Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] [POLITICS] what next?

["Christian M. Cepel" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

Rick Buford wrote:
> By your own arguments, the ACLU is simply another group of people trying 
> to "persuade" everyone else to their point of view. This illustrates the 
> point I was trying to make. You argue that government shouldn't be 
> biased against religious influence, but that they should be biased 
> against an organization like the ACLU.


I completely disagree with this and the earlier post where it was 
implied that the ACLU uses democratic methods.

The ACLU bypasses all democratic/republic methods and hijacks the courts 
_only_ through litigation.  They find a few activist judges who agree 
with them and keep forcing things down the American people's throat that 
would be Slammed into the dirt if taken to the American people.

An example might be made (with some tweaking) of Missouri's ban on same 
sex marriages.  Same sex marriage is a hot topic for the ACLU, and 
they've gone to different courts around the land to try to push their 
agenda.  When, because of their pushing the agenda, it finally had 
strength to be a concern to our state, it was put to the people.  The 
people destroyed it 70% to 30%.

The ACLU has NOTHING to do with democracy.  Nothing whatsoever, and I 
believe you are pushing a falsehood in the hopes that nobody will pick 
up on it and object, to suggest such a thing.

I object :)

I remember in the Ultra-Lib movie, An American President (that I rather 
enjoyed despite the fact, enough to buy it.) that the president there 
challenges his opponent who has been nay saying him for being a card 
carrying member by saying, "why aren't you." In as much as, why 
shouldn't everyone be for an organization that fights for civil 
liberties and seeks to uphold the constitution.  This is a lie I've seen 
in this long thread as well.  They do not fight for civil liberties, nor 
do they even remotely seek to uphold the constitution.  They fight to 
curtail the civil liberties of others to meet the civil liberties of the 
very very few, and they do their best to twist the constitution into 
saying things it doesn't remotely say.

I can think of plenty of stepped on civil liberties and constitution 
violations that they wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole.

There's an example on The Eagle 93.9 news briefs that I really am having 
a problem with.  They are saying that 3-4 more women in prisons have 
requested abortions, and the recent ruling that a woman who was being 
prevented from having one by state law was having her rights violated, 
thus allowing her to have an abortion and be transported at taxpayer 
expense, has now been declared by a Kansas City judge to be a class 
action, thus allowing these women the same privileges.  I have no 
problem with this (well, I do, but not with the wording they use).  What 
I have a problem with is their saying in the bit that it's the woman's 
constitutional right to have an abortion.

This is pure rubbish.  There is no right in the constitution to have an 
abortion.  There is, via the RvW ruling a constitution right to privacy, 
which encompasses her getting an abortion.

Further, I have no interest in violating her privacy.  I have every 
interest in my tax dollars not going to pay her way for transportation, 
and of course the time of the guard(s) which must accompany her, or to 
pay for the abortion itself (not that I have much choice in this anyway 
thanks to federal support of PP).

Her right to those accommodations when she's lost her freedom for 
violating the laws of the land is nonexistent, both in the constitution, 
and period.


--
  //Christian

Christian Marcus Cepel            | And the wrens have returned &
EMAIL:PROTECTED icq:12384980  | are nesting; In the hollow of
371 Crown Point, Columbia, MO     | that oak where his heart once
65203-2202 573.999.2370           | had been; And he lifts up his
Computer Support Specialist, Sr.  | arms in a blessing; For being
University of Missouri - Columbia | born again.    --Rich Mullins

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion