Register :: Log in :: Profile :: Mail   


ACLU
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    LVC Home // Conservative Corner
Author Message
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 10:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
jasonkenna wrote:

Have you not been listing to me?


Have you not been reading my responses?
Back to top
jasonkenna
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 16 Mar 2007
Posts: 64
Location: New York City

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 10:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
jasonkenna wrote:

Have you not been listing to me?


Have you not been reading my responses?


Yes, but that still doesnt justify why The ACLU supports NAMBLA or why they should be around. I can block out The ACLU, but having NAMBLA around is damaging our country and our children and you know it.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
jasonkenna wrote:

Yes, but that still doesnt justify why The ACLU supports NAMBLA


The ACLU defend's NAMBLA's rights, like free speech; it does not support the organization or what ir represents.

Quote:

or why they should be around.


It's not that they should be around, but that we shouldn't force them to not be around.

Just because we disapprove of something does not mean that it's okay for us to destroy it.

Quote:

having NAMBLA around is damaging our country and our children


How so?
Back to top
shankarsingam
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 09 Mar 2007
Posts: 122

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Jason, why did the ACLU defend Rush Limbaugh even though Rush Limbaugh condemns the ACLU every chance he gets?
Just ask yourself, why would an organization defend somebody that hates them.
Back to top
jasonkenna
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 16 Mar 2007
Posts: 64
Location: New York City

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 11:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
jasonkenna wrote:

Yes, but that still doesnt justify why The ACLU supports NAMBLA


The ACLU defend's NAMBLA's rights, like free speech; it does not support the organization or what ir represents.

Quote:

or why they should be around.


It's not that they should be around, but that we shouldn't force them to not be around.

Just because we disapprove of something does not mean that it's okay for us to destroy it.

Quote:

having NAMBLA around is damaging our country and our children


How so?


What The FUCK!!! Why would you say that? NAMBLA supports raping children by telling people how to get away with raping children, and how to talk your way out of it if you get caught. What do you support child rape?
Back to top
jasonkenna
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 16 Mar 2007
Posts: 64
Location: New York City

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 11:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
shankarsingam wrote:
Jason, why did the ACLU defend Rush Limbaugh even though Rush Limbaugh condemns the ACLU every chance he gets?
Just ask yourself, why would an organization defend somebody that hates them.


When did they support him?
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 11:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
jasonkenna wrote:

When did they support him?


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,108140,00.html

Talk radio host Rush Limbaugh (search) probably never expected the American Civil Liberties Union to become one of his staunch supporters.

But the privacy rights group was on his side Monday when its Florida branch filed a "friend-of-court" motion on behalf of Limbaugh arguing state officials were wrong in seizing his medical records for their drug probe.
Back to top
jasonkenna
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 16 Mar 2007
Posts: 64
Location: New York City

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
jasonkenna wrote:

When did they support him?


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,108140,00.html

Talk radio host Rush Limbaugh (search) probably never expected the American Civil Liberties Union to become one of his staunch supporters.

But the privacy rights group was on his side Monday when its Florida branch filed a "friend-of-court" motion on behalf of Limbaugh arguing state officials were wrong in seizing his medical records for their drug probe.


Thanks for that. Fox News, Fair and Balenced.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 11:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
jasonkenna wrote:

What The FUCK!!! Why would you say that? NAMBLA supports raping children by telling people how to get away with raping children, and how to talk your way out of it if you get caught. What do you support child rape?


You said:
having NAMBLA around is damaging our country and our children

However, as you are probably aware, pamphlets and the written word can not assault children. Only people can do that.

There's a very important difference between talking about something, and doing something.

Getting rid of NAMBLA wouldn't reduce the number of pedophiles, nor would it reduce the number of pedophiles who talk about their activities or engage in their activities. Getting rid of NAMBLA would just make them do it more secretly.
Back to top
jasonkenna
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 16 Mar 2007
Posts: 64
Location: New York City

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 11:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
jasonkenna wrote:

What The FUCK!!! Why would you say that? NAMBLA supports raping children by telling people how to get away with raping children, and how to talk your way out of it if you get caught. What do you support child rape?


You said:
having NAMBLA around is damaging our country and our children

However, as you are probably aware, pamphlets and the written word can not assault children. Only people can do that.

There's a very important difference between talking about something, and doing something.

Getting rid of NAMBLA wouldn't reduce the number of pedophiles, nor would it reduce the number of pedophiles who talk about their activities or engage in their activities. Getting rid of NAMBLA would just make them do it more secretly.


Well, does that mean that NAMBLA can still exist?
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 11:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Pretty much, yeah.

That is, unless you don't place high value personal liberties. I think that a person should be able to do as they please, providing it doesn't harm others.

So, while i find many things distasteful, i do not wish to stop them from happening.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 12:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
jasonkenna wrote:

Thanks for that. Fox News, Fair and Balenced.


*shrug*

It was the first result for the google search: "ACLU supports rush limbaugh"
Back to top
jasonkenna
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 16 Mar 2007
Posts: 64
Location: New York City

PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 12:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
Pretty much, yeah.

That is, unless you don't place high value personal liberties. I think that a person should be able to do as they please, providing it doesn't harm others.

So, while i find many things distasteful, i do not wish to stop them from happening.


But thats all NAMBLA is, talking about harming children, doesnt mean that everyone is gonna act on it, but still they talk about harming children. I dont know if you have children, but if you do, i think you would agree with me that people who talk about raping children is cruel and immoral.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 12:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
jasonkenna wrote:

But thats all NAMBLA is, talking about harming children, doesnt mean that everyone is gonna act on it, but still they talk about harming children.


Well, like i said: it's distasteful, but it doesn't harm anyone, so there's no adequate reason to stop them from doing it.

Quote:

I dont know if you have children, but if you do, i think you would agree with me that people who talk about raping children is cruel and immoral.


No, i wouldn't agree with that.

I would say that discussing such things is vulgar, and that i have no desire to participate in it, but i cannot say that it's morally wrong - again, because it doesn't actually harm people.

It's not altogether different from violence in movies. The difference is, wholesale slaughter is accepted, although not necessarily approved of, in our culture, and we can all identify with the need to survive and the desire to kill.

On the other hand, we're (most americans) extraodinarily squeemish about sex, and we're fanatic about the protection of children (not necessarily a bad thing, either). That leads to a much stronger emotional reaction to the concept of child rape than to any other ideas about human destruction and degredation.

But ultimately, it's no different.
Back to top
Lester
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 3796

PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 2:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
jasonkenna wrote:
exton wrote:
jasonkenna wrote:

Saddam had bombs that could have destroyed America. Both Republicans and Democrats said that. Are you forgeting the sattelite images of Iraq shoveling missles in and out of the country?


*sigh*

Saddam had no WMD's. None. That was established long ago.


Then what were those sattelite images of??


Giant twinkies.
Back to top
Post new topic   Reply to topic    LVC Home // Conservative Corner All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 8 of 9

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Add to My Yahoo!

Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites