Comments on: ACLU To Defend Nazis Again http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/04/14/aclu-to-defend-nazis-again/ Beating Them With Their Own Sickle And Hammer Mon, 13 Feb 2012 05:22:14 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Conservative Culture http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/04/14/aclu-to-defend-nazis-again/comment-page-1/#comment-62691 Conservative Culture Sat, 14 Apr 2007 13:04:42 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/04/14/aclu-to-defend-nazis-again/#comment-62691 <strong>ACLU Defends Nazi Party - View 2</strong> by JonJayRay @ 2:26 am. Filed under ACLU, 1st Amendment, News We read: “The ACLU lost a number of members in 1977 when they defended the American Nazi Party when they wanted to stage a demonstration in the town of Skokie, Illinois — a city ... ACLU Defends Nazi Party – View 2

by JonJayRay @ 2:26 am. Filed under ACLU, 1st Amendment, News

We read:
“The ACLU lost a number of members in 1977 when they defended the American Nazi Party when they wanted to stage a demonstration in the town of Skokie, Illinois — a city …

]]> By: loboinok http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/04/14/aclu-to-defend-nazis-again/comment-page-1/#comment-62690 loboinok Sat, 14 Apr 2007 08:53:36 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/04/14/aclu-to-defend-nazis-again/#comment-62690 The only disagreement I would have is, that the city <b>restricted</b> their right to protest but didn't deny them their right. That restriction was apparently for the safety of the protesters as well as the citizens. And secondly, the ACLU of Ohio, stated in an email; Throughout the history of the ACLU, our <b>firm dedication to civil liberties</b> has directed us to defend the rights of <b>all Americans</b>—even, at times, those whose messages we abhor. For nearly a century, we have adhered to Voltaire’s principle that “I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” [snip] As in previous cases where the ACLU has come to the defense of people or groups with whom we disagree, <u>our position is rooted in certain fundamental principles</u>. While we in no way endorse the views of the American National Socialist Workers Party, <b>we believe that the constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech and press would be meaningless if the government could pick and choose the persons to whom they apply.</b> They defend the rights of ALL Americans, unless you are an anti-abortion protestor, protesting at an abortion mill or a student wearing a t-shirt opposing the "Day of silence". To name two. The only disagreement I would have is, that the city restricted their right to protest but didn’t deny them their right. That restriction was apparently for the safety of the protesters as well as the citizens.

And secondly, the ACLU of Ohio, stated in an email;

Throughout the history of the ACLU, our firm dedication to civil liberties has directed us to defend the rights of all Americans—even, at times, those whose messages we abhor. For nearly a century, we have adhered to Voltaire’s principle that “I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

[snip]

As in previous cases where the ACLU has come to the defense of people or groups with whom we disagree, our position is rooted in certain fundamental principles. While we in no way endorse the views of the American National Socialist Workers Party, we believe that the constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech and press would be meaningless if the government could pick and choose the persons to whom they apply.

They defend the rights of ALL Americans, unless you are an anti-abortion protestor, protesting at an abortion mill or a student wearing a t-shirt opposing the “Day of silence”.

To name two.

]]>