Where do I start? How about the apparent contradiction from the ACLU where in the first tweet stating that government mandates restricting freedoms are actually promoting Civil Liberties or the admission that such basic liberties are restricted and that if we only are good subjects and allow the vaccination mandates, our freedoms will be restored. Again, they admit our freedoms are indeed curtailed, but rather that loudly protest and demand they are respected, they actually place the responsibility for their restriction on us for somehow not accepting a mandate.
We are about to become Prison Country Australia with the blessings of the American Civil Liberties Union, an organization that is supposed to fight any attempt against civil liberties with the ferocity of a pissed off pride of lions. But they are now cute little kittens chasing after a stringed toy being pulled by the administration and expecting us to do the same.
We are on our own.
These lunatics have ALWAYS been backwards. Cival liberty my dimpled ass
“This is the Control Voice. Repeat after me:
War is Peace.
Freedom is Slavery.
Ignorance is Strength.
We have always been at war with Eastasia.
That is all.”
Far from compromising them, Internet permits actually further civil liberties. They protect the vulnerable, people with anxiety issues and fragile psyches, children too young to view some content, and communities of color who are affected by hurtful words. By requiring everyone to have a permit to gain Internet access, we actually protect these vulnerable people from objectionable content.
See how you can twist anything? The ACLU is not for liberty. Never has been.
The ACLU has shifted its focus to promoting and working for a new and novel kind of “right”: the “right” to be free from the exercise of other people’s rights.
Whereas in the past (and in the normal, real world), if you don’t want to see other people exercising their rights, you just avoid them. Don’t like guns? Don’t hang around gun people or gun ranges. Don’t like offensive art or speech? Don’t look at it, don’t listen to it, and walk away. Don’t like religious services? Don’t hang out in churches or temples.
Easy-peasy, right? In the normal world, yes.
But in the ACLU’s “Brave New World”, if you don’t like something or find it offensive, you have the right to not encounter it. Ever. To achieve that, it’s no longer on you to avoid those situations; instead, other people’s rights must be curtailed or eliminated.
Therefore, if you don’t like guns, other people must be prohibited from keeping or carrying them any place you might go. If you don’t like offensive art or speech, it must be prohibited from being displayed or spoken. If you don’t like religious services, churches and temples closed and torn down and all religious observances banned.
However, if someone has a “right” to not encounter the exercise of my rights, then I have a right to not encounter people with their opinions and cannot be required to go out of my way to avoid them. The door swings both ways — how “meta” do we want to get with this?
It isn’t even that simple. For example, if I find homosexuality to be offensive, I am a racist Nazi. They aren’t a rights organization. They are a communist front.
ACLU: American Communist Legitimacy Union
That’s that “door swings both ways” part.
If they have a right to not hear Scripture in public and can therefore get religious observance banned because they find it offensive, you have a right to not see open homosexuality and can therefore get Pride events banned because you find it offensive.
But you are correct; they are a Marxist front, as evidenced by their long record of supporting some civil rights and condemning others. A real civil rights organization would stand for ALL civil rights, even (perhaps especially) those they disagree with.