RationalWiki's 2019 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2019.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $6000Goal: $6000
Information icon.svg The 2018 moderator election has started! We are electing 6 moderators and 2 alternatives to serve in 2019. Nominate users here and read their campaign slogans here!

Talk:American Civil Liberties Union

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon law.svg

This Law related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Copperbrain.png

A section on prominent cases the ACLU has worked on would be cool... humanUser talk:Human 14:33, 2 November 2007 (EDT)

Somehow, when I saw "racists", I knew it was going to link to Metapedia. 4.152.33.12 21:43, 2 November 2007 (EDT)

Seems logical to me. They are. PFoster 22:19, 2 November 2007 (EDT)

Politics[edit]

They ARE liberal, but the reason Conservapedia hates them more than any other leftist organization is because Conservapedia hates freedom (although the ACLU does not necessarily belive in true freedom in itself). Prussian1488 16:41, 28 November 2007 (EST)

They are "liberal" in the classic sense of freedom-loving. They are not leftist. humanUser talk:Human 16:43, 28 November 2007 (EST)
They are pro-homosexual and pro-choice for the most part. Prussian1488 16:44, 28 November 2007 (EST)
Do you have a reference for that "statistic"? Last beef I heard about, they were defending some nazis right to have a little parade. humanUser talk:Human 19:14, 28 November 2007 (EST)
I have no references, but I must say that I think that the ACLU is more libertarian than liberal, but they do not support the 2nd amendment compared to other rights, which would make me say they are liberal leaning, at least.dream
'Civil libertarian' is probably more appropriate to describe their stance. Also, as far as I know, they don't advocate completely banning guns. -Sρΐяαl.Дгсђıτέςτstand up and shout 07:02, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
Civil libertarian is pretty good. They aren't particularly anti-gun, but I they do endorse the "state militia" interpretation of the second amendment. If I remember correctly, they may even have submitted a brief for DC. dreaming 13:02, 16 September 2008 (EDT)
It's been a while, but do you have links? I think people are confusing the ACRU with the ACLU, judging from my minimal googling. LiberalOfAnUnknownVariant (talk) 03:01, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

ACLU will fund Whistleblower Web site defence[edit]

BBC Report. SusanThe Earth Moved 13:15, 29 February 2008 (EST)

Child Porn[edit]

The ACLU is in favor of legalizing possession and distribution of child porn, when separate from payment. They are only against production of child porn that uses real children, and the funding of child pornography producers.

http://www.acluohio.org/about/faq

"The ACLU does not support pornography or child pornography. However, we do oppose virtually all forms of censorship. Possessing certain books or films, even pornographic ones, should not make one a criminal. Once society starts censoring “bad or offensive” ideas, it becomes very difficult to draw the line. As for child pornography, the ACLU supports the government’s efforts to prosecute the makers of child pornography for exploiting minors."

It is understandable why the previous editor thought the ACLU is against child pornography legalization and regulation. They rarely come directly out and say it, for the obvious reason that insane people will potentially decide to kill them. However, you cannot twist their quotations against production into all around condemnation of the ability to view child pornography. The ACLU regularly condemns the producers of child pornography (well, at least the ones who are not 15 year old girls taking pictures of their naked breasts with their cell phone cameras, which is characteristic of over 25% of underage teenagers in the USA), but they never take an opportunity to condemn the viewing or distribution of child pornography. Additionally, they have quotes attributable to them where they explicitly explain that they are in favor of legalization of viewing and possession and distribution of child pornography, and only against production and the funding of child pornography production. — Unsigned, by: 96.44.189.101 / talk / contribs 17:37, 17 May 2014‎ (UTC)