", then yes.
 
2014-06-26 05:49:23 PM  
"I know we have a bad name, but it's not that way no more," he said. "When was the last time a black or Hispanic got hung on a tree?"

Oh, well, carry on then.
 
2014-06-26 05:49:53 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Lionel Mandrake: Gecko Gingrich: Lionel Mandrake: Do you think that everyone who holds an opinion not in accordance with precedent is showing "contempt" for the Constitution?


How can the answer be anything other than, "Yes."?

By disagreeing with but abiding by court decisions?

Do you believe the ACLU is breaking the law or undermining people's gun rights?  Are they sending out thugs to take away guns or something?

Gecko Gingrich: The ACLU can disagree with the SCOTUS's opinion all they want.

Have they done more than this?

Before we continue, do you know what "contempt" means? I'm asking that seriously, because unless you do (and all indications so far are that you don't), there's no point in furthering this discussion.


I'm fairly sure there's no point in continuing this discussion anyway, because it will quickly devolve into a debate about semantics and will change absolutely no one's opinion on the 2nd Amendment or the ACLU.
 
2014-06-26 05:50:00 PM  

sendtodave: Gecko Gingrich: Seriously, the ACLU will back anyone - even the KKK - if their civil liberties have been violated (frustratingly, unless it's a 2nd Amendment violation).

They will back the collective right based second amendment that we had until recently.


The concept of a right being "collective" is nonsensical.
 
2014-06-26 05:50:18 PM  
AWww, I was hoping for a discussion on which religion supports white power. I had my money on Mormons and Baptists. But we have to talk about guns.

Oh well, I guess we don't have many gun threads here, so it's okay.
 
2014-06-26 05:50:46 PM  

grokca: I guess if atheism is a religion then white supremacy can be one too.

/ducks and runs


You can have a religion for anything, seeing as a religion is just a made up set of beliefs.
 
2014-06-26 05:51:04 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Lionel Mandrake: Gecko Gingrich: Lionel Mandrake: Do you think that everyone who holds an opinion not in accordance with precedent is showing "contempt" for the Constitution?


How can the answer be anything other than, "Yes."?

By disagreeing with but abiding by court decisions?

Do you believe the ACLU is breaking the law or undermining people's gun rights?  Are they sending out thugs to take away guns or something?

Gecko Gingrich: The ACLU can disagree with the SCOTUS's opinion all they want.

Have they done more than this?

Before we continue, do you know what "contempt" means? I'm asking that seriously, because unless you do (and all indications so far are that you don't), there's no point in furthering this discussion.


Just because one disagrees with a currently legal statute or legal holding and expresses disgust over it, that is not "contempt" in either the legal or the semantic sense. That's just our right as Americans.

Legal contempt is violating a court order or injunction; showing contempt for the Constitution is almost impossible for an individual, except rhetorically or symbolically, since it circumscribes government actions, not individual ones.

By your argument, anyone who challenges a precedent or proposes a new law is in contempt, and I'm surprised you'd suggest that.
 
2014-06-26 05:51:53 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Lionel Mandrake: So they have no intention of doing so. So what?

It still comes down to a difference of interpretation/opinion.

The only arbiter of what's is or isn't Constitutional is the court. The supreme arbiter is the SCOTUS. The ACLU can disagree with the SCOTUS's opinion all they want. What they cannot do is state the something that the Court has held to be Constitutional isn't.

Lionel Mandrake: Do you think that everyone who holds an opinion not in accordance with precedent is showing "contempt" for the Constitution?

How can the answer be anything other than, "Yes."?


So abolitionists held the Constitution in contempt?  I guess the real traitors were those that didn't join the Confederacy
 
2014-06-26 05:52:14 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Lionel Mandrake: Do you think that everyone who holds an opinion not in accordance with precedent is showing "contempt" for the Constitution?

How can the answer be anything other than, "Yes."?


I don't believe that money equals speech. Does that mean I hold the Constitution in contempt?
 
2014-06-26 05:52:44 PM  

Dimensio: sendtodave: Gecko Gingrich: Seriously, the ACLU will back anyone - even the KKK - if their civil liberties have been violated (frustratingly, unless it's a 2nd Amendment violation).

They will back the collective right based second amendment that we had until recently.

The concept of a right being "collective" is nonsensical.


Nope.

We're not having this argument.

Nope nope nope nope.
 
2014-06-26 05:53:13 PM  

fusillade762: Gecko Gingrich: Lionel Mandrake: Do you think that everyone who holds an opinion not in accordance with precedent is showing "contempt" for the Constitution?

How can the answer be anything other than, "Yes."?

I don't believe that money equals speech. Does that mean I hold the Constitution in contempt?


Yep.  You are just like those anti-American Unionists.
 
2014-06-26 05:53:28 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Seriously, the ACLU will back anyone - even the KKK - if their civil liberties have been violated (frustratingly, unless it's a 2nd Amendment violation).


Really they won't aid a state forming a militia?
 
2014-06-26 05:53:32 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Lionel Mandrake: Do you think that everyone who holds an opinion not in accordance with precedent is showing "contempt" for the Constitution?


How can the answer be anything other than, "Yes."?


So you believe that Heller and the NRA were showing contempt for the Constitution by challenging the existing precedent in the first place?
 
2014-06-26 05:55:58 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: Right, the ACLU is well-known for not protecting the free speech of racists.  Sure.


They protected this one:
aclu.global.ssl.fastly.net

https://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/aclu-asks-court-protect- co nfidentiality-rush-limbaughs-medical-records

However Rush never seems to mention it. I wonder why.
 
2014-06-26 05:56:08 PM  

grokca: I guess if atheism is a religion then white supremacy can be one too.

/ducks and runs


Only if they don't collect stamps.
 
2014-06-26 05:57:34 PM  

Uchiha_Cycliste: AWww, I was hoping for a discussion on which religion supports white power. I had my money on Mormons and Baptists. But we have to talk about guns.

Oh well, I guess we don't have many gun threads here, so it's okay.


Just about any flavor of Christianity supports "white power" to the certain extent that they would oppose miscegenation. If they didn't pick and choose which parts of the bible to obey, that is.  You could say they hold the bible in contempt.
 
2014-06-26 05:58:00 PM  
Intolerance isn't a religion.
 
2014-06-26 05:58:08 PM  

Corvus: Lionel Mandrake: Right, the ACLU is well-known for not protecting the free speech of racists.  Sure.

They protected this one:
[aclu.global.ssl.fastly.net image 200x250]

https://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/aclu-asks-court-protect- co nfidentiality-rush-limbaughs-medical-records

However Rush never seems to mention it. I wonder why.


Perhaps excessive Oxycontin use impairs memory.
 
2014-06-26 05:58:46 PM  
This poor thread never stood a chance.
 
2014-06-26 05:59:11 PM  

Corvus: Intolerance isn't a religion.


Intolerance based upon religious beliefs are nonetheless Constitutionally protected, to an extent.

/I suspect that it would not override the protections of the Civil Rights Act.
//I suspect also that many Tea Partiers would disagree with me, because they are stupid.
 
2014-06-26 06:00:58 PM  

fusillade762: Uchiha_Cycliste: AWww, I was hoping for a discussion on which religion supports white power. I had my money on Mormons and Baptists. But we have to talk about guns.

Oh well, I guess we don't have many gun threads here, so it's okay.

Just about any flavor of Christianity supports "white power" to the certain extent that they would oppose miscegenation. If they didn't pick and choose which parts of the bible to obey, that is.  You could say they hold the bible in contempt.


I'm confused.  The Bible was written by Semites for Semites.  Where exactly are the white people at?  Well, except for the ones who tortured and killed God?
 
2014-06-26 06:01:37 PM  
I am in contempt of the constitution because I don't agree with federal drug regulations.


See, look at me, I'm in contempt!


/at least according to some people in the thread.
//Also in contempt of the constitution because I don't think money=speech
///Also in contempt of the constitution because I don't think executive appointees should require 60 senate votes.
////etc.
 
2014-06-26 06:03:01 PM  
Gecko Gingrich:The only arbiter of what's is or isn't Constitutional is the court. The supreme arbiter is the SCOTUS. The ACLU can disagree with the SCOTUS's opinion all they want. What they cannot do is state the something that the Court has held to be Constitutional isn't.

So it is your belief that the court is infallible, and that on occasions where they reverse themselves, they are actually changing the Constitution rather than correcting an error? And every dissenting justice has contempt for the Constitution?
 
2014-06-26 06:05:29 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Just because one disagrees with a currently legal statute or legal holding and expresses disgust over it, that is not "contempt" in either the legal or the semantic sense.


Actually, that is exactly contempt in a semantic sense.

con·tempt
noun \kən-ˈtem(p)t\

: a feeling that someone or something is not worthy of any respect or approval
 
2014-06-26 06:06:56 PM  

qorkfiend: So you believe that Heller and the NRA were showing contempt for the Constitution by challenging the existing precedent in the first place?


In the hypothetical way that you've framed that, yes. O the other hand, in reality, no.
 
2014-06-26 06:09:06 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Lionel Mandrake: So by "contempt" I guess you mean "a different view than my own"

They can use their fancy lawyer-talk however they'd like, but the bottom line is that they don't think people should own guns. Their position that it's a "collective" right and one reserved only for "state militias" flies in the face of over two centuries of legal private gun ownership.


I'm no expert on the modern supreme court. However, as a professional historian, I can tell you that the whole point of that amendment was to protect the state militias from federal interference. The fear was that an overly powerful federal government would try to take complete power by creating a standing army and abolishing the state militias. To put it in perspective, another popular proposed amendment suggested that a standing army be banned.

Now did the people of the 1780s believe that owning a gun was a "right"? Well, probably, if you limit it to people deemed to be citizens by the states and subject to state and local level regulation and restrictions. Gun regulations have existed in the U.S. since the beginning.

If you claim that the second amendment clearly was always intended to protect an "individual" right to a gun, then one of three things are possible:

1) You are ignorant and have no understanding of the history of the Bill of Rights.

2) You believe in an evolving Constitution.

3) You are a disengenous asshole who is willing to make any argument, no matter how dishonest, to protect your "right" to own a gun.
 
2014-06-26 06:09:32 PM  

BMFPitt: Gecko Gingrich:The only arbiter of what's is or isn't Constitutional is the court. The supreme arbiter is the SCOTUS. The ACLU can disagree with the SCOTUS's opinion all they want. What they cannot do is state the something that the Court has held to be Constitutional isn't.

So it is your belief that the court is infallible, and that on occasions where they reverse themselves, they are actually changing the Constitution rather than correcting an error? And every dissenting justice has contempt for the Constitution?


The Court is not infallible. Their rulings, however, are law. To assert a legal position that is demonstrably contrary to a legal precedent established by the court is to deny established law and thus is to deny reality.

Many Tea Party activists and politicians have denied that the Affordable Care Act is constitutionally legal legislation. The Supreme Court of the United States of America has ruled otherwise. Those Tea Party activists and politicians are, therefore, denying reality.
 
2014-06-26 06:10:25 PM  

phalamir: I'm confused.  The Bible was written by Semites for Semites.  Where exactly are the white people at?  Well, except for the ones who tortured and killed God?


Weren't there some Persians in there somewhere?
 
2014-06-26 06:12:03 PM  

Dimensio: Corvus: Intolerance isn't a religion.

Intolerance based upon religious beliefs are nonetheless Constitutionally protected, to an extent.

/I suspect that it would not override the protections of the Civil Rights Act.
//I suspect also that many Tea Partiers would disagree with me, because they are stupid.


Not the act of itself. Sure your beliefs are protected but not intolerant acts to other people. Which is my point.
 
2014-06-26 06:12:21 PM  

BMFPitt: phalamir: I'm confused.  The Bible was written by Semites for Semites.  Where exactly are the white people at?  Well, except for the ones who tortured and killed God?

Weren't there some Persians in there somewhere?


The cats or the rugs?
 
Displayed 50 of 171 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
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