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

891–900 of 1001 posts

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#891

Post by mistermann »

tinalumfoil wrote: post #719
rz2k wrote: post #602

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe a little glib, but this came up on Reddit from Twitter: > The left protest about Trump, but they're strangely silent about King Raedwald's invasion of Northumbria in AD 616[1] It's a bizarre way to argue in favor of being politically detached. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/5r6zw0/the_left...

I never supported Trump, but I can't find it in myself to join the opposition specifically because I don't understand them. When someone says "Why are you protesting Trump doing X, but not Obama doing X?" it's not a valid argument, and it's not a convincing argument, but that's not the point. If your answer is "well, when Obama did X he mitigated the negative effects by also doing Y, and did X in political climate wh…

> People won't speak because their afraid their reasoning might step on the toes of someone else's, so everyone just pretends its obvious and gathers immense support without saying anything.

This helps make sense of things a bit more for me as well, thanks. I listen to the left, and I very often agree, but at least as often I simply don't understand what they are on about, there is very often simply no logic to their arguments.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#892

Post by grzm »

mistermann wrote: post #891
tinalumfoil wrote: post #719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never supported Trump, but I can't find it in myself to join the opposition specifically because I don't understand them. When someone says "Why are you protesting Trump doing X, but not Obama doing X?" it's not a valid argument, and it's not a convincing argument, but that's not the point. If your answer is "well, when Obama did X he mitigated the negative effects by also doing Y, and did X in political climate wh…

> People won't speak because their afraid their reasoning might step on the toes of someone else's, so everyone just pretends its obvious and gathers immense support without saying anything. This helps make sense of things a bit more for me as well, thanks. I listen to the left, and I very often agree, but at least as often I simply don't understand what they are on about, there is very often simply no logic to their…

there is very often simply no logic to their arguments.

You've likely heard those on the left express similar sentiments of those on the right. What comes to mind when you hear them say that?

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#893

Post by eli_gottlieb »

dnautics wrote: post #839
danielsju6 wrote: post #829

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand... it's illegal. They shouldn't be business owners if our social contract hurts their feelings. Commerce is a regulated activity.

You could make the exact same statement about Eric Garner: Eric Garner shouldn't be in the business of selling loose cigarettes, because our social contract prohibits that sort of activity. Commerce is a regulated activity, and Garner's death is an unfortunate but justifiable collateral damage of the police's clear duty to enforce the social contract.

I don't think that getting hit with a lawsuit and dying are equivalent disincentives.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#894

Post by calimac »

Your brains are so deep in cognitive dissonance that your funding the ACLU in yc.

Look back at the psych warfarin of the HRC Campaign and ask yourself if you are being rational or eating the red meat of the left tech media?

Pull out of it man!!!

A decade forward your going to look back and see what donkeys asses you look like right now

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#896

Post by lol214365 »

chc wrote: post #808
lol214365 wrote: post #706

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are not denying service. Any gay customer can go into an aforementioned bakery and order any of the goods any other customer might order. They just cannot order a cake for a gay wedding -- nor can any straight customer. That is completely different than categorically denying service to black customers.

This is cognate to the "Black people can get married, just not to members of a different race" argument, which has long been recognized as specious.

Interracial marriage has been around for time immemorial and in no way affects the nature of a marriage.

Gay marriage was invented in the past coupled decades by left-wing ideologues. Even in ancient societies where homosexuality was the norm, they didn't have gay marriage. Gay marriage also entirely deviates from the original purpose of marriage: to settle down to monogamy to birth and raise children.

The idea that the two are comparable is pretty ridiculous.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#897

Post by jhomedall »

chc wrote: post #808
lol214365 wrote: post #706

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are not denying service. Any gay customer can go into an aforementioned bakery and order any of the goods any other customer might order. They just cannot order a cake for a gay wedding -- nor can any straight customer. That is completely different than categorically denying service to black customers.

This is cognate to the "Black people can get married, just not to members of a different race" argument, which has long been recognized as specious.

For anyone more interested in this, the most relevant cases are "Pace v. Alabama" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pace_v._Alabama), and "Loving v. Virginia" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia).

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#898

Post by eli_gottlieb »

TheOsiris wrote: post #721
Miner49er wrote: post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The line between free speech and discrimination was drawn long ago. Would you also have people deny service to Black Americans like we did before the Civil Rights movement?

Should a Jewish restaurant be compelled to serve neo-nazis wearing Nazi uniforms?

Compelled? Well, are there police present to stop the Nazis assaulting the Jews?

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#899

Post by lend000 »

eddieroger wrote: post #137
ErikVandeWater wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes this is somewhat dangerous for YC. I would like to see that this was planned before November and their support was not determined by who the president turned out to be. Combined with the outspoken politics of Paul Graham1, I get the feeling people who identify as conservatives may not feel welcome at YC. 1 http://twitter.com/paulg EDIT: I changed "conservatives" to "people who identify as conservatives" to clarif…

The unfortunate thing is that the ACLU should be non-partisan and only fighting for those who are having their rights threatened. It just so happens that in the last week or so, it was Conservatives doing the threatening. There aren't a lot of incidents in recent memory of liberals taking away rights from folks, so you get a slant of ACLU vs Conservatives. The irony of wanting a small government I guess.

> There aren't a lot of incidents in recent memory of liberals taking away rights from folks

That's a joke, right? The ACLU has been a prominent critic of Obama's executive overreach and even Muslim profiling.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#900

Post by dang »

wtvanhest wrote: post #237
dang wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it hasn't. The rule has been the same for years: most politics are off topic. Check it out: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html . The difference between "most" and "all" is significant. HN can't be immune to what's going on in the outside world and we've learned from years of experience that it doesn't make sense to try. At the same time, we're not going to let politics overwhelm the site, since that…

I used the word 'mainly' because I understand that HN has always had some political conversation in the background. I have personally learned about immigration issues, digital privacy, etc. etc. on HN. Those are valuable things to understand, and I enjoyed reading about them. Now, it is clear that YC leadership has taken a highly liberal stand. I won't make a judgement on liberal or republican, but it feels more and…

HN moderation isn't particularly connected to developments like YC funding the ACLU. I add 'particularly' because maybe there's some weak action at a distance that none of us are conscious of, but it's nothing like the close correspondence your comment suggests. We have well-established methods for moderating HN that don't fluctuate a whole lot even as the world fluctuates around them.
Post reply on HN