ACLU Perverting the Constitution

Posted on October 11, 2005

A Huge Thank you to Ian at The Political Teen for recording the video for me. Real Teen has atranscript from Monday night’s show on the same topic.
Click on pic, it will take you to The Political Teens Video of the Interview.

Last night we reported on how a judge ruled that an Oregan law banning live sex acts was unconstitutional. We made a point that it was in essense the legalization of prostitution. We stated that as far as we knew that the ACLU was not involved. Watching the O’Reilly Factor tonight, I learned different. The ACLU filed a brief in favor of banning this law.

Its not suprising in the least. The ACLU is in favor of fully legalized, unregulated prostitution across the board. Many libertarians agree that prostitution should be legal, and many think it should be left to the people of each state to decide. But where the ACLU gets radical is that it would place no limits on it whatsoever.

The ACLU’s Policy 211 is straightforward. “The ACLU supports the decriminalization of prostitution and opposes state regulation of prostitution”. They base their argument on several points, including that existing laws are discrimination against women, and the right of individual privacy. They argue that what two consenting adults in private do is their own business. However, when you also oppose zoning laws, and regulation you can hardly argue that prostitution is a private business.

As for it being a privacy issue, it seems a contradiction to me when they also state that the “public” solicitation of prostitution is “entitled to the protection of the First Amendment”. “It’s not just the bedroom that the ACLU wishes to make off-limits to public censure, but also the local street corner, presumably even if that corner is regularly used by school children crossing the street.” Source
They don’t belive in zoning laws, and do believe in fully legalalized, and unregulated prostitution. So there wouldn’t be any law that could keep a prostitution house from being a certain distance from your neighborhood, your Church, or your child’s preschool. This is especially disturbing when they think child pornography distribution and possession should be legal.

“Students of liberty, from John Stuart Mill to Thomas Emerson, have all intentionally excluded children from their formula for freedom. The ACLU does not. Not even when the subject is pornography.Quote from Twilight Of Liberty

In 1982, the ACLU, in an amicus role, lost in a unanimous decision in the Supreme Court to legalize the sale and distribution of child pornography.”

The case is…: New York Vs Ferber, 458 U.S. 747
It can be found here.

The ACLU’s position is this: criminalize the production but legalize the sale and distribution of child pornography. This is the kind of lawyerly distinction that no one on the Supreme Court found convincing. And with good reason: as long as a free market in child pornography exists, there will always be some producers willing to risk prosecution. Beyond this, there is also the matter of how the sale of child pornography relates either to free speech or the ends of good government. But most important, the central issue is whether a free society should legalize transactions that involve the wholesale sexploitation of children for profit.”

The ACLU objects to the idea that porn movie producers be required to maintain records of ages of its performers; this would be ” a gross violation of privacy.”Quotes from Twilight Of Liberty

I don’t think that any other ACLU stance evokes more anger from me, than this one. I mean, how sick can you get? Do these people not have a conscience at all, or are they just plain EVIL? How can one argue this sick, twisted view in the name of “protecting civil liberties?” Please, some liberal out there that loves defending this evil organization…explain this to us.

Since the ACLU thinks that child pornography should be legal, it is not surprising to read that it is against making it a felony to advertise, sell, purchase, barter, exchange, give, or receive child pornography. It is particularly distressed about the prohibition on advertisement, arguing that “the law cannot expect every publisher to decode every advertisment for some hidden and sinister meaning,” as if it took a technician-armed with a special decoding device-to ferret out pictures of children ludely exhibiting their genitals.Quote from Twilight Of Liberty

As legislative counsel for the ACLU in 1985, Barry Lynn told the U.S. Attorney General’s Commission on Pornography (of which Focus on the Family President Dr. James C. Dobson was a member) that child pornography was protected by the First Amendment. While production of child porn could be prevented by law, he argued, its distribution could not be. A few years later (1988), Lynn told the Senate Judiciary Committee that even requiring porn producers to maintain records of their performers’ ages was impermissible.
“If there is no federal record-keeping requirement for the people portrayed in Road and Track or Star Wars,” he said, “there can be no such requirement for Hustler or Debbie Does Dallas.”Quoted Reference

Is the ACLU completely retarded? I would love to think there was some kind of saving grace for an organization that says it is about protecting civil liberties, but with positions like this…which you KNOW are against the will of the people, I don’t know if there is. My head is about to explode just typing this stuff!

Let’s take a deeper look at the industry that the ACLU wants to defend here.

“It would be a mistake to think that all the children who are being exploited sexually are kidnapped by “kid porn” operators. Many of the children are being sold to people by their parents. In some cases, the parents have agreed to perform incest with their children. Gonorrhea of the throat in infants as young as nine and eighteen months has been reported”. source
This is as sick as it gets folks. But the ACLU believes it is a freedom being denied to people. And before liberals start to ask. Yes, the ACLU has a current policy advocating the legalization of child porn distribution and possession. Yes, the ACLU still currently defends pedophile organization’s.

“Mere possession should not be a crime,” said John Roberts, executive director of the Boston branch of the American Civil Liberties Union.”
Quoted Reference

O’Reilly made a great point in his interview with Alan Sears tonight that while they support these radical positions under the freedom of expression banner that they oppose other forms of expressions like maintaining the border, or celebrating Jesus. The founding fathers did not write the Constitution with Live sex shows in mind. The ACLU continually usurps the will of the people. He goes on to say, this isn’t democracy, this is judicial facism, and its also a joke. He says in his talking points that the 400,000 members of the ACLU need to wake up and smell the totaltarianism. This organization is about undermining freedom, not protecting it.

So why do they have 400,000 supporters? Alan Sears states in the interview that he doesn’t think their supporters, or even some of their lawyers know just how radical their organization is. He states that he has debated many of their lawyers that are shocked when he reveals some of their radical positions. He talks about former ACLU lawyers that woke up and smelled the coffee. We also had that privaledge. Check out our interview with a former ACLU lawyer, Mr. Reese Lloyd.

The truth is this organization wants to turn America into a different country. One where laws are set aside in favor of unbridled chaos. One vastly different than what our founders intended. One along the lines of their founder when he stated…

“I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal.”

In today’s times of judicial activism, the ACLU is winning in its goals. Please help us fight this evil organization before its too late for America.

We are trying to get an ad in the Washington Times. It will cost us $2500.00. We are half way there with 1,270.00. Please consider a donation.

Linked at Mudville Gazette
The Political Teen
Cao’s Blog
Cafe Oregano
Basil’s Blog
Bright and Early
Jo’s Cafe
Indepundit

» Filed Under Child Exploitation

Trackback URL

Comments

5 Responses to “ACLU Perverting the Constitution”

leav on October 12th, 2005 1:07 am

Wait, doesn’t the ACLU support child labor laws? Look that one up, because it would be just like them to oppose a child’s right to work in a family business, while supporting their “right” to strip or have sex for money.

An outstanding post, and I watched that Oreilly segment twice tonight, both at 8 and 11. Great job linking to it, for those who may have missed it.

I wish I could donate more than I already have to you. The ACLU’s hypocrisy, and their true intent, are being exposed to more people every day, thanks to people like you, the ADL, and O’reilly. I hope my two cents at Leavworld is helping also. You continue to inspire. THANKS.
leav on October 12th, 2005 2:04 am

ADF! NOT ADL! I’m always doing that! Sorry!
jaybird on October 12th, 2005 11:37 am

When it comes to Oregon, DON’T EVER make the mistake of thinking or believing that the ACLU’s dirty work isn’t afoot. Oregon has one of the most, if not the most prolific and active ACLU chapters in the US. Any time you hear about outrageous legal cases and court rulings emanating out of Oregon, count on the fact that the ACLU is right in the middle of it.

jaybird (who went to law school in Oregon and whose Constitutional Law professor was head of the local ACLU chapter)
oregano on October 12th, 2005 9:37 pm

Everytime I read news like this, it makes me sick that people are defending pedophiles in the name of the Constitution.
steve evans on October 17th, 2005 4:59 pm

Anyone who believes the ACLU has any desire, or motivation to protect civil liberties, is deluding themselves, as far as I’m concerned.

I believe the ACLU has always existed to create controversy and divisiveness by holding outrageous views and defending the indefensible.

They started out as a Socialist-Marxist organization and have never changed, if you ask me and exist primarily to throw monkey wrenches in the law and our society.

You don’t see or hear much from them in totalitarian countries, do you?