Wonder where the ACLU stands on this IRS deal ?

[Maddhattter]

I'm seeing cases about attacking exercises OF religion

None of the cases in that link are doing that.

but not attacking those who are claiming an unconstitutional freedom FROM religion.

No one claims an unconstitutional freedom from religion, nor have you provided any demonstration that the ACLU fights for such.

Perhaps you can help Racr find a few.

I'd still like to know when they went after the Black Panthers on voter intimidation

So, the fact that they do not have the resources to cover every case you feel is important, means they don't cover any? That's what you seem to be insinuating here.

I've not seen anyone claim that the ACLU went after the Black Panthers for anything. So, your request for a time when they did is nothing more than a red herring.

[Broncojohnny]

So, they choose not to fight on gun rights, so that means they don't fight for conservatives. Well hell, here I was thinking that there were more stances on the conservative side than being for the second amendment. Silly me.

Yes, silly you. There is nothing more important than the second amendment. I guess you aren't as smart as you think you are.

[BP]

They got their certification as a 501c

[racrguy]

Yes, silly you. There is nothing more important than the second amendment. I guess you aren't as smart as you think you are.

[46Tbird]

I wonder if you guys realize the ACLU fights for both sides.

In theory, yes they do. In actual practice, no they don't.

I google'd it to see if my instincts were correct and it appears they were.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_court_cases_involving_the_American_Civil_Liberties_Union

Everyone is going to see what they want to see, but that sure looks like a bunch of Nambla, partial-birth abortion, Boy Scouts, and Muslim enemy combatant cases to me. There are ~150 cases listed here, so you might be able to find a few instances where a conservative point was fought for. But the basic, undeniable ACLU mission is to defend 'progressive' rights and fight 'conservative' rights.

[Forever_frost]

He is absolutely right. There is nothing more important than that right as it holds the enforcement power for all the others.

[racrguy]

In theory, yes they do. In actual practice, no they don't.

I google'd it to see if my instincts were correct and it appears they were.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_court_cases_involving_the_American_Civil_Liberties_Union

Everyone is going to see what they want to see, but that sure looks like a bunch of Nambla, partial-birth abortion, Boy Scouts, and Muslim enemy combatant cases to me. There are ~150 cases listed here, so you might be able to find a few instances where a conservative point was fought for. But the basic, undeniable ACLU mission is to defend 'progressive' rights and fight 'conservative' rights.

Because your wikipedia list is exhaustive, yet mentions nothing of the following case:

http://puyallup.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/should-muslim-inmates-at-pierce-county-jail-receive-r857742ec98

I'm looking for the case docket.

Edit: http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/...11765/210488/4

He is absolutely right. There is nothing more important than that right as it holds the enforcement power for all the others.

He's trying to do the same thing you're trying to do: "They don't argue for X, so they don't argue for conservatives at all."

[Maddhattter]

In theory, yes they do. In actual practice, no they don't.

They don't if conservative issues don't include the limitation of governmental powers over individual choices, anti-discrimination, and the enforcement of the constitution and other legal jurisprudence.

I google'd it to see if my instincts were correct and it appears they were.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...iberties_Union

As has already been pointed out, this is by no means an exhaustive list. However, starting at the top I got through about 65 of the cases listed and found no indication that the "ACLU mission is to defend 'progressive' rights and fight 'conservative' rights".

In fact, a great many of them were protecting the rights of religion to act in accordance with the constitution and their beliefs. Such as fighting bans on proselytization and distributing religious documentation.

Ultimately, I had to start at the bottom to find that you're examples of the majority of cases are a few cherry picked cases that you didn't bother to do any research on before declaring who the ACLU was supporting and for what reasons.

Everyone is going to see what they want to see,

If this is the case, then everyone is not looking at the facts.

but that sure looks like a bunch of Nambla,

They protected an organization from a wrongful death accusation that was based on nothing more than circumstantial evidence(pamphlets found in the car). This is not in line with conservative issues? Or, which is the likely of the two, is this only a problem because the organization is NAMBLA?

partial-birth abortion,

Whether or not congress has the right to determine what medical procedures are available, independent of what a medical professional feels is warranted/required, is not in line with conservative issues? Again, it was my understanding that conservative issues were about limiting government intervention in private affairs?

Boy Scouts, and

You really should learn what amicus curiae is. The ACLU helped both sides of this case on different points.

Muslim enemy combatant cases to me.

If you're referring to Qassim v. Bush, the appeal for due process was made after they were found to be no longer enemy combatants by the Combatant Status Review Tribunal. Is due process in the execution of our laws not a conservative issue?

There are ~150 cases listed here, so you might be able to find a few instances where a conservative point was fought for.

The only way to limit it to a few instances is to ignore the facts.

But the basic, undeniable ACLU mission is to defend 'progressive' rights and fight 'conservative' rights.

This is not undeniable, as you've not supported the claim by any means.

[46Tbird]

Geez, thanks for breaking my post down into three-word snippets so I'd have 20 things to respond to.

I never claimed that was an exhaustive list of cases; it is just a wikipedia entry that was convenient, concise, and made my point. Anyone supporting the ACLU can update the entry to include anecdotes of cases that show a broader scope.

Don't be mad that I took from the most current cases in the examples listed. They are the most relevant because they show the current agenda of the ACLU. Yes, in the past they fought for basic human and American rights and for that we owe them a debt of gratitude. These days they consistently push boundaries on 'progressive' fronts.

[racrguy]

Geez, thanks for breaking my post down into three-word snippets so I'd have 20 things to respond to.

I never claimed that was an exhaustive list of cases; it is just a wikipedia entry that was convenient, concise, and made my point. Anyone supporting the ACLU can update the entry to include anecdotes of cases that show a broader scope.

Don't be mad that I took from the most current cases in the examples listed. They are the most relevant because they show the current agenda of the ACLU. Yes, in the past they fought for basic human and American rights and for that we owe them a debt of gratitude. These days they consistently push boundaries on 'progressive' fronts.

I hate to be a stickler for details, but the case I posted earlier in response to you was filed in 2006, is that not recent enough?

[46Tbird]

I hate to be a stickler for details, but the case I posted earlier in response to you was filed in 2006, is that not recent enough?

Yes, that is recent enough. So it appears the ACLU pushes for freedom of religious expression in jails, yet consistenly fights it in schools and courthouses. I see!

http://www.aclu.org/content/highlights-ten-commandments-litigation

[Maddhattter]

Geez, thanks for breaking my post down into three-word snippets so I'd have 20 things to respond to.

No problem. It's the best way to discuss a point and ensuring that there is no confusion over which point is being addressed.

It also helps to ensure that I've addressed all of your points.

I never claimed that was an exhaustive list of cases; it is just a wikipedia entry that was convenient, concise, and made my point. Anyone supporting the ACLU can update the entry to include anecdotes of cases that show a broader scope.

If it's not a exhaustive list, and there's no provided means of verifying selection criteria, then it can't be used as a valid source for anything.

Also, no anecdotes were given in that entire list.

Don't be mad that I took from the most current cases in the examples listed. They are the most relevant because they show the current agenda of the ACLU.

Except you didn't. You cherry picked the cases you thought supported your claims, and even then didn't support the case you're trying to make.

Yes, in the past they fought for basic human and American rights and for that we owe them a debt of gratitude. These days they consistently push boundaries on 'progressive' fronts.

Except the evidence still doesn't support these claims.

Yes, that is recent enough. So it appears the ACLU pushes for freedom of religious expression in jails, yet consistenly fights it in schools and courthouses. I see!

http://www.aclu.org/content/highligh...nts-litigation

So, upholding the constitution isn't a conservative issue now either? What exactly do you think are conservative issues?

[Forever_frost]

If they were upholding the constitution, then they would be fighting for freedom OF religion, not from it. Freedom from religion is not mentioned once in the constitution nor is it a power of the federal government or (since we go for incorporation) the states. Congress can make no law exalting one religion over another, they cannot write laws preventing religion from being exercised which is what the ACLU has been working towards.

That is, unless you're in prison, then you can have all the faith you want, just not in school, courts, community meetings...

[racrguy]

If they were upholding the constitution, then they would be fighting for freedom OF religion, not from it. Freedom from religion is not mentioned once in the constitution nor is it a power of the federal government or (since we go for incorporation) the states. Congress can make no law exalting one religion over another, they cannot write laws preventing religion from being exercised which is what the ACLU has been working towards.

That is, unless you're in prison, then you can have all the faith you want, just not in school, courts, community meetings...

[Maddhattter]

If they were upholding the constitution, then they would be fighting for freedom OF religion, not from it. Freedom from religion is not mentioned once in the constitution nor is it a power of the federal government or (since we go for incorporation) the states. Congress can make no law exalting one religion over another, they cannot write laws preventing religion from being exercised which is what the ACLU has been working towards.

Can you name one example of the ACLU working to prevent religions from being exercised? No one else has been able to.

I'll also restate that the list provided by 46Tbird give quite a few cases in which the ACLU has worked to protect people's rights to exercise their religion and none where they were working to prevent it. At least, none of the ones I saw.

That is, unless you're in prison, then you can have all the faith you want, just not in school, courts, community meetings...

Again, there is no case that I'm aware of that has ever challenged the people's right to have faith. Can you provide one?

EDIT:
Here's straight from the ACLU's website a non-comprehensive list of the ACLU working to protect the exercising of religion in public schools alone:

The ACLU of Virginia (2011) wrote a letter on behalf of a group of Christian athletes in Floyd County High School after the school removed copies of the Ten Commandments the athletes had displayed on the outside of their personal lockers.

https://acluva.org/7257/aclu-tells-floyd-county-high-school-to-allow-students-to-post-ten-commandments-on-lockers/

The ACLU of Texas (2011) opposed a school district’s policy prohibiting students from visibly wearing rosaries, crosses, and other articles of faith.

http://www.aclutx.org/2011/11/18/aclu-of-texas-demands-brownsville-isd-disclose-policies-banning-rosaries-and-crosses-at-school/

The ACLU of Nebraska (2011) objected to a public school district’s policy barring students from wearing rosaries.

http://www.aclunebraska.org/index.php/religious-liberty/127-that-gang-of-nuns-looks-pretty-dangerous

The ACLU of Colorado (2010) opposed a public school’s policy that barred students from wearing crosses and rosaries in public view.

http://aclu-co.org/news/aclu-supports-students-right-of-religious-freedom

The ACLU of New Jersey (2010) submitted an amicus brief in support of a public school student’s right to express her religious beliefs about abortion by wearing an armband with the word “LIFE” on it.

http://www.aclu-nj.org/news/2010/03/24/aclu-nj-defends-anti-abortion-students-free-speech/

The ACLU of Alaska (2010) advised the Alaska Department of Education to respect the religious freedom of Russian Old Believer families by arranging alternate testing dates for the High School Graduation Qualifying Exam, which conflicts with Holy Week for Russian Old Believer students.

http://www.akclu.org/NewsEvents/High-School-Qualifying-Exam-Testing-10-02-17.pdf

The ACLU of Florida (2009) filed a lawsuit against the Alachua County School District because school officials prohibited students—in school and at football games—from wearing t-shirts bearing religious messages, including those that proclaimed the primacy of Christianity and stated that “Islam is of the devil,” even though there was no evidence that the t-shirts had caused a disruption to the educational process.

http://www.aclufl.org/news_events/?action=viewRelease&emailAlertID=3794

The ACLU of Virginia (2009) wrote a letter school to a public school in support of students’ right to wear t-shirts encouraging school-sponsored prayer.

http://www.aclu.org/religion-belief/aclu-tells-high-school-allow-students-protest-aclu-football-game

The ACLU and ACLU of Texas (2008) filed a lawsuit on behalf of a five-year-old Native American boy who was forced into in-school suspension for wearing long braids as an expression of his religious beliefs and cultural heritage.

http://www.aclu.org/religion-belief/arocha-et-al-v-needville-independent-school-district-complaint

The ACLU of Pennsylvania (2007) came to the defense of a second-grade student who, in response to a class assignment to write a story, submitted a story about Easter and redemption. After the teacher rejected the submission because of its religious content, the ACLU wrote a letter to the school on the student’s behalf..

The ACLU of New Jersey (2007) filed an amicus brief in support of an elementary school student who was prohibited from singing “Awesome God” in a voluntary after-school talent show for which students selected their own material.

http://www.aclu.org/religion/schools/25799prs20060605.html

The ACLU of Michigan filed a lawsuit in Wayne County Circuit Court against Old Redford Academy, a public charter school in Detroit, for suspending, and trying to expel, a ninth-grade student who wore his hair long in accordance with a verse in Leviticus.

http://www.aclumich.org/issues/religious-liberty/2007-10/1232

The ACLU of New Jersey (2007) filed a religious discrimination case on behalf of a Muslim student who had to choose between following his religious beliefs that forbid him from entering buildings with foreign religious symbols and attending his public high school graduation that was scheduled to be held in a church. The ACLU argued that the school’s decision unlawfully forced the student to choose between attending his graduation and violating his faith.

http://www.aclu-nj.org/news/schoolviolatesreligiousfre.htm

The ACLU of Louisiana (2005) successfully represented a Rastafarian mother and her fourth grade son, who was suspended for wearing dreadlocks in accordance with his faith.

http://www.laaclu.org/News/2005/Dec0705DreadlocksRapides.htm

The ACLU of Michigan (2004) represented a student whose yearbook entry, a Bible verse, was deleted because of its religious content.

http://www.aclu.org/studentsrights/expression/12845prs20040511.html

The Iowa Civil Liberties Union (2005) defended the religious expression rights of two teenage girls, who were threatened with punishment by school officials after seeking to wear, for religious reasons, anti-abortion t-shirts to school.

http://www.aclu.org/studentsrights/expression/12852prs20050429.html

The ACLU of Massachusetts (2003) filed an amicus brief in support of a group of students at Westfield High School who were suspended for distributing candy canes and a religious message in school.

http://www.aclu.org/studentsrights/expression/12828prs20030221.html

The Iowa Civil Liberties Union (2002) filed an amicus brief supporting a group of Christian students who sued Davenport Schools asserting their right to distribute religious literature during non-instructional time.

http://www.aclu.org/religion-belief/aclu-supports-right-iowa-students-distribute-christian-literature-school