the question that springs to mind is whether you support the ACLU when it represents groups with which you do agree?

Yes, but he doesn’t give them credit for it. He believes they just take token pro-christian cases every now and then to throw off the scent. They don’t want anyone to figure out their secret communist plot.

So, we should make our decisions about what speech should be allowed by looking at the content of that speech? If it’s politically correct, we should allow it, otherwise, no go.

The Westboro Baptist freaks, while annoying, disgusting and horrendous, have never been violent. In fact, having seen both Phelps and anti-abortion protesters at Democratic events in Kansas, I find little to distinguish the “God Hates Fags” placards of Phelps and the aborted fetus placards of the AA protesters.

Can I ban everything in front of abortion clinics except peaceful things like vigils by septuagenarian nuns?

There’s big difference between peaceful objection to killing innocent humans and viciously reveling in the death of a hero.

Anyway, the vast majority of abortuary demonstrations consist of peaceful things like vigils and prayers by septigunarian nuns…hardly akin to raving lunatics accosting grieving families (I’m talking here not just about the military funerals, but those of the Amish school girls and people that have died of AIDS as well). We’re talking about two different things here Jeff.

Today at StopTheAclu they have a number of good posts but one particular one that caught my eye was the one below pertaining to those loony Westboro Baptist Church nimrods that go around protesting at our soldiers funerals: (pay particular attention …

If I meant “assault” Jeff, I would have written “assault.” I wrote “attack” and meant “attack.”

Fair enough. I retract my objection. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

I have to ask, though: when a story comes up about pro-lifers demonstrating outside of a clinic, will you use the word “attack” or “protest”?

Yes!
From Judicial Watch:
(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch, the public interest group promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law, announced today that a U.S. District Court in Missouri denied a request by t…

From Stop the ACLU: Judicial Watch: Court Rules Against ACLU, Protestors in Military Funeral Lawsuit
(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch, the public interest group promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law, ann…

JEFF MUST BE PART OF THE CHURCH.

That’s exactly why it’s unwise to make assumptions about another person’s motives, Richard. Your theory is “simple, plausible, and wrong”.

APPARENTLY HE DOESN’T KNOW WHAT AN ATTACK IS.

I’ll concede that the verb attack is broad enough to include some forms of protected speech. However, with the derogatory tone of the subject of his headline, it seemed to me as if he was implying that ACLU was somehow advocating speech which would qualify as assault.

If Glib acknowledges that he intended no such implication, I will happily withdraw my objection on that point.