41–50 of 550 posts
You could write a similar article about a lot of nonprofits, lately. "Once a Developer of Web Browsers, Mozilla Faces an Identity Crisis." "Once a Free Online Encyclopedia, the Wikimedia Foundation Faces an Identity Crisis."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s probably reasonable for an organization to choose not to conflate the civil liberties they stand for with amendments. In an ideal world the people would happily eliminate or modify laws that do harm, and of the existing US civil liberties, the 2nd amendment is likely the most debatable on whether it is a net win for liberty.
Even the most extreme proponents of the 2nd amendment have examples of it working The various police forces during the capital seige - in January, remember how that was this year - said they used less force because the participants were armed and knew they could shoot back Their whole thing is that they will make the state think twice, whereas the peaceful and unarmed protestors get knocked around with no recourse Wi…
Countries with fewer guns have fewer armed police officers and fewer policemen shootings.
I've managed to get junk mail from both sides of the political spectrum now, which has been interesting (the conservative groups have had me on their mailing list forever, and I think a subscription to Harpers got me on the liberal groups).
Unfortunately, other than the issues involved, I can't really tell a big difference between fundraising styles. "Assume the reader is an idiot and send surveys with the most leading questions you've ever heard of, then ask for money." Usually, they say "Please send us $15 to process the survey, and your best gift."
The questions are absolutely, loaded, leading questions that would be laughed out of any courtroom or actual attempt at a statistically accurate survey. They're things like "Do you agree that racial injustice and white supremacy is the most important issue facing America today?" and "Do you agree that widespread, unchecked illegal immigration is on a path to destroy the nation we love?"
One group actually has survey stickers you respond with - "Yes, illegal immigration is a huge concern!" and "No, I'm a global elitist who supports illegal aliens voting in our elections and overthrowing our Democracy." Or something of the sort.
I guess it works or they wouldn't do it, but it's absolutely insane how these "surveys" are worded. I'm sure all they do is look for a check on the inside instead of "processing" them.
Oh, and just in case you're a drooling moron who doesn't know how to read a letter, the attached letter highlighting the supposed problems will reliably include at the bottom of the pages, "Over!" "Next page please!" "Flip over to continue reading!" and other insulting directions that more or less imply I don't know how to read a multi-page document. Since it's apparently against federal law to leave whitespace in such a fundraising request, they fill the last page with "PS: This is an URGENT issue that requires your rushed donation to STOP THEM from DOING EVIL THINGS." "PPS: Please rush your donation back!" "PPSS: I'm still going to put stuff here so there's no whitespace."
But I do tend to respond in long form, usually expanding on answers, and often include 2-3 typed pages in response when the survey lacks nuance. I doubt it ever gets read, but it's good practice for being able to expand on issues.
In any case, the ACLU isn't getting my money. Neither is the Heritage Foundation, and neither are any other groups that send me these "surveys" where the only important question is "But how much can you afford to give?"
ACLU has been subverted by political correctness, mob mentality of internet, and the do-gooder activists. ACLU is a perfect example on how we ended up in the through the looking glass world.
One has to wonder if the useful idiots (according to Lenin) that are propagating this wave of ideological censorship and intolerance realize what they are in for. The powers that be must surely be extremely pleased to see such hated - by corporate and financial kleptocracy - liberal bastions as free speech and open debate dismantled and destroyed. I fear it is already too late.
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...
Despite the sad loss of the ACLU as an institution that cares about civil liberties, we can remain hopeful due to other organizations like FIRE. https://www.thefire.org
"We defend civil liberties and rights guaranteed to each individual, including freedom of speech and expression, equal protection under the law, and the right to personal privacy."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even the most extreme proponents of the 2nd amendment have examples of it working The various police forces during the capital seige - in January, remember how that was this year - said they used less force because the participants were armed and knew they could shoot back Their whole thing is that they will make the state think twice, whereas the peaceful and unarmed protestors get knocked around with no recourse Wi…
I don’t buy this argument. One of the reasons police are quicker to open fire on people here in the US is because so many people have guns. Countries with fewer guns have fewer armed police officers and fewer policemen shootings.
These are separate issues. All Americans experience a collective punishment from law enforcement because they might have "a" gun on them.
I like this idea: https://twitter.com/kittypurrzog/status/1401610476237197312 The ACLU should split into two groups: ACLU Sr, which fights for free speech rights, and ACLU Jr, which fights against them (Yes, I saw this when PG retweeted it.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same. I was turned off by the “my way or the highway” mentality on trans issues shown in their Twitter. Failure to defend 2A rights, now that NRA is clearly not principled in any way (maybe it never was), also bothered me. It is hard to imagine them defending an anti-trans person in 2021. As despicable as those people are, they still have civil rights. As a gay man, I would have been despicable for most of the past 1…
The ACLU has never defended or supported Hellerian 2A rights ( https://www.aclu.org/other/second-amendment ), and its not clear that they should change their position due to a shift in SC precedent, anymore than that they should shift their position on speech if the SC decided to revert to Schenck .