From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Mon Aug 06 2001 - 12:25:21 MDT
Charles D Hixson wrote:
>
> On Saturday 04 August 2001 01:42 pm, you wrote:
> > ...
> > Extropians. This doesn't seem to be the case, though I do admitt
> > I have a lower tolerence then the ACLU does for "free
> > speech"-more on that later.
> I beleive that this is based on a misunderstanding of the ACLU
> position (though I must admit that they have taken some that I find
> hard to defend, and ignored some things that I find strange). I
> suspect that some of this is due to strategic thinking, i.e., "This
> is a case that I can win, and winning cases makes me look strong.
> Looking strong brings me more supporters, which makes me actually
> stronger. So I'll take this case. OTOH, I'd probably loose that
> case, and I don't want to look weak, so I'll skip that one."
>
> When we evaluate someone (or group) totally on their ideology, we
> tend to miss important features that shape their decisions. But
> it's the ideology (i.e., ideals) that they want us to notice
> (usually).
This is what primarily defines the ACLU. You would think that after US
v. Verdugo-Urquidez that they'd get a clue and actually defend
individuals second amendment rights to the same degree they defend the
first amendment rights of individuals (i.e. just as their standard is
'we defend not the speech we find acceptable, but that which we find
unacceptable', but saying 'we defend not your right to keep and bear
arms we like, but those we abhor').
Your argument about winnability doesn't hold. For example, the US v.
Emerson case has been won significantly at the district court level, and
handicappers are betting Emerson will also win at the appeals level,
with arguments that are on the same level as Roe v Wade and the Skokie
case.
Furthermore, the ACLU seems to be caving in more to political
correctness, since it seems to be generally absent in the recent case of
a fellow convicted for pedophilic fictional writing in a private
journal. (Note: if this case stands, people writing in the manner of
Robert A Heinlein's later works would find themselves convicted of
pedophilia).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:09:31 MST