ACLU: Marriage checklist unfairly targets illegal immigrants

[Just Info]

Here's the ACLU for ya,"It appears that after years of incessantly accusing the U.S. military of abusing the captured terrorists and enemy combatants imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay, the ACLU’s public-relations battering ram has finally pounded a weary, much-maligned Pentagon into submission. Thus the ACLU has succeeded once again in helping terrorists keep hidden the details of whatever plots they and their cohorts may be hatching to murder more Americans in the future – and compounding the sin by sticking none other than American taxpayers with the bill for this abomination"

Taken from:http://www.discoverthenet works.org/Articles/ACLU%20Defe nds%20Guantanamo%20Terrorists. htm

Check it out. We are paying for it so we might as well know what the ACLU is doing to us.

[Jedi Squirrel]

Fabioso wrote:

It wasn't a question of money. The ACLU felt that it could not sit on the sidelines when it looked like a dangerous precedent for free speech was about to be set.
Whether NAMBLA got some indirect benefit from the ACLU's intervention isn't important. That's going to happen anytime they successfully intervene and no matter who the defendant is. Again, this is not about the identity of the defendant but the nature of the legal issue. You want very much for this to be about pedophilia for the shock and repulsion value and obviously want to ignore the real legal issue at hand.
The ACLU didn't get into this case because they think pedophiles deserve representation. I have explained why, so have they.
If people choose to remain ignorant about the case or want to misrepresent the nature of the ACLU's involvement, there isn't a whole lot I can do about that.
Ask yourself - or ask some of the other anti-ACLU "activists" around here about this case. You will find that VERY few of them actually know the real facts.

Well sir, we will have to agree to disagree on this subject.

And on that note, I’m not beating this dead horse anymore.

Have a nice day.

(ps this isn't a resignation of defeat, I just have more important things to do today)

[Disgusted]

Maybe they should require a a Photo ID like a USA Driver’s License, Passport, etc and Social Security Numbers for USA Citizens and Green Card Holders,

Require INFORMATION off a VALID VISA or other official documentation proving the individuals are in the USA LEGALLY.

In case people want to be married do not provide the Necessary Documentation to prove they are US CITIZENS or in the USA LEGALLY-----then have them signed a SWORN STATEMENT reflecting the DATE THEY ENTERED THE USA ILLEGALLY and the name of the USA PRESIDENT IN OFFICE on that Date.

IE-- I _______ am an ILLEGAL ALIEN in the USA. I entered the USA on - Month__ Day__ Year___ while President Reagan or Clinton or Bush 1 or Bush 2 or Obama was in Office. I wish to extend my deepest thanks to President______for making it possible for me to Illegal Enter the USA by NOT INSURING the USA Borders/Coast Lines were SECURE and making it possible many MOORE millions like myself could also enter the USA.

I have selected to use my own name,
or
I have selected to use a different name from my own.

[Chrgrfan]

Fabioso wrote:

<quoted text>
They do it all the time. So they should be villified based on your ignorance?

Well maybe they should try to represent the CITIZENS who pay taxes that support their POS organization. That's my opinion. That also happens to be the opinion of the majority of citizens. So don't get all hurt Fabioso.

[Fabioso]

Chrgrfan wrote:

<quoted text>
Well maybe they should try to represent the CITIZENS who pay taxes that support their POS organization. That's my opinion. That also happens to be the opinion of the majority of citizens. So don't get all hurt Fabioso.

They do.

They do it all the time.

You are seriously misinformed.

[Chrgrfan]

Fabioso wrote:

<quoted text>
They do.
They do it all the time.
You are seriously misinformed.

Well, lets do a poll on Topix and ask people mif they feel as though the ACLU protects the civil rights of citizens. Or if they spend the majority of their time and taxpayer money to protect the civil rights of illegals.

[ACLU]

Fabioso wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually I never brought that one up.
I do like to bring these cases up, however, since none of you anti-ACLU blowhards seem to be able to explain why they exist:
http://www.aclufightsforchristians.com

Actually you did when your handle was "Bud." I rember vividly Bud changed to Fabioso
in another ACLU Nebraska thread.

[Chrgrfan]

Fabioso wrote:

<quoted text>
They do.
They do it all the time.
You are seriously misinformed.

I created the poll. Hopefully I am wrong and people feel differently about the ACLU than I do. But, my opinion is due to a personal experience with the ACLU. So we'll see. Go vote!

[Fabioso]

Chrgrfan wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, lets do a poll on Topix and ask people mif they feel as though the ACLU protects the civil rights of citizens. Or if they spend the majority of their time and taxpayer money to protect the civil rights of illegals.

No, a poll would only demonstrate just how many people are seriously misinformed about this.

The anti-ACLU smearmasters have done their job well: sowing fear and ignorance.

Do you have any data whatsoever to support the notion that the ACLU spends "the majority of their time and money" fighting for the rights of illegals?

No, you don't. So this is just a pile of crap. Just looking at the ACLU website and the links to the issues and cases they handle proves you wrong.

[Fabioso]

Chrgrfan wrote:

<quoted text>
I created the poll. Hopefully I am wrong and people feel differently about the ACLU than I do. But, my opinion is due to a personal experience with the ACLU. So we'll see. Go vote!

You have personal experience that all the various ACLU chapters in the country spend more of their time and money on illegals than citizens?

You sure do travel a lot.

[Fabioso]

ACLU wrote:

<quoted text> Actually you did when your handle was "Bud." I rember vividly Bud changed to Fabioso
in another ACLU Nebraska thread.

Perhaps I mentioned him in passing, but he's not one of my favorite arguments. By the time I get into a thread about this topic, someone has usually talked about Rush already. Frankly I think there are more and better examples than that fat piece of human excrement.

[Just Info]

Fabioso wrote:

<quoted text>
No, a poll would only demonstrate just how many people are seriously misinformed about this.
The anti-ACLU smearmasters have done their job well: sowing fear and ignorance.
Do you have any data whatsoever to support the notion that the ACLU spends "the majority of their time and money" fighting for the rights of illegals?
No, you don't. So this is just a pile of crap. Just looking at the ACLU website and the links to the issues and cases they handle proves you wrong.

This response brings to mind the little kid when someone is trying to tell him something he doesn't want to hear.
Fingers in his ears shouting LALALALALALALA so he doesn't hear anything that he doesn't want to.

Of course all the people that say the ACLU is a POS that needs to be done away with are wrong and how can we prove this? Why of course by going to the ACLU Web site they are objective on this subject.

The ACLU is outdated and needs to be abloished. They do nothing to help this country they only hurt the country. They are a dividing force not a uniting one.

Not to mention that they are a tax exempt org so we are stuck paying for the crap they do.

[Fabioso]

Just Info wrote:

<quoted text>
This response brings to mind the little kid when someone is trying to tell him something he doesn't want to hear.
Fingers in his ears shouting LALALALALALALA so he doesn't hear anything that he doesn't want to.
Of course all the people that say the ACLU is a POS that needs to be done away with are wrong and how can we prove this? Why of course by going to the ACLU Web site they are objective on this subject.
The ACLU is outdated and needs to be abloished. They do nothing to help this country they only hurt the country. They are a dividing force not a uniting one.
Not to mention that they are a tax exempt org so we are stuck paying for the crap they do.

Actually the ACLU would be very keen on protecting the free speech rights even of its harshest critics. Don't you know that?

Churches are tax exempt too. Should I be offended that I have to "pay" for Baptists to preach sexism and bigotry? Are you sure you want to make that argument?

Also, I would LOVE for you to explain what legal mechanism could be used to "abolish" the ACLU. Good luck with that one, LOL.

I expect you know very little at all about what the ACLU actually does and why. Your kind never does. Fear and ignorance...

[Just Info]

Fabioso wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually the ACLU would be very keen on protecting the free speech rights even of its harshest critics. Don't you know that?
Churches are tax exempt too. Should I be offended that I have to "pay" for Baptists to preach sexism and bigotry? Are you sure you want to make that argument?
Also, I would LOVE for you to explain what legal mechanism could be used to "abolish" the ACLU. Good luck with that one, LOL.
I expect you know very little at all about what the ACLU actually does and why. Your kind never does. Fear and ignorance...

The ACLU is also very keen to,"Protect" the rights of enemies of the US also. Should I be happy about that?
Churchs are tax exempt. The difference is that do not get Federal Monies to support them. They survive off the contributions of their members.
The ACLU, through its state offices, get Attorney Fees paid by the Government in many cases. This a way to get around the Federal Funding that is not allowed under the law or the law that says monetary awards against a Governemnt entity are not allowed. So the ACLU gets the money in a diferent way by using the loophole called, "Equitable Relief".
So the difference is that I am not paying for Baptists but I am paying for the ACLU Lawyers to fight cases that I don't even want fought.
I am saying that for the good of all concerned the ACLU should be abolished. I know that is will not be done so there is no legal way to do it. It would be a good thing but I know it won't happen.
So,"My KInd" doesn't know about the ACLU? What exactly is my kind? What are you inferring? Are you trying to incite me to get into a personal battle with you? So please explain exactly what you mean by, "My KInd".

[Fabioso]

Just Info wrote:

<quoted text>
The ACLU is also very keen to,"Protect" the rights of enemies of the US also. Should I be happy about that?
Churchs are tax exempt. The difference is that do not get Federal Monies to support them. They survive off the contributions of their members.
The ACLU, through its state offices, get Attorney Fees paid by the Government in many cases. This a way to get around the Federal Funding that is not allowed under the law or the law that says monetary awards against a Governemnt entity are not allowed. So the ACLU gets the money in a diferent way by using the loophole called, "Equitable Relief".
So the difference is that I am not paying for Baptists but I am paying for the ACLU Lawyers to fight cases that I don't even want fought.
I am saying that for the good of all concerned the ACLU should be abolished. I know that is will not be done so there is no legal way to do it. It would be a good thing but I know it won't happen.
So,"My KInd" doesn't know about the ACLU? What exactly is my kind? What are you inferring? Are you trying to incite me to get into a personal battle with you? So please explain exactly what you mean by, "My KInd".

No, the ACLU is keen on protecting rights. The identity of the defendant is immaterial. Rights are not eroded, generally, in cases involving non-minorities, people who can afford lawyers, or people who get sympathy from the jury. The "edge" of rights erosion is and has always been in those cases involving repulsive or unpopular defendants. And the people eroding our rights ALWAYS think they are doing the right thing. Just like you do, and you are just as wrong as they are.

The ACLU only gets money when it wins. It only wins when the government is wrong. They are also just like ANY other organization (and there are many, e.g., the ADF) that have the same access to attorney's fees that the ACLU does. This is a bullshit argument, and it has nothing to do with the ACLU. If you don't like the law, write your congressman.

Also, your argument was originally that they are tax-exempt, therefore you are paying. I guess you have abandoned that position? Good thing, because it didn't make any sense.

Your "kind" is typically some kind of frightened and angry bigot with a political axe to grind, and a grade-school understanding of constitutional law.

This board is rife with them.

[Just Info]

Fabioso wrote:

<quoted text>
No, the ACLU is keen on protecting rights. The identity of the defendant is immaterial. Rights are not eroded, generally, in cases involving non-minorities, people who can afford lawyers, or people who get sympathy from the jury. The "edge" of rights erosion is and has always been in those cases involving repulsive or unpopular defendants. And the people eroding our rights ALWAYS think they are doing the right thing. Just like you do, and you are just as wrong as they are.
The ACLU only gets money when it wins. It only wins when the government is wrong. They are also just like ANY other organization (and there are many, e.g., the ADF) that have the same access to attorney's fees that the ACLU does. This is a bullshit argument, and it has nothing to do with the ACLU. If you don't like the law, write your congressman.
Also, your argument was originally that they are tax-exempt, therefore you are paying. I guess you have abandoned that position? Good thing, because it didn't make any sense.
Your "kind" is typically some kind of frightened and angry bigot with a political axe to grind, and a grade-school understanding of constitutional law.
This board is rife with them.

Your first comment I won't even bother with because it is evident that you are one of the bleeding heart liberals that refuse to see what is right in front of your face.
They are tax exempt and I am paying for them. Why would I cahnge that? See there you go again inventing stuff to support your postion. The fact that they get attorney fees reimbursed is me paying for it.
By the way I have written my congreeman numerous times. The problem is that PC is killing this country and the politicos are afrid to say what they know is right for fear of loosing the libs like yourself in the voting booth.
So I am a"Frightened Angry Bigot with a political axe to grind that has a grade school understanding of Constitutional Law"? Would you care to compare CVs?
I could say that,"Your Kind" are the frightened angry jealous type that have an entittlement attitude. That believe they are owed everything for free. That take positions on things so they can feel like they are the protectors of the poor downtrodden masses when in fact they are only feeding their own egos, but I won't.

[Fabioso]

Just Info wrote:

<quoted text>
Your first comment I won't even bother with because it is evident that you are one of the bleeding heart liberals that refuse to see what is right in front of your face.
They are tax exempt and I am paying for them. Why would I cahnge that? See there you go again inventing stuff to support your postion. The fact that they get attorney fees reimbursed is me paying for it.
By the way I have written my congreeman numerous times. The problem is that PC is killing this country and the politicos are afrid to say what they know is right for fear of loosing the libs like yourself in the voting booth.
So I am a"Frightened Angry Bigot with a political axe to grind that has a grade school understanding of Constitutional Law"? Would you care to compare CVs?
I could say that,"Your Kind" are the frightened angry jealous type that have an entittlement attitude. That believe they are owed everything for free. That take positions on things so they can feel like they are the protectors of the poor downtrodden masses when in fact they are only feeding their own egos, but I won't.

Actually I am a gun-owning business owing capitalist. You presume too much. I think welfare queens should have their benefits cut off. I believe in a strong national defense. I believe serial pedophiles should be hung, in public.

Is that bleeding heart enough for you? You presume too much. You also presume I agree with everything the ACLU does. I don't. I just do not like people telling lies and spreading false information about the law.

Again, you only pay for it when the government broke the law. Again, write your Congressperson, and no doubt you will get some education on why such laws exist (hint: for good reason). But I'm not going off on that tangent.

PC is killing this country? No, it isn't killing anything except some bigotry, but I find it annoying and a bit un-American. Now hear this - I do agree with you (and disagree with *some* ACLU members) about PC and hate speech legislation.

I don't need to see your CV to make up my mind, your posts are quite sufficient.

[Just Info]

"PC is killing this country? No, it isn't killing anything except some bigotry, but I find it annoying and a bit un-American. Now hear this - I do agree with you (and disagree with *some* ACLU members) about PC and hate speech legislation"

How can you say in 1 paragraph that PC is only killing bigotry and then that you disagree with pc and hate speech legislation? Isn't that a bit contradictory?
As to your claims of gun owning, busines owning capitolist. Well gee whiz how bout that? With your support of the ACLU that you have shown here then you are an enigma.
Now what is this about people telling lies and spreading false information? Care to give examples with proof contradicting what was said? You might want to try and use sources other than the ACLU itself.
The ACLU has done some good things in the past but they have far outlived any benefit to this country that may have at one time had.
As to the CV thing I didn't think you would want to do it.

[Illegals are ILLEGAL]

The ACLU needs to be disbanded. Broken up, never to be heard from again. Too many bleeding hearts. The are a disgrace, dont donate or associate with these people, they are hardly looking out for the american people anymore.

[Fabioso]

Because PC'ness isn't necessarily legislation. If it is just people trying to be polite, that's fine with me. If it is a tool of peer pressure to get people to not act like bigots or racists, that's fine with me.

Where I get hives is when the state tries to legislate PC. THAT I have a big problem with.

So it is not contradictory at all when you understand the context. People are free to be PC or not be PC. But when the government has the power to impose "political correctness", well now that is a big problem.

I'm no enigma. I'm an every, ordinary American with a point of view. Where is it written that we all have to occupy little political pigeonholes that include only certain opinions?

All the atheist Lefties think all conservatives are fundamentalist wackos. All conservatives think all liberals are subversive socialists hell bent on public homo orgies. Both are usually wrong, and most of us don't fall into these categories.

As for the lies, they are Legion. My personal favorite, as a Methodist and ACLU member, is that the ACLU is anti-Christian. That one's is born out of people not understanding the Establishment clause, and believing crap that is spewed at them by people with a political agenda.

I'm not interested in your CV, considering that either of us can make up whatever qualifications we want. Suffice it to say I have two bachelors degrees, one master's degree and a doctorate. The doctorate is a JD.

This is a site run by an ACLU Board member, but it merely lists cases in which the ACLU defended Christians on free exercise grounds. The cases exist, they are real and can be verified any number of ways. I've posted this at least a dozen times today, and so far not one single anti_ACLU poster has a response for it.

http://www.aclufightsforchristians.com

Why is such a site necessary? Because some people are out there on the Internet saying that the ACLU is anti-Christian.

This is a lie.