| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| victory for santa. aclu gets coal. |
| 2005-07-09 |
| BOSTON-A panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit ruled unanimously Wednesday that a woman represented by the ACLU who sued the City of Cranston, R.I., after being offended by Christmas displays at City Hall had no standing to bring her claim. "This is the court's message: you can't sue just because you're an offended observer," said ADF Chief Counsel Benjamin Bull. "The appeals court today rejected what has been a longstanding ACLU tactic-filing lawsuits simply for the reason that somebody claims to be offended. The Christmas displays in Cranston were perfectly constitutional, just as the district court ruled." |
| Posted by:∑Ü©Ќ₣Ωяδ∞ |
| #25 thank god for Croluter Jolumble6769 this blog was starting to look like a mutual masturbation society ...you idiots wouldn't hesitate to calll on the ACLU when you felt your rights were being trampled on |
| Posted by: tsotsi 2005-07-09 19:56 |
| #24 gotter look it siteways anjie. :) |
| Posted by: muck4doo 2005-07-09 23:57 |
| #23 This Bill of Rights is what the ACLU protecting. They're protecting you, cowboy, like it or not. The problem is not the ACLU defending the Bill of Rights. The problem is who, and on what part of the political spectrum, the ACLU decides to defend the Bill of Rights for. For example: the ACLU opposed The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) in 1970 as being "one of the most potent, and potentially abusive, weapons for silencing dissent." However the ACLU's opposition became neglibile, mostly because the 'pro-choice' groups advocated that RICO was an ideal weapon to use in the abortion wars. The ACLU claims it is non-partisan and non-politcal. Citing a defense of a group of Nazis for their right to march in Skokie, Illionis some 20-odd years ago does not exactly create a track record. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2005-07-09 20:15 |
| #22 Badanov. Make a new post on your freefirezone site; stavka 'isn't monitored'. |
| Posted by: Whiskey Mike 2005-07-09 20:06 |
| #21 this blog was starting to look like a mutual masturbation society I hope that's not an offer. Still haven't gotten a hang of that punctuation thing, have you? |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2005-07-09 20:04 |
| #20 Croleter, you are exactly 180 degrees off when you say the Constitution ennumerated what the Govt. could do.. What is does is ennumerate what the government can NOT do. Get a quarter, buy a clue and share it with tsotsi. Better yet, do your own fisking. Prove your point, dude. I'll be watching you! |
| Posted by: Brett 2005-07-09 20:02 |
| #19 Troll |
| Posted by: Neutron Tom 2005-07-09 19:58 |
| #18 The ACLU was founded by communinists to defend them and further their goals, end of story. Anyone who isn't privy to this fact by now and thinks otherwise is an assclown and tool. |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet 0’ Doom 2005-07-09 18:36 |
| #17 Forget what the ACLU stands for. What do those characters in the name stand for? Looks like Muckfordoo, but that's a sigma, so it's Suckfordoo. What that's about, I don't wanna know. Here's a capital mu for you, mucky: M |
| Posted by: Angie Schultz 2005-07-09 18:33 |
| #16 Frank you forgot... the right of NAMBLA to recruit little children for adult pleasure. |
| Posted by: Thrique Hupavigum9833 2005-07-09 17:36 |
| #15 the ACLU stands for separation from religion, abortion on demand to preteens without parental notification, release of enemy combatants, no individual rights to own arms, no free speech for partisan opponents of their leftist agenda, I could go on.... |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-07-09 17:26 |
| #14 "What do you folks think the ACLU stands for?" Evidently, about all it stands for anymore is keeping people from putting up Christmas displays. Pretty fucking sad, for an outfit which, long ago, actually was dedicated to protecting the First Ten Amendments to the United States Constitution. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2005-07-09 17:06 |
| #13 Lotta weird people near the bike rack today. |
| Posted by: Calvin 2005-07-09 17:03 |
| #12 What do you folks think the ACLU stands for? Misha sez it stands for American Communist Litigation Unit. It stands for you, fellers. Well, pardon me while I disavow what they are doing. We can still do that, right? It's dedicated to protected the First Ten Amendments to the United States Constitution. It's goal is to subvert the Constitution by reading garbage into it that was never there to begin with. Y'all remember why the framers amended the Constitution, don't you. For those who get their history from Rush Limbaugh, the Constitution ennumerated what the Govt. could do. It also enumerates what the government should not do, which should be much, much more than it is allowed to do. The ACLU believes the obverse: that social problems can be forced onto the electorate by the judiciary, a tyranny of a minority. To prevent the possibility of tyrany of the majority, the framers made a list of things the Govt. couldn't do and called the list the "Bill of Rights." That may have been an interpretation of it so many years ago, but what it actually means that a government cannot be the bad guy just because the majority deems it so. The interpretation of that by the ACLU is the government is the good guy ( which was never the intention of the Framers ) and that it's policies can be twisted to the reverse of a tyranny of the majority into a tyranny of a moniority, AKA Socialism,by using the judiciary. This Bill of Rights is what the ACLU protecting. The ACLU uses the Bill of Rights as it own personal jerkoff rag. They're protecting you, cowboy, like it or not. Then get them to back off, will ya, pilgrim? Because I don't like paying for protection. |
| Posted by: badanov 2005-07-09 16:52 |
| #11 What do you folks think the ACLU stands for? It stands for you, fellers. It's dedicated to protected the First Ten Amendments to the United States Constitution. Bullshit. The ACLU has a policy of not doing squat in defense of the 2nd Amendment. They also don't seem to have much care for the 10th, or for what the 1st REALLY says. The ACLU picks and chooses its fights based on which cases do the best job of undermining American culture and liberties. Does anyone think the ACLU would come to the defense of bloggers against campaign finance "reforms"? And let's not even get into the ACLU coming to the defense of terrorists. Talk about "not getting the concept"! |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2005-07-09 16:46 |
| #10 Croutchless, Your idea of tryannical majority is when your bosses tell you it's your turn to clean the Slurpee machine.. A-holes like you and the ACLU are like jock itch, mildly irritating. |
| Posted by: Sheikh Djabouti 2005-07-09 16:41 |
| #9 The ACLU is a pain-in-the-ass, suit-happy magnet for liberals, communists, athiests, and other discontents. This article is a case in point. My rights are just fine without them. |
| Posted by: Neutron Tom 2005-07-09 16:29 |
| #8 What do you folks think the ACLU stands for? It stands for you, fellers. It's dedicated to protected the First Ten Amendments to the United States Constitution. Y'all remember why the framers amended the Constitution, don't you. For those who get their history from Rush Limbaugh, the Constitution ennumerated what the Govt. could do. To prevent the possibility of tyrany of the majority, the framers made a list of things the Govt. couldn't do and called the list the "Bill of Rights." This Bill of Rights is what the ACLU protecting. They're protecting you, cowboy, like it or not. |
| Posted by: Croluter Jolumble6769 2005-07-09 16:22 |
| #7 It's Greek to me. |
| Posted by: Neutron Tom 2005-07-09 16:09 |
| #6 would the results have been different in the 9th circuit?? just wondering.... |
| Posted by: macofromoc 2005-07-09 15:44 |
| #5 Liberals, in a liberal socialist eutopia, making a ruling that makes sense?!?! Isn't that a sign of the apocolipse? |
| Posted by: mmurray821 2005-07-09 14:10 |
| #4 Wow, first Neutron Tom now Mucki, is this a trend? |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-07-09 11:57 |
| #3 Try to imagine what this country would look like if the ACLU won every case they brought. Second thought, no, don't do that because we wouldnt even be here. They would have taken the country away from us and given it to the cambodians to appoligize for us not stopping Pol Pot or something. |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2005-07-09 09:33 |
| #2 When I was stationed in Korea and Japan, the end of the year featured many displays of Old Santa Clause by the local population, particularly in the stores. Although, not christian nations, they seem to have picked up on the full commerical impact of the American version of year end celebrations. Its not religious. And if the name Santa is bothering you, then you should sue the cities of San Diego, San Antonio, etc while you're at it. Its time these ACLU cretins be hammered for their absolute intolerance of their fellow citizens. There seems to be a pattern of conspiracy to violate the civil rights of large numbers of people here. |
| Posted by: Ulamp Chosing2348 2005-07-09 09:12 |
| #1 Those judges are gonna lose their Hillary Clinton Liberal Magic decoder rings for this. |
| Posted by: badanov 2005-07-09 01:46 |