Slashdot Mirror

"except for any case involving the Second Amendment,"

I invite you to check here for the ACLU's word on the second amendment.

Essentially, the position of the ACLU is as follows:

They DO believe that the initial intent of the second amendment was to protect citizens against an oppressive regime. Here's the problem: to defeat a modern US military, you would need bazookas, F-15s, and nuclear weapons. Obviously, virtually no one honestly believes that every citizen has a Constitutional right to own their own F-15s and nuclear weapons. Therefore, the original intent of the framers goes out the window.

Next, while bazookas and nuclear weapons would certainly be considered arms, most people agree that private citizens just ought not be allowed to own them. At that point, you've agreed that the right of citizens to own arms has limits. Therefore, the ACLU concludes that those limits ought be set by the Congress and the Supreme Court, as they currently are.

The ACLU isn't against the second amendment, nor does it ignore the second amendment. The ACLU simply believes that the Congress and the Supreme Court have handled the matter in a perfectly reasonable matter to date, and therefore sees no reason to get involved. Aside from that, the NRA is at least as powerful as the ACLU, so it quite honestly isn't something the ACLU needs to devote a whole lot of resources to, considering the fact that there are other organizations that deal with the issue. If you agree with everything else the ACLU does, or even just some of it, join up and earmark all donations for the cause you're supporting. Some very conservative people have joined the ACLU lately, because it's at the forefront of defending our Constitution.

If Muhammed Atta drank double-mocha latte's at Starbucks on a daily basis, and I order the same thing, does that make me a terrorist?

Do you shop at a grocery store that has higher prices than most but then gives you "savings" if you use their "rewards card?" That's a great scam. You aren't paying much (if any) less than I am at another store, and you're giving them customer data for free. They track your buying patterns and sell the info. Yes, it's unpopular as hell on /., but you've got to admit it's opt-in as hell.

Of course, not all the data gets sold. A lot of it gets given to Ashcroft. Things that he'd have a damn hard time getting a warrant to sieze are getting handed to him by companies that see your private information as an asset of theirs. Of course, it is- you opted in. Just hope that you don't like (or have company coming that likes) the same food Atta liked. Make sure you don't rent the same movies he saw, either. No, it won't make you a terrorist, but it will make Ashcroft suspect that you are one. We've got people in custody; citizens being held without being charged. Ashcroft hasn't even told us who most of them are. They don't have access to lawyers (I'm still trying to find a downside to that one). If you don't mind all that, then by all means, opt in. If it isn't your idea of what the Constitution says ought to be happening, or even if you're worried that a bad person might smoke the same brand of cigarettes that you do, then try to help.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center has a nice page listing ways the companies get (and how they profit from) your data with tips to protect yourself.

When my wife heard about this program, it inspired her to immediately sign both herself and me up as proverbial "card-carrying members of the ACLU." I highly recommend it to anyone else who is concerned but non-melodramatic.

Perhaps, then, you'd care to read the ( well hidden ) slashdot posting of Section-by-Section Analysis of PATRIOT II, or, if you don't want to discuss the issue, then merely read the actual article, and then tell me the constitution is being permitted to interfere with such things as Assumption of Authority by ( state/private ) corporations, that we commit when we're assuming our corporate importance is real, and heart-worth isn't...

Anything less then the revoking of Patriot Act I and unanimous support for blocking Patriot II (whose powers are outlined in the ACLU's Interested Persons Memo: Section-by-Section Analysis of Justice Department draft "Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003," also known as "PATROIT Act II")is (and should be by any self-respecting American) totally and irrevocablly unacceptable.

Of course this will most likely get modded down as troll (whatever) and offtopic (duh, this is directly relating to the article posted if you haven't noticed), but that's okay. I know I'm writing all my congressmen to denounce this peice of legislation. My freedom IS my security. I just wish the rest of the sheep in this country would get the fuck off their lazy asses and realize that.

I for one REFUSE to live in a Soviet or Nazi America, land of the oppressed.

Anything less then the revoking of Patriot Act I and unanimous support for blocking Patriot II (whose powers are outlined in the ACLU's Interested Persons Memo: Section-by-Section Analysis of Justice Department draft "Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003," also known as "PATROIT Act II")is (and should be by any self-respecting American) totally and irrevocablly unacceptable.

Of course this will most likely get modded down as troll (whatever) and offtopic (duh, this is directly relating to the article posted if you haven't noticed), but that's okay. I know I'm writing all my congressmen to denounce this peice of legislation. My freedom IS my security. I just wish the rest of the sheep in this country would get the fuck off their lazy asses and realize that.

I for one REFUSE to live in a Soviet or Nazi America, land of the oppressed.

Just wait until Patriot Act THE SEQUEL

Now is the time to stand up for your rights. Become a member:

www.aclu.org

Here is a quote from Echelon Watch's FAQ:

Q - If ECHELON is so powerful, why haven't I heard about it before?

The United States government has gone to extreme lengths to keep ECHELON a secret. To this day, the U.S. government refuses to admit that ECHELON even exists. We know it exists because both the governments of Australia (through its Defence Signals Directorate) and New Zealand have admitted to this fact. (10)

This "wall of silence" is beginning to erode. The first report on ECHELON was published in 1988. (11) In addition, besides the revelations from Australia, the Scientific and Technical Options Assessment program office (STOA) of the European Parliament commissioned two reports which describe ECHELON's activities. These reports unearthed a startling amount of evidence, which suggests that Echelon's powers may have been underestimated. The first report, entitled "An Appraisal of Technologies of Political Control," suggested that ECHELON primarily targeted civilians.

So, what exactly is this article about? What have we won?

For the still-skeptical people amoung us, here is a warning from the EU government to e-mail users, originally stated in it's original form here. You can also find an EU resolution on the matter here

If you are not of the faint of heart, you can see the highly detailed 200 page report into the system here [pdf doc]. This report was originally reported in the news mid September, 2001. Obviously due to other news items, it wasn't widely reported and the whole affair was convienently swept under the carpet.

Here is a quote from Echelon Watch's FAQ:

Q - If ECHELON is so powerful, why haven't I heard about it before?

The United States government has gone to extreme lengths to keep ECHELON a secret. To this day, the U.S. government refuses to admit that ECHELON even exists. We know it exists because both the governments of Australia (through its Defence Signals Directorate) and New Zealand have admitted to this fact. (10)

This "wall of silence" is beginning to erode. The first report on ECHELON was published in 1988. (11) In addition, besides the revelations from Australia, the Scientific and Technical Options Assessment program office (STOA) of the European Parliament commissioned two reports which describe ECHELON's activities. These reports unearthed a startling amount of evidence, which suggests that Echelon's powers may have been underestimated. The first report, entitled "An Appraisal of Technologies of Political Control," suggested that ECHELON primarily targeted civilians.

So, what exactly is this article about? What have we won?

For the still-skeptical people amoung us, here is a warning from the EU government to e-mail users, originally stated in it's original form here. You can also find an EU resolution on the matter here

If you are not of the faint of heart, you can see the highly detailed 200 page report into the system here [pdf doc]. This report was originally reported in the news mid September, 2001. Obviously due to other news items, it wasn't widely reported and the whole affair was convienently swept under the carpet.

Here is a quote from Echelon Watch's FAQ:

Q - If ECHELON is so powerful, why haven't I heard about it before?

The United States government has gone to extreme lengths to keep ECHELON a secret. To this day, the U.S. government refuses to admit that ECHELON even exists. We know it exists because both the governments of Australia (through its Defence Signals Directorate) and New Zealand have admitted to this fact. (10)

This "wall of silence" is beginning to erode. The first report on ECHELON was published in 1988. (11) In addition, besides the revelations from Australia, the Scientific and Technical Options Assessment program office (STOA) of the European Parliament commissioned two reports which describe ECHELON's activities. These reports unearthed a startling amount of evidence, which suggests that Echelon's powers may have been underestimated. The first report, entitled "An Appraisal of Technologies of Political Control," suggested that ECHELON primarily targeted civilians.

So, what exactly is this article about? What have we won?

For the still-skeptical people amoung us, here is a warning from the EU government to e-mail users, originally stated in it's original form here. You can also find an EU resolution on the matter here

If you are not of the faint of heart, you can see the highly detailed 200 page report into the system here [pdf doc]. This report was originally reported in the news mid September, 2001. Obviously due to other news items, it wasn't widely reported and the whole affair was convienently swept under the carpet.

but, to me, they have gotten too politically-oriented

Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.

"To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: your tactics only aid terrorists, for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America's enemies and pause to America's friends. They encourage people of good will to remain silent in the face of evil."

-- John Ashcroft, before Senate Judiciary Committee, December 6, 2001

It's remarkable how John Ashcroft is the karmic successor to Joseph McCarthy; we're in a modern-day Red Scare, but with a very sympathetic administration and a apathetic public. The potential for (further) permanent damage to Americans' civil liberties is very real and very frightening.

Am I exaggerating? Well, can you tell them apart?

FWIW, link to ACLU coverage and a Google News search.

You've heard the old line "first Hitler went after the Jews, and I was not a Jew, so I did not protest"...

If you're a citizen of an Arabic or Islamic country, report to the INS

The list goes on an on... Wake UP!

And such an effective political institution it is.

Oh, wait:

<sarcasm>And such an effective political institution it is.</sarcasm>

When, oh when, is the EFF going to get a DC office? A friend of mine called about volunteering. Neither of us had great sums of money, but we had time. Their response?

"Oh, we only accept local volunteer help."

"That's OK, we're in DC."

"Um, we only have an office in SF."

"???"

Helloooooo--the political capital of the U.S. is in Washington, DC, not Berkeley, CA. You don't even have to rent space in the District to be effective. The NRA has a massive complex in Fairfax, VA. So why, oh why, is the EFF only in SF? Do they think that Ashcroft is going to come to them to ask them what they think? Are they going to get videoconferences with congresscritters? Do they think the'll have any political influence without playing the political game? Not with all the more money they bring to the table.

I like the ideals of the EFF, I just find it to be a fairly lackluster effort. I'd give time and what little money I can spare to an effective organization, but at the moment, my charitable money is better given to the Institute for Justice (politically unpopular with Slashdotters, I know) and the ACLU.

It's not as if there are no successful models to follow, people.

"Donated $50 to the American Civil Liberties Union to become a "card-carrying" member. Received an FBI probe for aiding the terrorists."

I understand this is officially to become part of the ACLU membership package! Three cheers for the Fourth Amendment!

I've signed up... Have you?

...go to their websites, and search on the keyword "Hamidi". Ken Hamidi is a former Intel employee who claims to have a grievance against Intel. If he put up an "Intel-sucks" website, and Intel tried to shut him down, I'd be on his side. That's not what's happening.

Hamidi claims some "electronic pamphleteering right" to spew his grievances to Intel's current employees via Intel's email system. He sent 6 spams, between 8,000 to 35,000 employees each time before Intel got an injunction against him.

EFF supports him and the ACLU supports him.

OK, so one nutcase gets to harass a "bigcorp" that you don't like, so what. Now imagine every political, religious, etc, nutcase in the country claiming the *RIGHT* to spam everybody at your ISP with their "important message".

It's about consent not content. I don't care if someone is spamming porn, or religion to save my soul, or a "sale" to save a few bucks, or a political party to save my country. If the nutcases get a "right" to bombard you with their garbage, you can kiss email as we know it goodbye.

There's more than enough injustice in real life, and you're wasting your time whining about this?!?!

• Amnesty International
• Southern Poverty Law Center
• American Civil Liberties Union
• Oxfam International
• Doctors Without Borders
• Habitat for Humanity International

Yes, the Fed has us under such close watch that they renewed the visas of two of the now dead 9-11 attackers.

The only purpose of this is to kick money back to supporters of Bush and create jobs for political appointees.

Echelon has been violating our rights for a long time.

Puh-leeze. I suppose that the ACLU was also manipulated by some shadowy right-wing Dr. Evil into denouncing Clinton's FBI file scandal.

Point take on the Japanese. I think finding useful statistics (where there are no other social influences) is going to be extremely difficult which is why I'm quite suspicion of all stats on this issue.

Interesting opinion column, but refer to the ACLU's site which has some direct rulings on the subject rather than indirect and oblique references.

Of course, you can take the ACLU as neutral or not depending on what you think of them.

It's been almost completely concluded that 9/11 happened because of US Intelligence failures.

Yeah, an intelligence failure like this? Or this? Or this? Or this? As opposed to the US Gov planning to invade Afghanistan before 9-11, to get a nice fat oil pipeline in there, and thus pissing off Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia being the country that almost all the highjackers came from, and the country funding Al Q'aida (sp?), and... err... the country supplying a very large portion of the USA's oil needs.

This TIA thing is research into how to improve it and prevent another 9/11.

War is good for business; there's arms manufacturers to please. George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four has a good explanation, written by "Emannuel Goldstein"(sp?). It is also a nice handy tool to crush dissent. A simplistic example would be the way Ford in the UK filtered out, with the help of the government, "subversives" from job applicants, for fear of union activity. Now we all know how much the US Corporate Government loves worker's unions!

It has nothing to do with spying on anyone. And everything to do with spying on everyone, collectively. Googling for dissenters, if you will.

Try this: The disinfo quiz. And this: The ACLU Quiz.

The only intelligence failure in this world is that of the people happy to just sit on their lazy ignorant arses and be spoonfed the "news" by their governments and Big Corps, instead of taking a few minutes to find out what's really going on.

Sorry if I've hurt anyones delicate idealistic feelings, but it has to be said.

Ali

ACLU President Nadine Strossen has spoken about guns in the past, saying that she leans toward the position that the second amendment identifies gun ownership is an individual civil right, not merely a collectivist permission to be part of the National Guard or for Guardsmen to keep their rifles at home like the Swiss. But the ACLU isn't a monolithic organization - they have a lot of central resources, and get involved in Supreme Court cases, but their real work is done by local chapters, who come up with lawyers to defend people in most of the cases that they work on. So if you want the ACLU to defend gun rights, get involved, get your law degree (:-), and find cases that you can convince your local organization that it makes sense to work on.

I disagree. Although we cannot, or do not, donate money on the same scale and microsoft, BillG is not, yet, in a position to buy our votes. All of the donations in the world can't guarantee that they will be elected if enough of us are actually paying attention.

If a million of us went over the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the American Civil Liberties Union, Moveon.org or started our own /. petitions then they would notice, and fear, because that's enough people to tip the balance in an election.

Money or not, they still need votes to get elected and if they think their jobs are at stake, they'll kowtow so fast its not even funny. What we have to do is show them that we are paying attention, and that we do care. We also have to show that we won't be bought off with false talk of compromise.

---
Taken the Eff Challenge yet?

Total Information Awareness will be used for the security of all American citizens, watching over you with the compassion and leadership of a big broth---er, uh - a favorite uncle.

Our glorious leader will leverage these tools to usher in a new era of safety and prosperity, unfettered by the shackles of complicated and antiquated laws. Never fear, no terrorist will be able to hide behind the The Constitution.

Of course, we rely on your cooperation and your TIPS to ensure our enduring freedom.

Everything is warm and fuzzy. War is peace.

We now return to your regularly scheduled programming.

Hi, I'm the guy who made the Lessig's Challenge website. I'd like to address some of the concerns which have been raised with the idea.

To my doubters: This isn't about a fundraising drive for the EFF (though I think you should join. Did you know the EFF only has 7,000 members? You can make your voice heard in the way the EFF operates if you join). It isn't about me buying cool stuff and writing it off as hurting the MPAA.

It's about supporting a different way to do things than the MPAA and RIAA. They want to lock up content and charge you every time you view it. They want to prevent you from viewing DVDs on Linux. And we help them do it. Every time you buy a CD, every time you go to a movie, you help them take away your freedom.

It's time to fight back. We can fight back not only by giving money to the EFF and the ACLU and the Free Software Foundation and Digital Consumer -- orgainizations which will fight against the media oligarchy -- but also by helping those artists and programmers who are outside the system. If they can make a living without turning to the RIAA or MPAA, the media oligarchy will not survive for long.

I'm not asking you to boycott these orgainizations entirely because it's not really plausable. Everyone likes to go see a movie now and then, everyone likes to listen to the radio or buy a few CDs. What I'm challenging you to do is to keep track of how much you're giving to the oligarchy (to take away your freedom) and counter that with a donation to people who will fight against that.

Here are a few suggestions:

• EFF
• ACLU
• Free Software Foundation
• Project Gutenberg
• Creative Commons
• Local bands in your hometown
• Your favorite online comic strips
• Unsigned musicians online
• Artists you like
• An open source project you appreciate
• A weblog or news site that provides you with fresh, interesting stories daily
• Political canidates who will fight against the MPAA and RIAA

The list goes on and on.

Do not forget about the ACLU which also does a great deal to ensure your liberties cyber or not. ACLU Cyber-liberties page.

I recently joined the ACLU and am now a card carrying member. Strange coming from a middle-class republican backgroun. I am 29 now, and feel that at least a contrary response is needed, so that we don't go off the deep end. I don't agree with everything they say, but at least they are there speaking up and deserve some of my hard earned money.

I also a couple days ago became a card carrying member of EFF which is probablly more palletable to us technologists. I would encourage everyone to at least look at their website. Too often it is easy for us to click and read, instead of taking action. At 29 I have started writing my first letters to my congressman. He is a republican, who doesn't share my views, but still he needs to know as his constituate, that I don't like his voting style. Sure, it is one small drop in the ocean, but enough drops will create a flood.

Whether all the changes going on upset you, or if you like them all, we should all stand up and let our voice be heard. Too many of us, including myself, sit on the sidelines. I was at a concert for Counting Crows recently and Adam the lead singer said "The reason the country is run by a bunch of old people is because us young people don't stand up for our selves."

This is related, I believe: http://www.aclu.org/Cyber-Liberties/Cyber-Libertie s.cfm?ID=11332&c=58

--Ben

The ACLU is concerned that one of the leaders of the Iran Contra affair now having access to every database in America. The government wants to know where and when you pass through a toll booth, make phone calls, e-mail, surf the web, and anything else. And they want it without having to get a warrent. Has anyone read the Constitution who's passing this lesgislation?

This is exactly why an objective filter (software) cannot be relied upon
People every day write intelligent algorithms to handle vague concepts. For example, Cloudmark does a good job with "spam". Again, it need not be 100% to be effective.

Note in all this that I'm not objecting to libraries blocking porn
Then you are in direct disagreement with the ALA and ACLU.

But it sure makes for good campaign fodder.
So your theory is that politicians are doing this for votes. Well, I'm not a politician, and I hold these views. I know plenty of others that do, including librarians who say it IS a problem- or was before they added filtering software. You dismiss our opinion based on your speculation that filtering software isn't good enough, speculation that it's not a problem, and speculation that it's a campaign ploy. The facts are, though, that it is a problem, there is a reasonable solution, and that those truely opposed believe children have a right to view pornography.

While I would like to think this, the fact is, is that most people did not care because it was the Jews. Was this an effect of propaganda or just a reflection of institutionalized anti-semitism I do not know, probably a bit of both.

Oh yeah, here we go, hate whitey.... please cite specific examples where under identical circumstances a black defendent recieved the death penalty and a white defendent got a slap on the wrist.

Damn right, libraries rule. Clackamas County, Multnomah County (yes, the Multnomah County that fights censorship nationwide).

And yeah, I do vaguely remember books. Someday, maybe I'll actually read one again. By the way, if you want the content without the paper & reading, they have audio books too! Mostly cassette, occasionally CD.

I know that violating people's civil liberties including taking away their right to speech, privacy and due process makes it easier for law enforcement, but aside from being unconstitutional, it's also bad policework.

If you racially profile your suspects, then the Timothy McVeighs slip through. If you tap everyone's phone, then you become bogged down in terabytes of data -- most of which is useless. If you suppress the speech of the hate mongers and racists, then you don't know who is a hate monger or racist.

Civil liberties aren't just respectful of constitutional and human rights, they also help law enforcement do their job right. So don't ask for a line to be drawn. Try playing by the rules instead.

You want to help people who defend your rights? Become a member of the ACLU

Call your mom.

What's the big deal? Since this country has been founded we have both regulated porn and encouraged free speech, especially political free speech. You are seeking to make things like political speech=porn, which the Supreme Court already rejected years ago.

Also we are not "preventing our own citizens" from viewing porn (as if we are banning it altogether) but saying that you cannot view porn in a taxpayer funded library. You want to get off on porn, do it in your own house. But you have no right to demand it on everyone's dollar.

If your truely worried about speech, why not worry about something truly substantial like the Unconstitutional Campaign Finance Reform that harms political speech.

Brian Ellenberger

From the article: Twenty-nine states will vote on a tax proposal next month that could be pivotal in their effort to tax all online sales.

Section 8 of the Constitution: Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises ... To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states

But then, who cares about the constitution? Certainly not the United States.

Join the ACLU and help out! I joined with a monthly donation of $10, and I never miss the money. They can set it up to be automatically charged to your bank account or credit card and it's totally painless.

If you spend money on products (which nearly everyone does), you're voting with your dollars. Make sure some of your "votes" go to something you believe in!

http://forms.aclu.org/contribute/contribute.cfm'

For reference:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

From FindLaw:

In spite of extensive recent discussion and much legislative action with respect to regulation of the purchase, possession, and transportation of firearms, as well as proposals to substantially curtail ownership of firearms, there is no definitive resolution by the courts of just what right the Second Amendment protects.

From the ACLU itself.

IMHO, the Second Amendment is embodied and about exhausted by the existence of state branches of the National Guard. Guns are for pussies.

I just saw one of the new ACLU ads (real player required) on this page, and I almost went nuts. It absolutely slams Ashcroft, and I'm about ready to send in another donation on that note. Keep ads like those coming, ACLU, and I'll keep my money flowing. That's a promise.

Well, part of the Constitution, anyway.

I don't think it includes the DMCA (since it was passed in 1998), but ACLU's Scorecard has some nice info on who voted for who (at least on their issues). The EFF really needs something like this. Voting may not be the best way to get an issue across, but at least it's one way that we have an option of using.

He has a consistent record of supporting electronic freedoms, and I believe he deserves credit.

Nevermind the whole little thing about when he voted FOR Internet censorship in the form of a variation on the now-infamous Communcations Decency Act.

Unfortunately, for you and me, it makes a lot more sense to just pay the fine than it does to try to take on the constitutionality of the law. We'll need someone like the ACLU to take this on.

Or the ACLU.

AFAIK, the 9/11 terrorists all took internal flights. Had the intelligence authorities done their job better, it might not have happened

As for info regarding death row, have a look here

Tim

The ACLU is a leading force behind censoring religious speech.

The ACLU defends the rights of individual citizens to exercise their right to religious speech in their private lives. For instance, the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the Lafayette-Parish school board in Louisiana because it's dress code violated the religious beliefs of Rastafarian Children. The ACLU also worked to pass the Religious Freedom Bill of 2000 which helped protect an individual's right to worship.

The ACLU is opposed to government sponsored religion and government restrictions on religion. How more pro religion can you get?

The ACLU claims to defend the Constitution, but basically ignores the 2nd Amendment.

For more information, see the ACLU's position paper online.

The ACLU is strongly in favor of executing people without a trial.

There is a whole section on their website about this.

The ACLU in its "diversity" efforts supports the idea of denying people rights due to their skin color.

For more, please see the ACLU's section on Racial Equality.

In addition to being a card carrying member of the ACLU, I am also a member of the EFF. I wouldn't pick one over the other because they are both important to civil rights online and offline.

The ACLU is a leading force behind censoring religious speech.

The ACLU defends the rights of individual citizens to exercise their right to religious speech in their private lives. For instance, the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the Lafayette-Parish school board in Louisiana because it's dress code violated the religious beliefs of Rastafarian Children. The ACLU also worked to pass the Religious Freedom Bill of 2000 which helped protect an individual's right to worship.

The ACLU is opposed to government sponsored religion and government restrictions on religion. How more pro religion can you get?

The ACLU claims to defend the Constitution, but basically ignores the 2nd Amendment.

For more information, see the ACLU's position paper online.

The ACLU is strongly in favor of executing people without a trial.

There is a whole section on their website about this.

The ACLU in its "diversity" efforts supports the idea of denying people rights due to their skin color.

For more, please see the ACLU's section on Racial Equality.

In addition to being a card carrying member of the ACLU, I am also a member of the EFF. I wouldn't pick one over the other because they are both important to civil rights online and offline.

The ACLU is a leading force behind censoring religious speech.

The ACLU defends the rights of individual citizens to exercise their right to religious speech in their private lives. For instance, the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the Lafayette-Parish school board in Louisiana because it's dress code violated the religious beliefs of Rastafarian Children. The ACLU also worked to pass the Religious Freedom Bill of 2000 which helped protect an individual's right to worship.

The ACLU is opposed to government sponsored religion and government restrictions on religion. How more pro religion can you get?

The ACLU claims to defend the Constitution, but basically ignores the 2nd Amendment.

For more information, see the ACLU's position paper online.

The ACLU is strongly in favor of executing people without a trial.

There is a whole section on their website about this.

The ACLU in its "diversity" efforts supports the idea of denying people rights due to their skin color.

For more, please see the ACLU's section on Racial Equality.

In addition to being a card carrying member of the ACLU, I am also a member of the EFF. I wouldn't pick one over the other because they are both important to civil rights online and offline.

The ACLU is a leading force behind censoring religious speech.

The ACLU defends the rights of individual citizens to exercise their right to religious speech in their private lives. For instance, the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the Lafayette-Parish school board in Louisiana because it's dress code violated the religious beliefs of Rastafarian Children. The ACLU also worked to pass the Religious Freedom Bill of 2000 which helped protect an individual's right to worship.

The ACLU is opposed to government sponsored religion and government restrictions on religion. How more pro religion can you get?

The ACLU claims to defend the Constitution, but basically ignores the 2nd Amendment.

For more information, see the ACLU's position paper online.

The ACLU is strongly in favor of executing people without a trial.

There is a whole section on their website about this.

The ACLU in its "diversity" efforts supports the idea of denying people rights due to their skin color.

For more, please see the ACLU's section on Racial Equality.

In addition to being a card carrying member of the ACLU, I am also a member of the EFF. I wouldn't pick one over the other because they are both important to civil rights online and offline.