Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

Bann the ACLU

Sushi X

Sushi X

New member
they're a joke and are nothing more than a communistic group in sheeps clothing. they claim to be for american's civil liberties but the moment you mention God they turn their noses up at you. if they ever offered to help me i'd tell them they can do that by shutting down. all they do is lurk in the shadows and as soon as God is metioned they go to work to eliminate his name from the vocabulary. they say or do nothing about the name Allah or even Satan. ya know why they are satan's pawns in his war against God. they are a joke and need to be banned. period.
 
uh ok. didnt these guys support David Koresh or that idiot from Ruby Ridge? Don't they support gun ownes rights? Wake up bro.


Where's Weapon X when I need a good arguement???
 
The Nature Boy said:
uh ok. didnt these guys support David Koresh or that idiot from Ruby Ridge? Don't they support gun ownes rights? Wake up bro.


Where's Weapon X when I need a good arguement???
Click to expand...

I have occasionally agreed with the ACLU's positions but it's damn rare. I have admired them when they've been willing to defend people and rights that are unpopular - for instance, allowing neo-Nazis to talk even in predominantly Jewish Skokie, Illinois - because that's the price we pay for free speech and freedom. The ACLU sometimes shows real courage.

However, the American Communist Lawyer's Union has its limits: for instance, they never have come to the defense of the Second Amendment. They're oddly quiet on that one; apparently the right to keep and bear arms doesn't quite jive with their Constitutional outlook. The ACLU's stance is that the right to keep and bear arms is a collective one (as in groups regulated by the state can have firearms - national guard, etc., but not private citizens) , as opposed to an individual one.

They should stand up for all rights. It is not up to them to pick and choose. The 2nd Amendment is just as important as the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th. If you cannot be just in the defense of all Rights, then you are as big a hypocrite as they get.
 
The ACLU is a good thing.

This country is gonna fuck itself soon.
 
I, along with other concerned Americans, are proud to be members of the ACLU. The ACLU has been on the frontlines for years protecting gays, lesbians, those suffering from AIDS, prisoners, victims of racism, women, the rights of all Americans to free speech, and, of course, the list goes on.

If you are really concerned about a few groups destructive to this great nation, consider the following:

--THE NRA (a big endorser of murderers for years)
--The Tobacco Lobby (a big endorser of afflicting victims with cancer)
--The Family Research Council (a big endorser of hate)
and
--The Christian Coalitioin (a big endorser of putting hate into religion).

If this list isn't exhaustive enough, I'll more than happy provide you with other groups who certainly pose a greater danger to our country.

Oh, how can I forget? The KKK will always be at the top of any destructive group. Maybe you should post a similar thread voicing as much concern over the KKK as you harbor against innocent, benign groups such as the ACLU.

Ryan.
 
Last edited:
RyanH said:
I, along with other concerned Americans, are proud to be members of the ACLU. The ACLU has been on the frontlines for years protecting gays, lesbians, those suffering from AIDS, prisoners, victims of racism, women, the rights of all Americans to free speech, and, of course, the list goes on.

If you are really concerned about a few groups destructive to this great nation, consider the following:

--THE NRA (a big endorser of murderers for years)
--The Tobacco Lobby (a big endorser of afflicting victims with cancer)
--The Family Research Council (a big endorser of hate)
and
--The Christian Coalitioin (a big endorser of putting hate into religion).

If this list isn't exhaustive enough, I'll more than happy provide you with other groups who certainly pose a greater danger to our country.

Oh, how can I forget? The KKK will always be at the top of any destructive group. Maybe you should post a similar thread voicing as much concern over the KKK as you harbor against innocent, benign groups such as the ACLU.

Ryan.
Click to expand...

yawn :rolleyes:
 
Ryan,

I like the ACLU. I also like the NRA. Someone as well informed as you should know that the NRA is comprised almost entirely of gun-owning. law-abiding patriots.

"Endorsing murderers" is asinine rhetoric that discredits your position.

The tobacco lobby is a good call. People say "Well, they;re only harming themselves (smokers)" but that is pure bullshit. When they get old and sick, it costs the taxpayers billions and billions of dollars to treat them.


The Christian Coalition is one of the worst things going in America. Wasn't Jesus Jewish?

Matt
 
RyanH said:
I--THE NRA (a big endorser of murderers for years)
--The Tobacco Lobby (a big endorser of afflicting victims with cancer)
--The Family Research Council (a big endorser of hate)
and
--The Christian Coalitioin (a big endorser of putting hate into religion).
Click to expand...

You're right on about the Family Research Council and the Christian Coalition. I endorse the NRA, and the Tobacco Lobby is a necessary evil.
 
Sushi X said:
they're a joke and are nothing more than a communistic group in sheeps clothing. they claim to be for american's civil liberties but the moment you mention God they turn their noses up at you. if they ever offered to help me i'd tell them they can do that by shutting down. all they do is lurk in the shadows and as soon as God is metioned they go to work to eliminate his name from the vocabulary. they say or do nothing about the name Allah or even Satan. ya know why they are satan's pawns in his war against God. they are a joke and need to be banned. period.
Click to expand...


i endorse their efforts to protect free speech, prisoner's rights, civil rights, etc. i'm all for them.

but i think they can be oversensetive at times. even so, i would rather have them than not.
 
MattTheSkywalker said:
Ryan,

The tobacco lobby is a good call. People say "Well, they;re only harming themselves (smokers)" but that is pure bullshit. When they get old and sick, it costs the taxpayers billions and billions of dollars to treat them.



Matt
Click to expand...

So maybe the problem is not the tobacco lobby, but instead the problem is WHY we the taxpayers are paying to treat these people. I sure as hell know that I do not want on dime of my tax money going to treat someone elses illness.
 
the nra is does not support murderers. they support american's right to own and bear arms as long as they are law abiding and are mentally capable. trust me i was a memeber until i coul'nd afford the membership fee but i still agree with them. the tobacco lobby, well have'nt they paid enough? let them be, how about the libs go after mcdonalds coprportaion for making this country fat? they entice people with their delightfull food(humor me here, i don't like their food) and make it all appealing to everyone. still people eat it and eat it some more and get fat. well you say it's their choice and they are doing no harm, well hold on a sec. the tobacco industy did the same and yet ya went after them. why not go after the music, video game, movie and clothing industry next? let's just eliminate all people's rights to expression.

here's something to ponder about equal rights and civil liberties. when i was in high school that movie malcom x came out. well you remember the blacks had all the malcom x attire on? well, a friend of mine went to school with a shirt that had a rebel flag x(not the flag but the x) and it said malcom who? well he was told to take it off as it was racist and offensive. the more i think about it it was only equal. i find malcom x to be a racist. he hates whites and everything to do with them. is that not racist? i think so, it's wrong in any form. well anyway, back to the topic. how does the aclu help this country, i think it helps the liberal coaliton more than anything or anyone else.
 
BO-CEPHUS said:


So maybe the problem is not the tobacco lobby, but instead the problem is WHY we the taxpayers are paying to treat these people. I sure as hell know that I do not want on dime of my tax money going to treat someone elses illness.
Click to expand...

It will go to them Bo. There is no limit on how much you can be taxed for Medicre (like ther is with social security)
 
MattTheSkywalker said:


It will go to them Bo. There is no limit on how much you can be taxed for Medicre (like ther is with social security)
Click to expand...

Oh, I know that it will go to them. But instead of criticizing the tobacco lobby, I would much rather get rid of medicare and even social securtiy all together.
 
Support for any position can come in one of two ways: 1) expressly, or 2) implicitly.

Has the NRA endorsed murder expressly? No, of course not.

Has the NRA endorsed murder implicity through its actions? YES.

The NRA has consistently fought against any sort of regulation of gun ownership, even when legislators are wanting to ban guns made for the sole purpose of committing violent crime or mass murder.

The NRA also fought against background checks and regulation of gunshows. Therefore, the facts show that the NRA has advocated EVERYONE having easy access to guns, which, in turn, means that the NRA has endorsed gun ownership for criminals who commit murder.

Hence, the NRA has endorsed murder----time and time again.

Ryan.
 
BO-CEPHUS said:


Janet Reno? :D
Click to expand...

the "REVERANDS" pack:

Falwell
Robertson
and yes, Jackson,

even I've grown tired of Jackson---he's lost most of his supporters. His affair has damaged his credibility beyond repair, not because he had an affair, but because he's a reverand and should thus be held to a higher standard.

Ryan.
 
RyanH...I've got a question for you since you used to support Jesse Jackson....

Do you think that black leaders are too heavy handed with the black pride stance? What I mean is, a lot of folks on this board have stated that black leaders are a joke because they are racist, and exclude whites.

What is your take on this? I am often conflicted, because I feel a lot of black leaders use blackness as a tool for emotional leverage, rather than embracing all people.
 
strongchick said:
RyanH...I've got a question for you since you used to support Jesse Jackson....

Do you think that black leaders are too heavy handed with the black pride stance? What I mean is, a lot of folks on this board have stated that black leaders are a joke because they are racist, and exclude whites.

What is your take on this? I am often conflicted, because I feel a lot of black leaders use blackness as a tool for emotional leverage, rather than embracing all people.
Click to expand...

Well, we always have to keep the black "perspective" in mind. Many African-Americans are accustomed to being in a reactionary mode throughout most of their lives. Afterall, on a daily basis any African-American might be denied a cab ride if a white person is standing next to him or her. Or, an African-American might be looked upon suspiciously just because he or she is strolling through Macy's.
So, on a regular basis many African-Americans are either overtly or covertly discriminated against, and thus the black perspective is bound to be somewhat self-defensive, which can lead many critics to believe they are exclusionary when, in fact, they are just fighting for themselves-----something African-Americans have always had to do.

The fact of the matter is that equality has still not been achieved in regards to blacks and whites. Neighborhoods are still segregated, blacks are still shut out of jobs over whites, and blacks are consistently denied many of the opportunities whites are given because of the economic circumstances many blacks have to endure. So all in all, its easy to understand why African-Americans, to some extent, must look after African-Americans first....History has shown us that if they don't, few others will (exceptions include JFK, Lincoln, brave southern judges, etc)

Ryan.
 
Satanic Goatslayer said:
You just typed African-American 8 times.
Click to expand...

and oops I said "black" instead of "African-American" in some instances....Everyone please don't be disappointed.
 
BO-CEPHUS said:


So maybe the problem is not the tobacco lobby, but instead the problem is WHY we the taxpayers are paying to treat these people. I sure as hell know that I do not want on dime of my tax money going to treat someone elses illness.
Click to expand...

why are we paying to treat people that eat red meat and drink too much. oh yea and diabetics and people who injure thierselves doing extreme sports. oh and why are we paying for any aids treatment, that is individual risky behavior, same as smoking right.

im too tired to go on.
 
RyanH said:


If you are really concerned about a few groups destructive to this great nation, consider the following:

--THE NRA (a big endorser of murderers for years)
--The Tobacco Lobby (a big endorser of afflicting victims with cancer)


Ryan.
Click to expand...

--pro-lifers (a big endorser of murderers for years)
--the tobacco smokers (a big endoser for not taking responsibility)

:FRlol:
 
RyanH said:


the "REVERANDS" pack:

Falwell
Robertson
and yes, Jackson,

even I've grown tired of Jackson---he's lost most of his supporters. His affair has damaged his credibility beyond repair, not because he had an affair, but because he's a reverand and should thus be held to a higher standard.

Ryan.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but this logic would also discredit MLK Jr., whom you often cite as a hero. The only difference is that King's affairs did not get publicized during his life.

When religious leaders reveal their feet of clay, we have two choices -- to call them hypocrites or to wonder if our religion doesn't need revising.
 
musclebrains said:


Sorry, but this logic would also discredit MLK Jr., whom you often cite as a hero. The only difference is that King's affairs did not get publicized during his life.

When religious leaders reveal their feet of clay, we have two choices -- to call them hypocrites or to wonder if our religion doesn't need revising.
Click to expand...

I agree, but Jackson has had other collateral issues that have destroyed his credibility. For example, his rainbow push coaliton has been the subject of much well-deserved ridicule, and his constant need to be the center of media attention makes me question whether his recent "goals" are sincere or if they are simply an act to gain him more recognition.

While I do credit Jackson for the good deeds he has done, and recognize that an affair should never negate the good that one does, I still have a difficult time respecting a 'REVERAND" who sets a bad example for others.

I could really care less if one has slept with a hundred young women, but remove the name "Reverand" from your title when you do. Then, at least you aren't a hypocrit. Example: BILL CLINTON STILL HAS MY UTMOST RESPECT.:D
 
Last edited:
RyanH said:




BILL CLINTON STILL HAS MY UTMOST RESPECT.:D
Click to expand...

:sick: :sick: :sick: :sick: :sick: :sick:

You can't be serious! Bill Scandal aMonth Clinton??? Ever notice that almost all of the women that were going to testify against him mysteriously died right before doing so. And that our MEDIA pretty much swept that fact under the carpet for all practical purpose.
 
ryan points out that the NRA and big tobacco are killing machines. he does'nt realize the NRA does everything they can to teach people how to properly use guns and handle them in a safe manner. the tobacco industry well i won't get into that.

the aclu does nothing but sue people they don't like or feel are harmfull when they are not. well let's use the aclu to sue the fast food industry for making thid country fat and adding to the masses who suffer from heart related diseases. they are in cohoots with the pharmacutical industry and many public hospitals. they are all in it together don't ya know.
 
RyanH said:


I agree, but Jackson has had other collateral issues that have destroyed his credibility. For example, his rainbow push coaliton has been the subject of much well-deserved ridicule, and his constant need to be the center of media attention makes me question whether his recent "goals" are sincere or if they are simply an act to gain him more recognition.

While I do credit Jackson for the good deeds he has done, and recognize that an affair should never negate the good that one does, I still have a difficult time respecting a 'REVERAND" who sets a bad example for others.

I could really care less if one has slept with a hundred young women, but remove the name "Reverand" from your title when you do. Then, at least you aren't a hypocrit. Example: BILL CLINTON STILL HAS MY UTMOST RESPECT.:D
Click to expand...

I've never found Jesse Jackson anything but superficial but I simply can't agree on your claims about the moral responsibility of religious leaders. Indeed, I'd say making it more of an issue in his case than in Clinton's on the basis of religious credentials is a specious argument. Jackson did not lie and compound his lies about his affair once it was exposed. If you want to weigh lies (that I regard as insignificant in both cases), Clinton is far guiltier. Thus I have to think your making the religious credential an issue is simply a way to protect Clinton. And Clinton is reviled for besmirching the office of the President, just as the Rev. is for soiling his.
 
Last edited:
musclebrains said:


I've never found Jesse Jackson anything but superficial but I simply can't agree on your claims about the moral responsibility of religious leaders. Indeed, I'd say making it more of an issue in his case than in Clinton's on the basis of religious credentials is a specious argument. Jackson did not lie and compound his lies about his affair once it was exposed. If you want to weigh lies (that I regard as insignificant in both cases), Clinton is far guiltier. Thus I have to think your making the religious credential an issue is simply a way to protect Clinton. And Clinton is reviled for besmirching the office of the President, just as the Rev. is for soiling his.
Click to expand...

The distinction, in my view, is that Clinton never really stepped up to the alter, neither figuratively nor literally. Jackson, on the other hand, by placing "Reverand" in front of his name did step up to the moral alter, and consequently, should be held to an objective standard similar to that of other "Reverands."

While I certainly realize that Shakespeare was right---that we all have our human fallacies and that none of us are immune from the inherent nature of being men----Reverands, at least, ought to strive for something a little closer to his religious philosophy. The facts do not indicate that Rev. Jackson has had simply one moral slip and is now on his way to redemption. Instead, Jackson has still yet to see his child born months ago and additionally has used the Rainbow Coalition for self-gain.

The cumulative effects of these occurences is simply too much to allow me to have any remaining respect for "Reverand" Jackson----- maybe more would be forthcoming if he removed the cloak of God.

Ryan.
 
RyanH said:


The cumulative effects of these occurences is simply too much to allow me to have any remaining respect for "Reverand" Jackson----- maybe more would be forthcoming if he removed the cloak of God.

Ryan.
Click to expand...

Or the cloak of a race he doesn't truly represent.
 
RyanH said:


The distinction, in my view, is that Clinton never really stepped up to the alter, neither figuratively nor literally. Jackson, on the other hand, by placing "Reverand" in front of his name did step up to the moral alter, and consequently, should be held to an objective standard similar to that of other "Reverands."

While I certainly realize that Shakespeare was right---that we all have our human fallacies and that none of us are immune from the inherent nature of being men----Reverands, at least, ought to strive for something a little closer to his religious philosophy. The facts do not indicate that Rev. Jackson has had simply one moral slip and is now on his way to redemption. Instead, Jackson has still yet to see his child born months ago and additionally has used the Rainbow Coalition for self-gain.

The cumulative effects of these occurences is simply too much to allow me to have any remaining respect for "Reverand" Jackson----- maybe more would be forthcoming if he removed the cloak of God.

Ryan.
Click to expand...

We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't have any positive feelings about Jackson -- always thought he was smarmy -- but I think the reality is that the ministry has operated politically very different in the Af-Am community than it has in white culture. King was discredited by HOover for this same reason.
 
musclebrains said:


but I think the reality is that the ministry has operated politically very different in the Af-Am community than it has in white culture. .
Click to expand...

This is interesting......I'd like to comment on this without it turning into a derogatory race thread.

How is it different?

Jackson, I feel is a attention whore. He's done some good things, but the value of them is diminished because of his penchant for the microphone, or camera.
 
gymnpoppa said:


This is interesting......I'd like to comment on this without it turning into a derogatory race thread.

How is it different?

Jackson, I feel is a attention whore. He's done some good things, but the value of them is diminished because of his penchant for the microphone, or camera.
Click to expand...

Oh, I just mean that prior to Jerry Falwell during Reagan's time, the white church was much less political. The Civil Rights movement was hosted by the churches and, I think, becoming a minister had political motivations as well as spiritual ones.
 
gymnpoppa said:


This is interesting......I'd like to comment on this without it turning into a derogatory race thread.

How is it different?

Jackson, I feel is a attention whore. He's done some good things, but the value of them is diminished because of his penchant for the microphone, or camera.
Click to expand...

IMO that is a dead on statement BRI.

you should see DERILL HAMMOND on S & L do Jessie Jackson...he subtley points to what you just described.
 
OMEGA said:


IMO that is a dead on statement BRI.

you should see DERILL HAMMOND on S & L do Jessie Jackson...he subtley points to what you just described.
Click to expand...


I've seen him.....LOL......plus, I'm trying to venture into mainstream topics....I've been labeled (politics), unfairly I might add.......I could talk about tofo (MB), if you want a nice sammich........hahahahhha
 
OMEGA said:


its a differnece....between being someone.....and Trying to be someone.
Click to expand...

You know, that is a very interesting point. His whole message was in some respects about personal ambition, being "seen."
 
gymnpoppa said:

I could talk about tofo (MB), if you want a nice sammich........hahahahhha
Click to expand...

I had a bowl of Korean soup, fiery hot kimchee with tofu, last night. I like tofu in its Asian presentation. I just don't like the American lesbian version.
 
The ACLU does suck sushi x. I think it really stands for Anti Christ Law Union. They founder was even a communist. If you need help, use the ACLJ.
 
American Center for Law and Justice. It is the organization that fight the ACLU for religious and civil freedoms. Like when the ACLU said it was wrong to sing Christmas Carols the ACLJ fought them in court.
 
ahh i got ya. i'll have to remember them. sounds like a good organization. hmm, wonder what ryan and the left wingers think about them.
 
MattTheSkywalker said:
The Christian Coalition is one of the worst things going in America. Wasn't Jesus Jewish?
Click to expand...

He wasn't jewish dumbfuck, He was Christian...His Father was Christ, therefore Christianity became a religion. I can understand the ignorance of those to believe that all these so called "activist groups" are really out to do good. The NRA, ACLU, NAACP, RAINBOW COALITION, TOBACCO LOBBY, CHRISTITAN COALITION, KKK, BLACK PANTHERS, and whatever else may be out are only a way for people to exploit the constitution. To say that the Tobacco Lobbyist's are violation human rights by putting the ingredients in cigarette's leads me to counter that with, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink" who put the cigarette in their hands? The powerful men behind the corporation, no! They presented the product and the ill informed consumer ate it up. The NRA does not support muderists, they support the freedom and right to bear arms. That so happens to include all those dipshits who abuse the laws, but they don't advocate killing. The ACLU, I don't know anything about them. But if they supported the KKK coming into Skokie, let me ask you this. Do you live there? Do you know what life is like there? I bet you don't! And I bet you've never been to a KKK rally. Well guess what, I live here. I've been there. I was not on the side of the fence screaming hateful words, I wasn't even in the close vicinity to the rally. Yet, them being there affected me in my own home. How? Well, the fucking cops were out like bee's on honey. They were looking for any reason to stop a white kid on the street who they thought might be a part of it. I'm not Jewish, I'm Catholic. I don't like hate and I don't like prejudice. But I'm human and I detest the KKK. I abhor anyone who thinks that slandouring another race is ok. I abhor anyone that thinks they can get away with bending the rulebook because they find a gray area. The Rainbow Coalition....shit, that's the biggest crock of shit I have yet to see! Jesse Jackson, a self righteous jack ass has half the city of Chicago praising his name. Despite him being a self proclaimed adulterer. Breaking one of the Ten Commandments and breaking it with the worst one, adultery! Who would still follow that filth? He thinks he can bring peace to the world?! Puuhlease, someone knock some sense into that moron. Nobody in power wants him anywhere near a peace keeping summit.

Aww hell, I'm done with this little rant. Put up or shut up, is what I say.

~p~
 
who is jesus' child? who's christian? i do know jesus was jewish(born to a jewish mother in a jewish country) but i was unaware of him having children. other than that probing question good points made unowho.
 
uNOwho said:


He wasn't jewish dumbfuck, He was Christian...His Father was Christ, therefore Christianity became a religion.


Click to expand...

How to answer this? Jesus was most certainly a Jew. He was from the tribe of Judah, one of the original 12, and the House of David.

I am truly bewildered by your ignorance of the roots of Chrtistianity. I would love to discuss the role of the Roman Empire in early Christianity...but not with you. Wow!




I'm not Jewish, I'm Catholic
Click to expand...

And a well-informed one, too. You're really a credit to the rest of us.

Have a nice night,

Matt


PS: The 12 Apostles: all Jews.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Richardbrown
Napsgear : 5 Exercises That Have Stood the Test of Time
Replies
15
Views
3K
Tazz
Tazz
javaguru
War, Peace and the State
Replies
7
Views
3K
javaguru
javaguru
hanselthecaretaker
Interesting piece: How to prevent the "End of America"
Replies
6
Views
2K
-SD-
-SD-
javaguru
War Is a Racket
Replies
30
Views
4K
Strongbow
Strongbow
javaguru
The Riddle of the Gun
Replies
19
Views
4K
wootoom
wootoom
Top Bottom