Bashing the ACLU
Why is the ACLU sometimes used as a punching bag for so-called "liberal values"?
In the 1988 Presidential campaign, then-Vice President George Bush referred to his opponent Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis as a "card-carrying member of the ACLU." Not only did this charge -- along with the Willie Horton scare -- effectively brand Dukakis as a "leftist", but it also helped establish Bush's conservative credentials.
Recently, the ACLU's membership base has grown dramatically, mostly as a response to the attacks on civil rights by current President George W. Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft. Membership includes prominent members from both sides of the political spectrum. What changed?
For the ACLU, not much has changed. It's charge has always been to defend the Bill of Rights, usually in high profile cases and also regularly on the unpopular side of an issue.
For example, the ACLU is currently defending NAMBLA -- the North American Man/Boy Love Association -- and its members from a wrongful death suit in Massachusetts. The case was filed by the parents of a 10-year-old boy who was kidnapped, raped, and tortured to death by a man who was a visitor to the NAMBLA web site and who claimed that that's why he did it. NAMBLA advocates that a loving sexual relationship between adult men and minor children should not be against the law. As repulsive as this position might be to the majority of people in the world, NAMBLA is entitled to their views and to publish their views provided they do not encourage breaking the law, which the NAMBLA site does not. The ACLU took this case as a first amendment, free-speech rights case.
Another example: in Tampa, Florida, the courts held that a husband could remove the feeding tube and allow his wife to die. His wife had been in a persistent vegetative state with minimal brain functionality for over 10 years. In response to the outcome of the trial and subsequent appeals (including appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court), all of which held that the husband has this right, the Florida Legislature hastily created and passed a law allowing the governor to override the husband's wishes. The governor signed the bill into law and the woman's feeding tube was re-inserted over the wishes of both the husband and the courts. The ACLU has stepped into this case on the side of the husband, a position that caused an uproar from people who believe that life is sacred and must be maintained as long as possible at all costs.
In both of these cases -- and many others not listed here -- numerous people believe the ACLU should just "butt out" and abandon their unpopular positions.
I find these people -- mostly respectable conservatives -- to be curious. Are our rights only to be defended when the cause is a popular one? Of course not; if so, then when it comes time to defend my unpopular position -- or YOUR unpopular position -- you won't have this advocate on your side. Our rights truly need a vociferous defense when we're on the minority side of an argument or court case.
Why is the ACLU gaining in popularity now?
In response to the U.S. Patriot Act, which granted the government additional abilities to investigate and arrest our citizens in this so-called "War on Terrorism", people from all sides of the political spectrum are worried that these rights will be abused. Numerous local governments are also refusing to cooperate with the Federal Government to enforce some of the more odious portions of the Patriot Act. The government has been attempting for several months to get Congress to amend this law to grant further government powers in this "War", while removing much of the oversight to prevent abuse of these powers. Attorney General John Ashcroft's reputation as a religious zealot hasn't helped with anyone's view of the government's position, either.
Because the Bush Administration is increasingly trying to limit the rights available to all citizens under the Bill of Rights, the ACLU's popularity is rising again (only $20 to join). People are rightfully afraid that a joke or a nasty word against the government will make them a target of their newly granted powers. We need defenders like the ACLU to help keep the government's power in check.
In the 1988 Presidential campaign, then-Vice President George Bush referred to his opponent Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis as a "card-carrying member of the ACLU." Not only did this charge -- along with the Willie Horton scare -- effectively brand Dukakis as a "leftist", but it also helped establish Bush's conservative credentials.
Recently, the ACLU's membership base has grown dramatically, mostly as a response to the attacks on civil rights by current President George W. Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft. Membership includes prominent members from both sides of the political spectrum. What changed?
For the ACLU, not much has changed. It's charge has always been to defend the Bill of Rights, usually in high profile cases and also regularly on the unpopular side of an issue.
For example, the ACLU is currently defending NAMBLA -- the North American Man/Boy Love Association -- and its members from a wrongful death suit in Massachusetts. The case was filed by the parents of a 10-year-old boy who was kidnapped, raped, and tortured to death by a man who was a visitor to the NAMBLA web site and who claimed that that's why he did it. NAMBLA advocates that a loving sexual relationship between adult men and minor children should not be against the law. As repulsive as this position might be to the majority of people in the world, NAMBLA is entitled to their views and to publish their views provided they do not encourage breaking the law, which the NAMBLA site does not. The ACLU took this case as a first amendment, free-speech rights case.
Another example: in Tampa, Florida, the courts held that a husband could remove the feeding tube and allow his wife to die. His wife had been in a persistent vegetative state with minimal brain functionality for over 10 years. In response to the outcome of the trial and subsequent appeals (including appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court), all of which held that the husband has this right, the Florida Legislature hastily created and passed a law allowing the governor to override the husband's wishes. The governor signed the bill into law and the woman's feeding tube was re-inserted over the wishes of both the husband and the courts. The ACLU has stepped into this case on the side of the husband, a position that caused an uproar from people who believe that life is sacred and must be maintained as long as possible at all costs.
In both of these cases -- and many others not listed here -- numerous people believe the ACLU should just "butt out" and abandon their unpopular positions.
I find these people -- mostly respectable conservatives -- to be curious. Are our rights only to be defended when the cause is a popular one? Of course not; if so, then when it comes time to defend my unpopular position -- or YOUR unpopular position -- you won't have this advocate on your side. Our rights truly need a vociferous defense when we're on the minority side of an argument or court case.
Why is the ACLU gaining in popularity now?
In response to the U.S. Patriot Act, which granted the government additional abilities to investigate and arrest our citizens in this so-called "War on Terrorism", people from all sides of the political spectrum are worried that these rights will be abused. Numerous local governments are also refusing to cooperate with the Federal Government to enforce some of the more odious portions of the Patriot Act. The government has been attempting for several months to get Congress to amend this law to grant further government powers in this "War", while removing much of the oversight to prevent abuse of these powers. Attorney General John Ashcroft's reputation as a religious zealot hasn't helped with anyone's view of the government's position, either.
Because the Bush Administration is increasingly trying to limit the rights available to all citizens under the Bill of Rights, the ACLU's popularity is rising again (only $20 to join). People are rightfully afraid that a joke or a nasty word against the government will make them a target of their newly granted powers. We need defenders like the ACLU to help keep the government's power in check.
posted by Andy @ 7:53 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home