Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Anti-Troll Law! : )

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

Mike Miller wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jan 2006, Christian M. Cepel wrote:
>
> > Mike Miller wrote:
> >
> > > Here's an opportunity for some of you to appreciate the work of the 
> > > ACLU. I know it is difficult for some of you, for some reason, but 
> > > here is a nice example.  They defend freedom of speech.
> >
> >
> > Or gee Mike, any other group out there protecting civil liberties.  
> > I'm sure the Jay of the ACLJ will have something to say about it and 
> > will be at the very least being filing amicus curiae if not bringing 
> > suit themselves.
>
>
> Is this why you guys hate the ACLU?  Because there is a competing 
> Christian ACLJ?

Not at all.  What a funny thing to ask.  No, I, and those like me 
dislike the ACLU because they take on cases like the NAMBLA case, and 
Michael Newdow type stuff.

Yes, I will agree that they've done some very good things, but if you 
read my post below, you'll see that it's not worth it to someone of my 
viewpoint to get on that wagon for one positive destination when it will 
mean being forced to stop at very contrary and negative (to me) 
destinations.

I'd like an organization like the ACLU that had a better track record 
(in my book).


There's nothing of 'competition' in it at all.  Its simply a matter of 
conscious.

Not to invoke Godwin's law (because, really, this isn't meeting the 
requirements... I'm using an analogy, I'm not actually comparing the 
ACLU to Hitler), but Hitler did a lot of good things, but nobody should 
support him because he'd done horrific things that far outweigh any good 
he's done.  I'm sure the same could be said of Hussein, or Castro. 
That's how I feel about the ACLU.  I think it's really cool that they've 
defended the civil rights of some Christian's (or other religious 
folksies) out there, but they still leave a bad taste in my mouth.

Not only do I not like the lion share of their causes, but I despise a 
lot of their tactics.  There are always different ways of approaching a 
certain problem, and more often than not, the ACLU's approach will be 
the opposite of the one I would have chosen, or very likely someone like 
the ACLJ would have chosen.  A lot of times I think the ACLU quashes 
civil rights when defending civil rights.

> > > We should consider the possibility that Bush doesn't care about the 
> > > Constitution and he would in fact like to undo it and place more 
> > > power in his own hands.
> >
> >
> > Do you and others like you really believe these things when you say 
> > them?  Do you have real proof, or are these just drive by ad hominem 
> > attacks on a man you don't really know.
>
>
> I "don't really know" him?  What does that mean?  Do you "really know" 
> Bill Clinton or the ACLU?
>
> It's about his conduct.  Consider the Patriot Act, his defiance if 
> wiretapping laws, his disrespect for the Geneva Convention, etc.  All 
> this conduct is an attempt to increase Presidential power at the expense 
> of the rights of others.  This is what Bush is about.

I approve the Patriot Act.  What's your point?  I have considered it.  I 
say, "Good Job Mr. President".  For the most point I don't agree with 
any of the objections your side has lodged.  I'd like to see it extended 
with a bit of revision to increase oversight while not making it's 
powers less broad.  I.e., I fully support any efforts that prevent abuse 
while still allowing the goals to be achieved.

Mike.  Where has he been defiant of wiretapping laws?  Right now, this 
one is still up in the air and waiting to be decided.  The White House 
right now claims that it was all perfectly legal.  A lot of pundits 
respond to this by saying, "well duh, of course it was legal, it's the 
law in black and white and those who say otherwise are just slinging 
hogwash."  A lot of pundits are saying the opposite.  It still remains 
for the issue to be decided in the future.  There's no point in you 
convicting him in your own court of public opinion.  Who cares what the 
blazes you think or feel.  The law is the law, and his actions will be 
judged in light of that.

Same goes for the Geneva Convention.  I've never seen any viable 
evidence that Bush has done anything that in any way violates the GE.

There are two issues here.
1. Abuses that were not sanctioned, that, when discovered have been 
stopped and punished.
2. The nonsense claim that those held in various holding facilities 
qualify under the GE.

Again.  Who cares what your opinion is.  Read the Law (or in this case 
the signed document) that clearly states that they do not meet the 
qualifications of an enemy combatant and therefore do not fall under the 
GE protections and guidelines.)

These are things you disapprove of, but there's no evidence that your 
opinion is that of the majority, so I fail to see why you feel it would 
be a good argument on your part to list these things as though I'd be 
ashamed of them.  Quite the opposite.  What I'm ashamed of him for is 
for his namby pamby treatment of the border problems until recently. 
For granting immunity to those who have broken the law unequivocally 
across the board.  For cutting Immigration off at the knees.  I'm 
ashamed of him for pulling his head under a rock for the past year and 
not challenging the nonsense that has been allowed to run rampant 
regarding his conduct with regards to the war and to domestic disasters. 
  I'm glad he found his backbone recently.  The troops both home and 
abroad deserve a CIC who does no less.

You treat these things like they are done deals... convictions of the 
President of wrongdoing in the court of public opinion.

The problem is, is that you don't allow anyone into the courtroom who 
would vote for acquittal (and even commendation).

Your court has no teeth outside of your circles.

History may show that he's the bad guy in some of these topics, but it 
has not done so yet.



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


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