4 ms·

They’ve also literally promoted banning books. The ACLU made its name defending the free speech rights of despicable parties on principle. Because, among other

They’ve also literally promoted banning books. The ACLU made its name defending the free speech rights of despicable parties on principle. Because, among other reasons, allowing exceptions to the protection of civil liberties terminally all-but-guarantees that such exceptions will be abused in unjust ways. But there is no longer any principle they stand on. Politically compromised and merely self-perpetuating for the cynical insiders willing to bend the machinery to their selfish ends. Entropy has taken the ACLU, and it’s just a cancer on the body politic now.

paulgb 4y ago
> They’ve also literally promoted banning books. Which ones? Was it the ACLU as an organization, or an employee of the ACLU?
- rhcom2 4y ago
  The ACLU wants to keep intelligent design out of schools [1]. ID is something the Supreme Court upheld as religious [2] 1. https://www.catholicleague.org/the-book-banning-aclu/ https://www.catholicleague.org/the-book-banning-aclu/ 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwards_v._Aguillard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwards_v._Aguillard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_Schoo... Fighting to stop censorship while also fighting to keep religious texts out of the public school system isn't contradictory to me. Also seems a little disingenuous when the religious right in the US does the vast majority of book banning.
  - paulgb 4y ago
    > Fighting to stop censorship while also fighting to keep religious texts out of the public school system isn't contradictory to me. Right, and I think the Catholic League’s framing is disingenuous. From the opinion[1], the ACLU wasn’t trying to ban the textbook, they were saying that teachers shouldn’t be compelled to issue a canned statement to their class which promotes a religious text as an alternative to their scientific curriculum. [1] https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/asset_upload_file577_23137.pdf https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/asse...

paulgb 4y ago

> They’ve also literally promoted banning books. Which ones? Was it the ACLU as an organization, or an employee of the ACLU?

rhcom2 4y ago
The ACLU wants to keep intelligent design out of schools [1]. ID is something the Supreme Court upheld as religious [2] 1. https://www.catholicleague.org/the-book-banning-aclu/ https://www.catholicleague.org/the-book-banning-aclu/ 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwards_v._Aguillard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwards_v._Aguillard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_Schoo... Fighting to stop censorship while also fighting to keep religious texts out of the public school system isn't contradictory to me. Also seems a little disingenuous when the religious right in the US does the vast majority of book banning.
- paulgb 4y ago
  > Fighting to stop censorship while also fighting to keep religious texts out of the public school system isn't contradictory to me. Right, and I think the Catholic League’s framing is disingenuous. From the opinion[1], the ACLU wasn’t trying to ban the textbook, they were saying that teachers shouldn’t be compelled to issue a canned statement to their class which promotes a religious text as an alternative to their scientific curriculum. [1] https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/asset_upload_file577_23137.pdf https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/asse...