Merlyn_LeRoy Posted February 27, 2002 Share Posted February 27, 2002 ... "And Merlyn, just like allowing the government to penalize the Boy Scouts of America destroys any meaning of the right of association contained in the first. Oh, where is that ACLU now?" Could you give some specific examples of how the government is "penalizing" the BSA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dedicated Dad Posted February 27, 2002 Author Share Posted February 27, 2002 Oh my my, throw a little red meat out there and you never know what kind of carrion eaters it will attract. BTW, Mr. LeRoy, defend the ACLU defending NAMBLA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlyn_LeRoy Posted February 27, 2002 Share Posted February 27, 2002 What do you find wrong with the ACLU's position on it? http://www.aclu.org/news/2000/n083100a.html ..."In representing NAMBLA today, our Massachusetts affiliate does not advocate sexual relationships between adults and children." "What the ACLU does advocate is robust freedom of speech for everyone. The lawsuit involved here, were it to succeed, would strike at the heart of freedom of speech. The case is based on a shocking murder. But the lawsuit says the crime is the responsibility not of those who committed the murder, but of someone who posted vile material on the Internet. The principle is as simple as it is central to true freedom of speech: those who do wrong are responsible for what they do; those who speak about it are not." I thought you started this thread saying you were in favor of freedom of speech; I guess you really meant religious speech backed by the government, and not speech by a private organization you personally find offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScouterPaul Posted February 28, 2002 Share Posted February 28, 2002 Dedicated Dad Now that I've been drawn into this debate I would like to ask you a question. Let me preface my comments with the statement that I am strongly in favor of seperation of church and state. I do not want government in my religion. My question to you is: In plain lanquage why is it so important to YOU that the Ten Commandments be posted on public property? This is a sincere and honest question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slontwovvy Posted February 28, 2002 Share Posted February 28, 2002 First of all, sorry to ScouterPaul for my misquote. Didn't mean to be so stupid. Still though, for NJCubScouter, you didn't read the reasoning for my assertion. I added a qualifier to my logic. If Merlyn is a typical ACLU member, I don't see how the BSA and the ACLU can have 95% in common. I haven't seen Merlyn agreeing with much of anything, nor do I see him following the Scout Oath and Law in many of its forms. (If a Scout is kind, he doesn't seem to appreciate OGE that much.) My point didn't come across the way it was meant to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGreyEagle Posted February 28, 2002 Share Posted February 28, 2002 I was thinking about the ACLU on my way to the Scout Committe meeting last night and you have to admit, sometimes they have a sense of style and stand by the their mission. I am sure Merlyn will either affirm or correct what I have to say, but if it is true. its too good not to share, if its wrong, then oh well, its makes a great urban legend. Back in the mid to late 70's, the American Nazi party wanted to have a parade/march in Skokie, Illinois. Skokie is a rather upscale community Northwest of Chicago, it is also a vey heavily Jewish community. I remember as a child riding on the public transportation system called the Skokie Swift and looking the old men and women riding, many with crudely tattooed numbers on their arms or legs. So, the Nazi's wanted to march in Skokie, and they were refused a parade permit. Naturally the Nazi's sued based on the constitutional right of freedom of assembly. The ACLU got involved of course and the Nazi's eventually got their permit. ALmost as soon as the permit was granted, the leader of the Nazi party resigned, seems the lawyer the ACLU assigned to the case was Jewish, and the Nazi leader said he could not stand being helped by "one such as him". Later I lived in Bloomington Illinois which is immediately adjacent to Normal Illinois which is home to Illinois State University as well as the birthplace of George Lincoln Rockwell. The house where Mr Rockwell was born no longer exists, an empty lot is there. Every year on Rockwell's birthday, the Nazi's would show up in Brown shirt uniforms or SS black and hold a rally on the sidewalk. And yes, the ACLU would be there backing up their Civil Rights. I remember thinking about those old people in their shorts, and the tattoos and thinking how repugnant defending Nazi's in full uniform had to be to the ACLU personnel, but they were there because its the ACLU's mission to defend everybody's constitutional rights whether they agree with the groups philosophy or not. Do I always agree with the ACLU? NO! I wish they would be more vocal in the Second Amendment fight, but perhaps no one has asked them to be, but I sure am glad they exist, because if they will fight to ensure NAMBLA constitutional rights, I am secure in having mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScouterPaul Posted February 28, 2002 Share Posted February 28, 2002 I believe that I'm doing this correctly. Bump to OGE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dedicated Dad Posted February 28, 2002 Author Share Posted February 28, 2002 Now that I've been drawn into this debate I would like to ask you a question. Let me preface my comments with the statement that I am strongly in favor of seperation of church and state. I do not want government in my religion. Like being drawn into the proverbial bug zapper isnt it? Please lay out for us how, in this instance, specifically how government is in your religion. My question to you is: In plain lanquage why is it so important to YOU that the Ten Commandments be posted on public property? This is a sincere and honest question. Respectfully Paul, Im not sure that you ever responded to one of my queries previous while I answered to both yours and Bobs questions with regards to your imperfect analogy on the other thread. And, I still look forward to those responses, I hold no resentment and am happy to answer this question. I think that it is important for the Ten Commandments to be on public property because its principles (though not all) were intrinsic to the inspiration that formed our government and the ideals that model our society. I think that the Judeo/Christian religion partly represents the basis, though not bindingly, the standard (historically) by which our system of government was formed and the ethics that our civil laws aspire to. The ACLUicans seek to destroy such concepts as marriage, profanity laws, age of consent laws and many other civil laws in the name of liberty. I am not willing to give up the rights of a local legislature to deny the access of legal prostitution or legal drug use into its jurisdiction for the sake of individual liberties. Many of our laws are based on the concept of a civilized society, originally and historically grounded in the principles of the Judeo/Christian religion and I see no reason not to publicly display these principles as they would pertain to that basis of our laws. Again, show me how that is an establishment of a religion, where is the public alter for worship? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sctmom Posted February 28, 2002 Share Posted February 28, 2002 " The ACLUicans seek to destroy such concepts as marriage, profanity laws, age of consent laws and many other civil laws in the name of liberty." Objection. Please state a case of ACLU trying to destroy the concept of marriage. If your case is allowing same-gender marriages, please explain how that is a threat to a traditional marriage. Please also state a case of age of consent laws being done away with by the ACLU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dedicated Dad Posted February 28, 2002 Author Share Posted February 28, 2002 If your case is allowing same-gender marriages, please explain how that is a threat to a traditional marriage. Wow mom, not were defending same-sex marriage? It weakens the concept of the traditional, best equipped, ideal family unit. Dont forget its immoral and should not be legally recognized as having the same status as traditional marriage, also please insert usual analogy of how incestual marriage doesnt deserve the same status. Please also state a case of age of consent laws being done away with by the ACLU. Umm. That would be in their defense of NAMBLA! What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlyn_LeRoy Posted February 28, 2002 Share Posted February 28, 2002 >>Please also state a case of age of consent laws being done away with by the ACLU. >Umm. That would be in their defense of NAMBLA! What do you think? I think they're defending NAMBLA's right of free speech to advocate that age of consent laws should be done away with, which is entirely different from the ACLU itself advocating that age of consent laws be done away with. They're defending free speech, they aren't advocating anything about age of consent laws. And no, gay marriage doesn't affect other marriages; some churches have performed gay marriages for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sctmom Posted February 28, 2002 Share Posted February 28, 2002 Two people love each other, commit to care for each other emotionally and financially. How does that affect any other marriage? How does it weaken traditional marriages? Are traditional marriages so fragile and weak they are weakened by 2 people of the same gender caring for each other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dedicated Dad Posted February 28, 2002 Author Share Posted February 28, 2002 They're defending free speech, they aren't advocating anything about age of consent laws. Of course it does, its like defending those who advocate the right to scream fire in the theater or to demonstrate in a public forum to say, kill the Jews. Youre defending the right to coerce illegal activity. And no, gay marriage doesn't affect other marriages; some churches have performed gay marriages for years. I dont see the connection, how does one affect the other? A conflict of religion and states interests if I ever saw one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dedicated Dad Posted February 28, 2002 Author Share Posted February 28, 2002 Asked and answered mom! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlyn_LeRoy Posted February 28, 2002 Share Posted February 28, 2002 >>They're defending free speech, they aren't advocating anything about age of consent laws. >Of course it does, its like defending those who advocate the right to scream fire in the theater or to demonstrate in a public forum to say, kill the Jews. Youre defending the right to coerce illegal activity. So you also think that the ACLU agrees with the Nazis and the KKK, since they've also defended their speech rights? Sorry, the ACLU link I gave you and quoted states quite clearly that they are NOT advocating NAMBLA's position, only defending their free speech rights to advocate such a position. >>And no, gay marriage doesn't affect other marriages; some churches have performed gay marriages for years. >I dont see the connection, how does one affect the other? Um, I thought YOU were claiming that same-sex marriages somehow affected other marriages. They already exist, and they don't seem to be affecting other marriages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now