Slashdot Mirror

Wednesday is my busy day. After I get off work as a substitute gym teacher, I have to race across town to the NAMBLA meeting. Then it's a quick pit stop at McDonald's for a bite and to check out who is having a Happy Meal in Playland. Afterward I must zip uptown to the Apple Users' Group meeting. Finally by 11:00 pm it's time to head home with my PowerBook and scope out the K12 chat rooms. As I said, it's my busy day. If it weren't for my Apple computer, I don't know how I could do it all.

I doubt it. Check out

ACLU policy statement #47:

The Union agrees with the Supreme Court's longstanding interpretation of the Second Amendment that the individual's right to keep and bear arms applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a 'well-regulated militia'. Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected.

The ACLU is too busy defending the right to promote child molesting.

While

NAMBLA may extol conduct which is currently illegal, its materials fall far short of speech that may be prohibited. If that rule were to be changed to allow a suit like this one, it would introduce a regime of conformity to majority rule that would threaten the very right to dissent."

In self-serving fashion, the ACLU notes that the father of the murdered boy -- who is suing NAMBLA -- praises the ACLU for defending NAMBLA

While intent on pressing their suit against NAMBLA, the Curley family has acknowledged ACLU's concerns. In a Boston Globe article which appeared shortly after the ACLU entered the case, Jeffrey Curley's father, Bob Curley, is quoted as saying that he harbors no ill feelings toward the ACLU for defending the case. "I really do have respect for them (ACLU)", said Curley. "They are very consistent in whom they defend. It takes a lot of nerve to defend the groups they have over the years. They have a lot of courage."

Wired puts a different spin on it:

Attorney Lawrence Frisoli, who represents the Curleys, said he is glad the ACLU is defending NAMBLA, because he has had trouble locating the group's members.

Harvey Silverglate, an ACLU board member, said Wednesday that the group's attorneys will try to block any attempt by the Curleys to get NAMBLA's membership lists, or other materials identifying members.

The ACLU interprets Roe v. Wade as meaning that minors must be allowed to get an abortion, without having to even notify their parents (much less get their permission), and that taxpayers must subsidize abortions.

But "the people" in the Second Amendment means "the government," because a 30 year old woman is apparently too stupid to weight the risks vs. benefits of owning and/or carrying a firearm for self-protection, and can be denied the right to make that choice.

If the ACLU supported the Second Amendment in the same fashion that they do abortion, then they woudl be demanding taxpayer subsidies for poor children to buy guns, without having to notify their parents, so they can shoot the child molestors who prey on them.

Constitutional scholars who have bothered to write about the issue in various law review journals do not agree with the ACLU's position. You can read the law review articles for yourself at the Second Amendment Law Library. Much better than stuff put out by any pro- or anti-gun special interest group.

In justifying the ACLU's position on gun control, ACLU President Nadine Strossen said that

Putting all that aside, I don't want to dwell on constitutional analysis, because our view has never been that civil liberties are necessaril

Little do we know that the same server that hosts slashdot.org also hosts www.nambla1.de .

Setting aside for a moment the question of what to do about it, I'm simply saying that your statement is demonstrably untrue.

The problem of child pornography is not "overblown" nor is it a "hoax." In fact, given the propensity today to tolerate advocacy for the most egregious of behaviors I would suggest that the problem is if anything greater than we realize.

In other news, penisbird likes to have gay sex with children he is an active member of nambla

Afterward I must zip uptown to the Apple Users' Group meeting. Finally by 11:00 pm it's time to head home with my PowerBook and scope out the K12 chat rooms. As I said, it's my busy day. If it weren't for my Apple computer, I don't know how I could do it all.

Friday is my busy day. After I get off work as a substitute gym teacher, I have to race across town to the NAMBLA meeting. Then it's a quick pit stop at McDonald's for a bite and to check out who is having a Happy Meal in Playland. Afterward I must zip uptown to the Apple Users' Group meeting. Finally by 11:00 pm it's time to head home with my PowerBook and scope out the K12 chat rooms. As I said, it's my busy day. If it weren't for my Apple computer, I don't know how I could do it all.

Friday is my busy day. After I get off work as a substitute gym teacher, I have to race across town to the NAMBLA meeting. Then it's a quick pit stop at McDonald's for a bite and to check out who is having a Happy Meal in Playland. Afterward I must zip uptown to the Apple Users' Group meeting. Finally by 11:00 pm it's time to head home with my PowerBook and scope out the K12 chat rooms. As I said, its my busy day. If it weren't for my Apple computer, I don't know how I could do it all.

Perhaps I should have represented myself better with my original statement.

I used to support the ACLU. In fact in the past I've support them financially through donations, I've supported them physically by providing my time and labor for their functions, and my girlfriend has even participated in an ACLU internship while in college.

I've always appreciated the stance they take on seperating church and state and of course I support their attempts to protect our 1st admendment rights.

However, I feel, by blantantly ignoring 2nd admendment rights and issues they are turning themselves into hipocrits. As a orginization devoted to defending americans civil liberities you cannot pick and choose which rights you decide to protect.

For example...The ACLU chose to represent NAMBLA, an orginization who's sole purpose is legalizing sexual acts between teen boys and adult men, on the grounds of freedom of speech. In their own statement the ACLU aknowledges that they do not support the ideas of groups such NAMBLA, Neo Nazis, or fundamentalist Christian churches, all of whom the ACLU has represented. Yet they willingly work to protect these groups and the First admendment.

I'm confused why the ACLU has no problem protecting child molesters yet they refuse to respect the Bill of Rights and the right of American citizens to bear arms and as such I've stopped supporting the ACLU.

this website offers a foreign insight into this situation

"In south park"? NAMBLA is real! And yes, it is North American Man/Boy Love Association.

Links to NAMBLA websites with a message reading: "check out these sites, they're really informative." Do not count as "interesting", you weirdo.

Don't you mean NAMBLA?

Before taking up this DMCA case, which NAMBLA organization did the ACLU defend?

• North American Man-Boy Love Association?
• Narional Association of Marlon Brando Look-Alikes?