Author
|
Topic: ACLU, church-state group plan lawsuit over 'intelligent design' mandate
|
Snuckles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2764
|
posted 13 December 2004 06:28 PM
quote: HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — The state American Civil Liberties Union plans to file a federal lawsuit Tuesday against a school district that is requiring students to learn about alternatives to the theory of evolution.The ACLU said its lawsuit will be the first in the nation to challenge whether public schools should teach "intelligent design," which holds that the universe is so complex that it must have been created by some higher power. The Dover Area School District was believed to be the first in the nation to mandate intelligent design when it voted 6-3 in favor of including the concept in the science curriculum on Oct. 18.
Read it here.
From: Hell | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Piatkowski
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1299
|
posted 15 December 2004 03:43 PM
quote: Originally posted by Mr. Magoo: Yes, GO ACLU! (and also, look into a little fire insurance )
This is a serious subject, but Magoo's post reminded me of this... ACLU Defends Neo-Nazi Group's Right to Burn Down Its Headquarters quote: NEW YORK--At a press conference Monday, American Civil Liberties Union officials announced that the organization will go to court to defend a neo-Nazi group's right to burn down ACLU headquarters. ACLU president Nadine Strossen told reporters that her organization intends to "vigorously and passionately defend" the Georgia chapter of the American Nazi Party's First Amendment right to freely express its hatred of the ACLU by setting its New York office ablaze on Nov. 25. "I am reminded of the words of Voltaire: 'I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,'" Strossen said. "While the ACLU vehemently disagrees with the idea of Nazis torching this building, the principle of freedom of expression must be supported in all cases. If we take away these Nazis' right to burn down our headquarters, we take away everyone's right to burn down our headquarters." Buddy Carver, president of the Georgia chapter of the American Nazi Party, praised the ACLU for taking on his case. "I would like to thank Ms. Strossen and all the other nigger-loving bleeding-heart liberals at the 'ACL-Jew' for defending my constitutional right to express my loathing of them with hundred-foot-high flames," said Carver, sporting a tan uniform and swastika arm band. "We must finish the job Hitler was unable to." ACLU associate director Mel Rosenblatt agreed. "The real danger here is not the American Nazi Party," he said. "The real danger here is what would happen to the rest of us if the Buddy Carvers of this world were not allowed to commit arson against nigger-loving, bleeding-heart-liberal Jew attorneys." Making the case all the more controversial is the neo-Nazis' demand that the ACLU's entire 315-person staff be in the building at the time of the blaze. Strongly opposing the request are New York City police commissioner William Bratton, fire chief Ed Holm and mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who said that all 315 will die if trapped in the 47-story building during the blaze. ACLU attorneys responded that they will request a federal appeals hearing if the City of New York attempts to stop them and their fellow ACLU employees from perishing in the Nov. 25 blaze. "Yes, my loving wife Linda and three wonderful children, Ben, Robby and Stephanie, will be devastated when I am killed next month," ACLU attorney Harvey Gross said. "But I recognize that, in a very real sense, it would be a victory for Mr. Carver and his fellow hatemongers if I did not burn to death, because their terrible message of bigotry and intolerance would be all the more effective if suppressed."
From: Kitchener-Waterloo | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
johnpauljones
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7554
|
posted 15 December 2004 03:50 PM
Scott thank you for that link and article. I think that story illustrates the true difference between real facists and real defenders of freedom, equality and rights. The real defenders like the ACLU will defend anyone whose rights have been infringed upon even if they personally find them repugnant and disgusting. Where as a real facist - not us just using the word to describe an enemy - but a real one wants to take away the very right that allows him to commit his terrible acts. With all this babble talk lately about the state of our debates a story like this reminds me. That it is ok to disagree with someone and to be totally appaled at another persons thinking. But you know what, thank god we live in a society where even the biggest asses have the right to voice their opinions. And after that opinion has been voiced the rest of us can shoot it down. Ain't democracy grand.
From: City of Toronto | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
johnpauljones
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7554
|
posted 15 December 2004 04:15 PM
Scott actually I am aware that the onion is a satiracal publication. But you know what. The ACLU has represented those whose actions are terrible but fall under the rights of the first ammendment. So i took the article to be a satiracal approach to something that is actually done.
Edited to add: The aclu has represented the right for cross burnings in some cities while at the same time representing the victims of the hatred spewed by a cross burning [ 15 December 2004: Message edited by: johnpauljones ]
From: City of Toronto | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
voice of the damned
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6943
|
posted 15 December 2004 11:21 PM
quote: The aclu has represented the right for cross burnings in some cities while at the same time representing the victims of the hatred spewed by a cross burning
The ACLU has also defended the rights of anti-choice protestors to march down a reidential street in front of a doctor's home, while at the same time untiringly defedning Roe V. Wade. I remember mentioning that to a relative of mine who is very much anti-choice and had once picketted the Morgantaler clinic. She expressed the view that the American anti-choicers had no right to march in front of someone's house. And when the case got to the US Supreme Court, as I recall it was mostly pro-choice judges who sided with the anti-choicers, since they tend to be the most liberal on "free speech" questions.
From: Asia | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
robertal
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7963
|
posted 20 January 2005 06:26 PM
I don't know how the ACLU is going to hand this one, but a very big spanner has been thrown into the works of the ID vs Evolution debate, and at both sides as well! I quote from a posting to one of my other discussion groups:"A new scriptural synthesis and interpretation, [authorship unknown] entitled The Final Freedoms, which includes material from the OT/NT, Apocrypha, The Dead Sea Scrolls and The Nag Hammadi Library, to describe and teach the first wholly new Christian moral and spiritual paradigm for two thousand years is on the Net." "And this is the first ever religious teaching, a gospel able to demonstrate by an act of faith, its own efficacy! That is to say, the first living and testable proof of the living God has been published and is circulating on the Web! However incredulous this may sound, if this teaching is confirmed, and there appear to be many who are attempting to do so, it can only be described as an intellectual and religious revolution in the making! " The site where I found my copy of the manuscript [a 1.3mb pdf download] at is at www.energon.uklinux.net No joke and no hoax Cheers: robertal
From: London England | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|