Why does the ACLU. SUPPORT MBLA?
477155
The same reason why the ACLU supports disgusting terrorists who want to kill civilians.  The ACLU has a noble cause, but doesn't stop to look at the bigger picture.  Do people have a right to be gay?  Sure.  But they can not rape little children
998518
The ACLU has defended the constitutional rights of Christians and non-Christians alike. Check out the articles below about how the ACLU went to court to sue for the rights of Christian street preachers.\n\nThe ACLU exists to defend our rights as guaranteed by the Constitution. The reason why there are more non-Christian cases brought to trial than Christian ones is simply because Christians are more frequently guilty of limiting other people's constitutional rights than of having their own limited.\n\nIncidentally, did you get in trouble for wearing a Christian t-shirt, or is this a purely hypothetical question? I'd be very surprised to find a school district where students were not allowed to wear crosses or t-shirts with Christian messages on them. In fact, at my son's high school, they allow freshmen and sophomore students who are not normally allowed to leave campus to have lunch off campus whenever the church across the street sponsors a free lunch in an attempt to convert heathens to their faith. I don't think you'd EVER see the same thing if it were a mosque or temple.
917570
Hey, they helped defend Rush Limbaugh and several religious conservatives including that scumbag, the "reverend" Fred Phelps.\nThat proves there impartiality.\n\nHERE ARE SOME EXAMPLE OF THE ACLU DEFENDING RELIGOUS FREEDOM INCLUDING 2ND ADMENDMENT RIGHTS,TAKEN FROM THEIR SITE:\n\n    September 20, 2005: ACLU of New Jersey joins lawsuit supporting second-grader's right to sing "Awesome God" at a talent show.\n\n    August 4, 2005: ACLU helps free a New Mexico street preacher from prison.\n\n    May 25, 2005: ACLU sues Wisconsin prison on behalf of a Muslim woman who was forced to remove her headscarf in front of male guards and prisoners.\n\n    February 2005: ACLU of Pennsylvania successfully defends the right of an African American Evangelical church to occupy a church building purchased in a predominantly white parish.\n\n    December 22, 2004: ACLU of New Jersey successfully defends right of religious expression by jurors.\n\n    November 20, 2004: ACLU of Nevada supports free speech rights of evangelists to preach on the sidewalks of the strip in Las Vegas.\n\n    November 9, 2004: ACLU of Nevada defends a Mormon student who was suspended after wearing a T-shirt with a religious message to school.\n\n    August 11, 2004: ACLU of Nebraska defends church facing eviction by the city of Lincoln.\n\n    July 10, 2004: Indiana Civil Liberties Union defends the rights of a Baptist minister to preach his message on public streets.\n\n    June 9, 2004: ACLU of Nebraska files a lawsuit on behalf of a Muslim woman barred from a public pool because she refused to wear a swimsuit.\n\n    June 3, 2004: Under pressure from the ACLU of Virginia, officials agree not to prohibit baptisms on public property in Falmouth Waterside Park in Stafford County.\n\n    May 11, 2004: After ACLU of Michigan intervened on behalf of a Christian Valedictorian, a public high school agrees to stop censoring religious yearbook entries.\n\n    March 25, 2004: ACLU of Washington defends an Evangelical minister's right to preach on sidewalks.\n\n    February 21, 2003: ACLU of Massachusetts defends students punished for distributing candy canes with religious messages.\n\n    October 28, 2002: ACLU of Pennsylvania files discrimination lawsuit over denial of zoning permit for African American Baptist church.\n\n    July 11, 2002: ACLU supports right of Iowa students to distribute Christian literature at school.\n\n    April 17, 2002: In a victory for the Rev. Jerry Falwell and the ACLU of Virginia, a federal judge strikes down a provision of the Virginia Constitution that bans religious organizations from incorporating.\n\n    January 18, 2002: ACLU defends Christian church's right to run "anti-Santa" ads in Boston subways.\n\nSO I GUESS THAT SHOW THAT CONSERVATIVES ARE WRONG  AND DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHATS REALLY GOING ON WITH THE ACLU OR REFUSES TO UNDERSTAND.
1015561
I find, as both a member of the ACLU and a Christian, that they are perfectly compatible.  Quite frankly, the only people it is not compatible with are the highly conservative "Christian" extremists, a la Falwell and Robertson.  Quite frankly, they merely use Christianity as an excuse for bigotry and hatred.  Ironically enough, historically, those people who you and I would really identify as acting in a Christian manner are those on the forefront of the progressive movement today.  For instance, the Christians who were anti-slavery in the 1850's, or those working for desegregation in the 1950's.  The fundamentalists were on the opposite sides back then.  If Robertson was alive in the 1850's I have no doubt whatsoever that he would be pro-slave. After all, there is much more biblical teaching that is pro-slavery than there is anti-gay.
578621
Yes, the ACLU did sue the board for court costs, because after the case was decided in 2002, the board refused to obey the order and the ACLU had to take them to court again, all the way to the Supreme Court to finally get them to remove the display.
450094
i'm being discriminated against by this question.i'm retired.it's a good thing i don't know who you are or i'd sic the ACLU on you.
815407
The ACLU is one of the most dangerous and destructive groups in the US today. They, along with their liberal friends, are working hard to take away much of our freedoms by trying to force everybody to believe as they do. They are as bad as the ultra religious in their self rightous claptrap.
425456
Ah, first of all, you should contact the ACLU. Collect all the information that you can! Turn it over to the ACLU. You should also contact your local government representatives about what is going on. The more people you get involved, the better your chances. If I knew more, I could tell you more.... However, if you have evidence of such discrimination, by all means use it.
882971
No they are not.\n\nThere is a slight connection, in that one of the people (Baldwin) who founded an predecessor to the ACLU also was a member of the Communist party, well before WW-2. However, if you check, Baldwin also left the communist party when it started advocating violence. More importantly, of the dozens of people who helped form the ACLU nearly a century ago, only one had even that tenuous a connection.\n\nMany people don't like the ACLU because the ACLU will defend anyone's rights, no matter how nasty the person is. But what those people don't understand is that rights only matter when they are needed. It's easy to say that you support civil rights if they are never being tested. It's when the test cases involve horrible people that convictions are really put to the test.\n\nBTW, remember that ACLU will defend anyone's rights, even people like Rush Limbaugh who hate them. Their sole goal is to defend the Bill of Rights, particularly the 1st, 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments. Other groups focus on the 2nd and 8th Amendments, so the ACLU concentrates on the remainder.\n\nAs far as the Escondido (California) suit, read the details (link below). The law would require all landlords to provide information about citizenship to anyone who racially could be an immigrant, whether they are legal or illegal. Not only is this racial profiling and racial discrimination, but it also violates federal housing laws. \n\nThe ACLU isn't fighting for the rights of illegal immigrants. They are fighting so that 42% of the town -- including tens of thousands of legal immigrants and naturalized citizens -- are not forced to turn over private data to the government, data that federal law prohibits the town from collecting. \n\nAnd they're not alone. It's not just the ACLU that's opposing this law. It's also Fair Housing Council of San Diego, and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. They are trying to stop racial discrimination and force the town to obey federal law. \n\nWhy do people seem to have a problem with that?
1181444
If you think you were one of the persons wrongfully arrested, contact the ACLU.  The ACLU is not the person suing.  The ACLU is simply representing the persons who are suing.  If you feel you have been personally wronged, you might be able to join in the suit.  If you have not been arrested but you want to join in the litigation, you have no basis.  If you just want to voice your support, then write a letter to the editor of your local paper.
926776
Do you have the money to pursue these things?  Maybe, maybe not.  The ACLU stands up and helps those who think they have been wronged who may not have the means nor smarts to do it on their own.\n\nThey look after civil rights in the constitution just as the NRA rights for 2nd amendment rights.   Both are necesary advocates for our constitutional rights..   You may not always like what either does but in general they're good org's to have in place.
773864
Yes, I am proud to say that I have donated to the ACLU.\n\nAnd no, I have not donated to NAMBLA, nor did the ACLU donate to NAMBLA. Read the actual case, not the canned headlines.\n\nThe law in question would have forced them to take down their website, which did not actually advocate any illegal activity. As sick as NAMBLA's goals might be, they -- like everyone else -- are entitled to the same legal protections for actions which are legal. Their website was not illegal, and did not actually advocate illegal activity (even if other parts of the group did). So the law in question was unconstitutional.\n\nIt's easy to claim that we have freedoms if nobody ever attempts to use them. It's when you see someone that you hate, saying something that makes you sick, that those freedoms are at risk. If the govt can silence someone, just because the majority doesn't like what they say, then we don't have freedom of speech.\n\nThe ACLU defends the rights of anyone to speak, no matter how unpleasant the message, as long as its legal. And while I may not like the message that's being protected, I cherish the rights of free speech that allow that message to be spoken.\n\nAnd I'm proud to support a group that fights for everyone's rights, even when some of the people exercising those rights are unpopular.
126970
The ACLU defends our constitution, which is more than you can say for our current president. The ACLU defended Rush Limbaugh when he was in trouble for all those pills he was popping. Don't criticize something you don't understand.
854056
You don't seem to understand the ACLU position. According to them, only Lib blacks have rights.
308919
Good question... call the ACLU.\n\nhttp://www.aclu.org/
831870
Check the ACLU's website.
880438
Nice Article...Interesting....Yea the ACLU is the bomb.....I Have actually filed 2 reports on behalf of clients with them within the last 2 weeks ... but.... what I find more interesting is the fact that RACISM leaves such a void where one's brain should be