3 ms·

“Stopping the circulation of this book and these ideas is 100% a hill I will die on.” That’s Chase Strangio, part of ACLU leadership, fighting to ban a book sh

“Stopping the circulation of this book and these ideas is 100% a hill I will die on.” That’s Chase Strangio, part of ACLU leadership, fighting to ban a book she doesn’t like: https://www.iwf.org/2020/11/16/some-in-aclu-have-new-cause-book-banning/ https://www.iwf.org/2020/11/16/some-in-aclu-have-new-cause-b... You might object that the ACLU also fights against book bans, and that Strangio wasn’t necessarily expressing official ACLU policy, and those would be good points. But the ACLU tolerates this kind of rhetoric and keeps this individual in a prominent position, representing the organization. There are other examples. Even if you don’t like the book in question, surely the old ACLU, the one I used to support, would have no truck with book banning and book banners.

tablespoon 4y ago
> “Stopping the circulation of this book and these ideas is 100% a hill I will die on.” > That’s Chase Strangio, part of ACLU leadership, fighting to ban a book she doesn’t like: https://www.iwf.org/2020/11/16/some-in-aclu-have-new-cause-book-banning/ https://www.iwf.org/2020/11/16/some-in-aclu-have-new-cause-b... It's worth noting here that the ACLU seems to have literally bought nearly all the online ad space on the New York Times over the past several weeks (at least), to pronounce in 72pt bold letters that you should support them to fight "book bans."
fnordpiglet 4y ago
Imagine the ACLU and tolerating people expressing opinions they disagree with.