[WideMiddle03]

athiests
communists
liberals
united

[Quickkickonthird]

athiests
communists
liberals
united

I have been a conservative for 50 years now but still do not think being a member of an organization who's purpose is to protect our constitutional rights, such as the right to bear arms, is necessarily a bad thing. To call ACLU members athiests, communists, etc.,(which is their right by the way) is not a healthy thing in my opinion. Also, being an atheist, communist, or a liberal is an individual's choice in this country. I may not agree with them but many Americans have fought and died to protect their freedom of choice. I understand that your comment was made tongue in cheek but comments like this just allows liberals to look at all conservatives, like myself, as ignorant rednecks.

[TheRealThing]

I have been a conservative for 50 years now but still do not think being a member of an organization who's purpose is to protect our constitutional rights, such as the right to bear arms, is necessarily a bad thing. To call ACLU members athiests, communists, etc.,(which is their right by the way) is not a healthy thing in my opinion. Also, being an atheist, communist, or a liberal is an individual's choice in this country. I may not agree with them but many Americans have fought and died to protect their freedom of choice. I understand that your comment was made tongue in cheek but comments like this just allows liberals to look at all conservatives, like myself, as ignorant rednecks.

I'd say there might be a tad more to it than you indicate. After all, before the emergence of the ACLU, we had the founding documents to guide and direct us, and sworn public officials whose duty it was to protect our constitutional rights. Starting along about the mid 20th century, the ACLU has managed to sue those officials senseless who did not agree with their leftist views. We the people keep electing and sending them because we, like you, want to protect our conservative values. And still, the ACLU keeps undermining our system with an endless succession of law suits. From what I can determine, the bottom line for the ACLU is to propagate liberal idealism.

Rather than protecting our rights, I believe their purpose is to redefine our constitutional rights by running them through the liberal strainer. They failed to make the desired headway until they smartened up and started getting activist judges to rule in their favor. Now it is more a matter of mastering docket slots in court systems where the loons have seeded the bench.

Americans died to protect the right of choice, I agree. But, not necessarily their choice to play dirty by seeding the courts with activist judges who are apt to rule against the will of 80% of the people and contrary to precedent. We're supposed to be fair people, not stupid people. Legislating social change from the bench should be something the ACLU is standing watch against, not pushing for.

[Quickkickonthird]

I'd say there might be a tad more to it than you indicate. After all, before the emergence of the ACLU, we had the founding documents to guide and direct us, and sworn public officials whose duty it was to protect our constitutional rights. Starting along about the mid 20th century, the ACLU has managed to sue those officials senseless who did not agree with their leftist views. We the people keep electing and sending them because we, like you, want to protect our conservative values. And still, the ACLU keeps undermining our system with an endless succession of law suits. From what I can determine, the bottom line for the ACLU is to propagate liberal idealism.

Rather than protecting our rights, I believe their purpose is to redefine our constitutional rights by running them through the liberal strainer. They failed to make the desired headway until they smartened up and started getting activist judges to rule in their favor. Now it is more a matter of mastering docket slots in court systems where the loons have seeded the bench.

Americans died to protect the right of choice, I agree. But, not necessarily their choice to play dirty by seeding the courts with activist judges who are apt to rule against the will of 80% of the people and contrary to precedent. We're supposed to be fair people, not stupid people. Legislating social change from the bench should be something the ACLU is standing watch against, not pushing for.

You make a very good arguement. I liked your quote about running our constitutional rights through a liberal strainer. Ive never heard it put that way before, LOL!

[TheRealThing]

You make a very good arguement. I liked your quote about running our constitutional rights through a liberal strainer. Ive never heard it put that way before, LOL!

LOL, thank you. These guys (liberals) are masters of guile. Take the catch phrase Obama has been using lately to describe the liberal grand scheme for implementing socialized medicine in the US. "Quality affordable health care". Affordable for whom?

If they came out and said they were going to foist the cost of the poor's health care on the people who make more than 50,000 a year, I'd have said they wouldn't have gotten it through the House or the Senate. That's why the SCOTUS ultimately declared ObamaCare to be a tax. People who have decent jobs are going to be forced to pay for all this, therefore it is a tax, pure and simple. The House of Representatives has the power to tax, just ask the mega-gavel wielding Nancy Pelosi, who helped to get it rammed through the House when she was speaker. :biggrin:

A lot of things that sound fair and right on the surface run completely contradictory to the intent of the founding fathers. Like doing your "fair share" where it comes to paying taxes that are used to give stuff to the no-works among us. Not working is not moral behavior.