Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the large number of authoritarians here. Everybody who has a different viewpoint than me is a !
I mean, if they are supporting Trump, they are literally authoritarians.
Do elaborate
Welcome, ACLU
751–760 of 1001 posts
Re: Welcome, ACLU
#752Earlier quoted context omitted.
HackerNews loves to pat itself on the back about what a great community it is, but when it comes to politics (and other specific topics) the bullying and one-sidedness is as bad as anywhere on the internet. But this is exactly why half of America is in utter shock about what's happening: their discussion circles involve one "side", and the other isn't acceptable.
When the other side is proposing to reduce the liberties of those it disagrees with, you're darn right it's not acceptable. It's not like conservatives are forced to get abortions, change gender, become homosexual, or have a different religion, but they complain mightily about other people who want to do such things for themselves, while conservatives present themselves as victims of...well, I'm not too clear on exac…
"not like conservatives are forced to get abortions"
What if the conservative hasn't been born yet? Maybe they wouldn't want to be aborted. Do they get a choice, or should we reduce their liberties and victimize them?
See, you're ignoring a person's rights. There is more than one person involved, but for only one person is the issue literally a matter of life and death.
The fact that such a person can't live alone is no different than the fact that some elderly and paralyzed people can't live alone. The unborn have brain waves; with that you normally are not allowed to euthanize a person.
To the conservative, you are asking them to stand aside while a murder happens, and then you essentially say "It's not like conservatives are forced to commit murder".
Re: Welcome, ACLU
#753Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the large number of authoritarians here. Everybody who has a different viewpoint than me is a !
How would you label people who are for reducing civil liberties then?
What civil liberties?
You think it is a civil liberty that foreign nationals may enter the United States?
Re: Welcome, ACLU
#754Earlier quoted context omitted.
You used the passive voice, “the ACLU are being politicized right now as being anti-Trump.” The ACLU, in their official communications and advertisements, have been actively and explicitly anti-Trump. Witness their current 'pinned tweet' for example: https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/825805289572151298 I don’t really mind that, but let’s not ignore that the ACLU intentionally earned their reputation as an opponent of t…
A long time ago, during the GWB administration, I donated to the ACLU and got placed on the postal mailing lists of innumerable unrelated Democratic-leaning activist organizations. I was disappointed by that, since the partisan association cheapens their work and opens them up to attack.
Are you sure you didn't tick the "Yes, send me information about related campaigns box"? Because this is what their privacy statement reads:
"When we give you an opportunity to voluntarily submit information about yourself, we may give you the option of indicating that you permit us to share that data with other parties such as coalition partners or specific legislators. We will not share your data with such parties unless you have indicated that you permit us to do so."
https://www.aclu.org/american-civil-liberties-union-privacy-...
Because you are making a strong accusation: "they shared my data without my consent"
Re: Welcome, ACLU
#755The ACLU sometimes supports a worthy cause, but it's basically just a left-leaning political organization. I understand that's particularly trendy right now, and anyone who supports Trump is a pariah in Silicon Valley... but come on. Would YC be donating directly to the Democratic party if that got the same favorable tax treatment?
How are your rights 'trendy'? I tend to stay out of politics, and don't really label people as such, but Trump is a bad guy. I'm happy to donate engineering time to the ACLU.
Who's rights?
You think it is a "right" for foreign nationals to enter the United States?
Re: Welcome, ACLU
#756Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would you label people who are for reducing civil liberties then?
What civil liberties? You think it is a civil liberty that foreign nationals may enter the United States?
It's a civil liberty that the privilege of entry is not granted in manner which amounts to state favor to, or disfavor to, a particular religion.
Entry of aliens itself is not a civil liberty.
Re: Welcome, ACLU
#757Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think refusal of service is itself protected speech either, but we're not talking about the government restricting protected speech. We're talking about the government compelling an individual to engage in protected speech, like taking a wedding photograph. > The U.S. Supreme Court has said repeatedly that the First Amendment protects an "individual freedom of mind"—e.g., (1943), which affirmed the right not…
What's the difference between the wedding photographer who won't take a picture of a gay couple, and a bar/shop owner with "no dogs, no blacks, no Irish" policy?
The wedding photographer believes, because of their religion, that it would be unethical to participate in the wedding.
Re: Welcome, ACLU
#758Earlier quoted context omitted.
Refusal of service based race, sex, marital status or sexual orientation is not protected speech. It's discrimination. They gave up rights when they went into business.
On the other hand, there's a significant number of religious people in the US that believe they can't ethically support an LGBT wedding by offering services as a photographer, baker, etc. There's a very real tension between the rights of LGBT people to not be discriminated against and the rights of religious business owners to act according to their conscience. It's a snaggly issue, but hearing this kind of rhetoric…
hearing this kind of rhetoric from Democrats and left-leaning media("they give up rights when the went into business") is exactly what caused the center of the country to swing further right in the last election.
Do you have any evidence for that?
Re: Welcome, ACLU
#759Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but "not doing anything to improve the state of 2A" is not the same as "fighting to impose a degraded view of 2A". The ACLU has nothing to gain by promoting any particular 2A view, because that's the only right that's not universally a political sinkhole. The inconvenient truth is that all civil rights (that aren't gun rights) have opposition nearly everywhere in America. The only difference is incidentals- if…
> urban New England are the two big exceptions Been to Manchester, NH lately?
I probably should have said 'Northeast' rather than 'urban New England' specifically.
I mis-remembered; that area encompasses fewer states than I thought it did (and NH is a good counterexample- gun laws there are great, if I remember correctly).
Anyways, in the Northeast, the states with less liberal gun laws (NY/MD/CT/Mass./NJ) also happen to contain most of that area's population, especially in the larger cities like NYC/Boston/Baltimore. NH is good, but it's a very small piece of that region.
Re: Welcome, ACLU
#760Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel like you could have a good argument about most of those, but the affirmative action one is pretty damning. That's blatantly political and in no way related to constitutional protections. There are plenty of good civil liberties related ways to look at race, but affirmative action is not one of them.
>but the affirmative action one is pretty damning The supreme court agrees that affirmative action is constitutional (within certain bounds), see the recent Fisher v. UT case, or Bakke for the original example.
"constitutional" is different from "constitutionally protected civil liberty".
Almost all laws are constitutional, but very few pertain to civil liberties.
It isn't a matter of civil liberty.