Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Welcome, ACLU

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

861–870 of 1001 posts

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#861

Post by rayiner »

alanh wrote: post #590
joshfraser wrote: post #427

I've been a long time supporter of the ACLU. While they're being politicized right now as being anti-Trump, the thing I admire most about them is their consistency in fighting for the rights of everyone. They stick to their principles of free speech and human equality no matter how unpopular the issue or unsavory their client. A good example is back in the 1930s when the ACLU simultaneously defended the rights of bla…

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…

For context, I've got 8 years of ACLU emails with quotes like:

> Despite initial assurances that he would veto this outrageous bill, President Obama will now be known as the president who signed indefinite detention without charge or trial into law.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#862

Post by lend000 »

wahern wrote: post #836
DashRattlesnake wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I once almost donated to the NRA several years ago. But on their main website were a few links to some anti-abortion/pro-life organizations. (And, AFAICT, it wasn't advertisements served over a third-party system.) I never went back. I don't think the ACLU is nearly as partisan aligned or affiliated like that. But they're definitely more aligned, as a political matter, with the Democratic party. Partly for historical…

The ACLU is much more closely aligned with the Libertarian Party, although they don't officially associate with any political party. They were huge critics of the Obama administration, the "embodiment of the Democratic Party" -- to some people, at least. They've also been huge advocates for Title IX reform on college campuses and opposed restrictions of student expression. It's wishful thinking that they are any closer to the Democratic Party than the Republican Party -- both are enemies of freedom, most of the time.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#863

Post by jrmurad »

int_19h wrote: post #777
jrmurad wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some "left-leaning" stances they take where I'm hard-pressed to see how they are defending civil rights, if not outright violating those of one party for the benefit of another: affirmative action: https://www.aclu.org/issues/racial-justice/affirmative-actio... voter id (are all the other countries that have this violating their citizens' civil rights?): https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-...…

On the subject of abortion and drugs, it's fairly straightforward. ACLU is not a "states' rights" organization. It is an "individual rights" organization. It sues states for infringing people's rights as much as it sues the feds. So from their perspective, if they can enshrine the protection of a right at a federal level, they'll go for it, because it's easier than forcing all 50 states to do the same.

Yes, it may be "easier" for the ACLU to abuse/"reinterpret" the Constitution rather than work to amend it or work within its strict framework... but doing so makes things worse for more people in the longterm.

States' Rights limit the Federal Government from being so powerful that it can more easily violate civil rights... a bigger picture which ACLU should take into account.

Likewise, "legislating from the bench" may have protected some rights of individuals... but, far more often, it has "enshrined", as you say, new Federal powers at the cost of individual liberties.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#864

Post by krenoten »

hackuser wrote: post #854
joshfraser wrote: post #427

I've been a long time supporter of the ACLU. While they're being politicized right now as being anti-Trump, the thing I admire most about them is their consistency in fighting for the rights of everyone. They stick to their principles of free speech and human equality no matter how unpopular the issue or unsavory their client. A good example is back in the 1930s when the ACLU simultaneously defended the rights of bla…

> While they're being politicized right now ... That's long been true, though I'm sure sometimes more than others. I agree with what you say, but AFAIK they always have been associated with the left.

to the extent that the left is associated with the maintenance of our rights

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#865

Post by pshposh »

gregw134 wrote: post #781
bradleyjg wrote: post #758

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I grew up in the Midwest and still visit sometimes. Many people I know think Democrats have lost their minds with this issue (and the bathroom debate).

You made sweeping statements that went well beyond just 'people I know'.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#867

Post by pshposh »

beaconstudios wrote: post #738
Miner49er wrote: post #732

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, I can understand that viewpoint, it is logical. However, I'd argue that while liberty would be gained, it would come at the expense of there being more hate in the world. I personally don't think I would want to live in a society where people are denied service because of something about themselves that they cannot control.

forcing interaction doesn't remove that pre-existing hate though (I'd prefer the term prejudice because I know many christians don't hate gays). Forcing a christian bakery or a muslim pizzeria to cater to a gay wedding would just foster resentment at being compelled by the government to perform an action against their will. Freedom of association means that groups that don't want to interact, don't have to. For someo…

When you talk about a Christian bakery forced to cater a gay wedding are you referring to a specific incident? Has that happened?

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#868

Post by base698 »

dwaxe wrote: post #714
CPLX wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are literally zero constitutional issues raised by the nature of his relationship with Twitter.

How do people still not get this? The First Amendment is a limitation on the government of the United States. Period. It does not apply to other countries. It does not apply to private entities within the United States. It does not apply to Facebook, Twitter, Reddit or any other social media.

Maybe it shouldn't be:

"... a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression, since, though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties, it leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself."

--John Stuart Mill

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#869

Post by ErikVandeWater »

m3rc wrote: post #278
ErikVandeWater wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the countries banned by the president were determined by the Department of Homeland Security. Read the order itself: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/27/execu... Your ad hominem attacks are not welcome here.

Where are you seeing ad hominem attacks? And if that's true, either the DHS is doing a spectacularly awful job, or we're not hearing the full story of what they did and did not recommend.

Questioning whether someone else has a "sound mind" is obviously ad hominem.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#870

Post by [deleted] »

lol214365 wrote: post #724
justinlaster wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I get the feeling conservatives may not feel welcome at YC. Sounds like a personal problem. "Oh no, an organization that defends people's liberties is making me feel uncomfortable!"

More like: "Oh no, an organization that casts advocacy for their leftist politics as defense of people's liberties is making me feel uncomfortable!" Opposing a border wall defends no one's civil liberties.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN