calling_the_hogs
1st String
Posts: 2,096
Joined: May 2002
Reputation: 5
I Root For:
Location:
|
Why does your group (the ACLU) support NAMBLA in having men rape 8 yr old boys?
WPS
|
|
12-20-2003 11:51 PM |
|
joebordenrebel
1st String
Posts: 1,968
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
|
Technically, I think they were defending the first amendment rights of NAMBLA.
Believing in free speech means you believe in the very speech you find morally repugnant. Otherwise, you don't believe in free speech.
Hitler believed in free speech for everybody who thought the same way he did.
And I know this is kind of difficult for you pea-brains to wrap your gourd around so I'm going to type v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y. . .
Defending NAMBLA against a totalitarian abuse of power is justified. You ought to be writing the ACLU every day to thank them for protecting your freedoms (after you get through sending the troops in Iraq fruit cake, of course. Don't forget the flags, too).
Now, would you care to explain why Rush isn't turning himself over to the nearest prison in order to make himself an example of "the truth"?
[quote]Rush Limbaugh On Drugs
|
|
12-21-2003 12:43 AM |
|
Rebel
Unregistered
|
NAMBLA is an illegal organization by legal standards.....just not liberal standards.
|
|
12-21-2003 09:32 AM |
|
Guest
Unregistered
|
If NAMBLA, who I personally find beneath contemp, is engaging in illegal activities they need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Their constitutional rights need to be observed in the process. To argue otherwise is un-american.
|
|
12-21-2003 09:56 AM |
|
Rebel
Unregistered
|
Oddball Wrote:If NAMBLA, who I personally find beneath contemp, is engaging in illegal activities they need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Their constitutional rights need to be observed in the process. To argue otherwise is un-american.
So we should support their right to THINK about sex with young boys? Ok, then I guess kiddie porn is A-OK. If it is an organization based on Man-Boy love, it is illegal. If you don't think we can prosecute someone for thoughts, think again. We do it all the time with hate crime laws.
|
|
12-21-2003 09:58 AM |
|
Guest
Unregistered
|
Reading comprehension is key to understanding your opponent's point. Unless you understand it, you cannot argue against it. Better luck next time.
|
|
12-21-2003 10:00 AM |
|
Rebel
Unregistered
|
Oddball Wrote:Reading comprehension is key to understanding your opponent's point. Unless you understand it, you cannot argue against it. Better luck next time.
My reading comprehension is fine. It sounds as if you are defending NAMBLA's right to exist. "I" am arguing against it.
|
|
12-21-2003 10:08 AM |
|
Guest
Unregistered
|
RebelKev Wrote:My reading comprehension is fine.
Actually, it could be a lot better.
If they violate laws, they should be prosecuted. Period. If their Constitutional rights are being violated, they need protected. Period. However, I refuse to debate what you would like me to have said.
My statements that you are free to debate are:
1. Criminals should be prosecuted for their crimes.
2. Constitutional rights need to be defended.
I realize that the unsophisticated ideology of the neo-con believes that these type of things are situational, i.e. Clinton being a draft dodger for getting a college deferrment while Bush isn't a deserter for, well, being a deserter, however for our society to remain (return?) free, they need to be absolutes.
|
|
12-21-2003 10:23 AM |
|
nate jonesacc
Heisman
Posts: 5,215
Joined: Mar 2002
Reputation: 6
I Root For:
Location:
|
Of course people should have the right to think... about ANYTHING. What kind of Conservative Nazi would try to take that away from someone?
|
|
12-21-2003 11:39 AM |
|
KlutzDio I
1st String
Posts: 1,120
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation: 0
I Root For:
Location:
|
No, no, no, one cannot thing unless they are thinking like George W. and his people!
I hesitated responding on this thread because I don't know anything about NAMBLA. And I hate to disappoint, but I have nothing to do with the ACLU!
|
|
12-21-2003 11:51 AM |
|
Rebel
Unregistered
|
North
American
Man
Boy
Love
Association
Sure, they should have the right to think that they have the right to molest little boys. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
|
|
12-21-2003 12:14 PM |
|
Rebel
Unregistered
|
Besides Nate, aren't you a Christian? It clearly states that it is a sin to even think it. Dizam you're a hypocrite.
|
|
12-21-2003 12:16 PM |
|
GrandFunkRailroad
Water Engineer
Posts: 23
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 0
I Root For:
Location:
|
:chair: GWADDD how I love liberals. :snore:
|
|
12-21-2003 12:24 PM |
|
nate jonesacc
Heisman
Posts: 5,215
Joined: Mar 2002
Reputation: 6
I Root For:
Location:
|
RebelKev Wrote:Besides Nate, aren't you a Christian? It clearly states that it is a sin to even think it. Dizam you're a hypocrite.
Wow... are you this dumb?
We are clearly talking about two different levels of law. On a US law level, everyone has their own right to think whatever the hell they want. On a Christian, Godly level, any intent to sin is sin in itself.
|
|
12-21-2003 01:51 PM |
|
joebordenrebel
1st String
Posts: 1,968
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
|
nate jonesacc Wrote:RebelKev Wrote:Besides Nate, aren't you a Christian? It clearly states that it is a sin to even think it. Dizam you're a hypocrite.
Wow... are you this dumb?
:roflol:
You hit the nail on the ole head right there, Nate!
Hey, Kev. Have you ever read the Bill of Rights?
GFRailroad. . .
Is this what you call insulting? :stupid:
Do you and T-Monay know one another? :roflol:
|
|
12-21-2003 11:10 PM |
|
calling_the_hogs
1st String
Posts: 2,096
Joined: May 2002
Reputation: 5
I Root For:
Location:
|
Last time I checked, rape, child molestion, sexual harassment, etc. are against the law in all 50 states.
ACLU isn't defending NAMBLA's thoughts, they're defending their ACTIONS. In fact, they want these two guys, who KILLED a 10-yr old boy, to be set free. Why? Cause they're 'thoughts' are being put on trial, they say.
Last time I checked, 'character' and 'character witnesses' play a big role in judicial cases.
Sick, disgusting, wrong. Joe, still got your card and loving those child molesters?
WPS
|
|
12-22-2003 12:46 PM |
|
Guest
Unregistered
|
The ACLU is not representing the two men who killed the boy. They are representing the organization against a lawsuit brought against them claiming that their Web site incited the murders.
"For us, it is a fundamental First Amendment case," John Roberts, executive director of the Massachusetts branch of the ACLU, told Boston Globe Wednesday. "It has to do with communications on a web site, and material that does not promote any kind of criminal behavior whatsoever."
As is typical for "conservatives", you are grossly misrepresenting the facts.
|
|
12-22-2003 02:21 PM |
|
nate jonesacc
Heisman
Posts: 5,215
Joined: Mar 2002
Reputation: 6
I Root For:
Location:
|
Oddball has it.
No one is defending the murderers... Nice try though!
|
|
12-22-2003 04:49 PM |
|
calling_the_hogs
1st String
Posts: 2,096
Joined: May 2002
Reputation: 5
I Root For:
Location:
|
Harvey Silverglate, an ACLU board member, said Wednesday that the group's attorneys will try to block any attempt by the Curleys to get NAMBLA's membership lists, or other materials identifying members.
The ACLU also will act as a surrogate for NAMBLA, allowing its members to defend themselves in court while remaining anonymous.
And...
The American Civil Liberties Union has asked a judge to dismiss what it calls an "unconstitutional" lawsuit against a national pedophile organization being sued in a wrongful death case after two of the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10-year-old boy.
Hmmm...wrongful death case...ACLU helping NAMBLA members....as posted just above....
The ACLU also will act as a surrogate for NAMBLA, allowing its members to defend themselves in court while remaining anonymous.
Sorry....wrong again.
WPS
|
|
12-22-2003 05:58 PM |
|
Guest
Unregistered
|
That act was funnier when the Black Knight did it for Monty Python.
|
|
12-22-2003 08:47 PM |
|