Other
See other Other Articles
Title: A Strange Evolution: When Fundagelicals Loved the ACLU
Source:
patheos.com
URL Source: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rollto ... elicals-loved-the-aclu-lsp-48/
Published: Jun 25, 2018
Author: Captain Cassidy
Post Date: 2018-06-30 09:00:42 by Gatlin
Keywords: None
Views: 6267
Comments: 32
Long, long ago, when I was a wee bright-eyed Pentecostal lass, I had a run-in with an anti-theist college professor. I wrote about it a few years ago, but I always intended to come back to that story because there was a part I hadn’t mentioned at the time. You see, my evangelical peers had an instant–and unanimous–response to the situation when I told them about it. They wanted me to go talk to the ACLU. Does that shock you? Surprise you? It should. I’ll tell you about it today. Today, Lord Snow Presides over another strange evolution in fundagelicalism. As I said in that earlier post, it must have been 1988 or 1989. I was a freshman or sophomore, taking a class required for my major. And wow, the professor of this class did. Not. Like. Christians. At. ALL. I was Pentecostal, of course. Back then that made me a fundamentalist. I had a lot of friends in college, almost all of them evangelical. And we brooked no muddying of the terms! They’d have been offended at the mere suggestion that they were fundamentalists. To them, that term meant dangerous extremism. By contrast and in similar fashion, I’d have been offended at being called evangelical. To me, it indicated dangerous laxity. But we shared a deep passion for all things Christian. We got together often to pray, to talk about Christian stuff, and to argue about our different interpretations of this or that Bible verse. I lived in the dorms then, so often these get-togethers occurred in my dorm room or in the lounge downstairs. My memories of those evenings now seem golden-yellow with nostalgia, from the color of the lights and walls there. We shared our daily struggles and triumphs with each other. At the same time, we all tried not to fret whenever the others didn’t agree with our arguments or interpretations. Naturally, when this professor got totally out of hand, I shared this concern with my group. The exact conversation is lost to my memory, but my complaint probably went like this: “In every class, this guy insults Christians. He looks right at me when he does it, so he knows what he’s doing. I can’t even concentrate–I’m always just waiting for the next snide jab. Ugh! He thinks he’s just so clever, but I feel attacked and singled out. Nobody likes it when he does this, but I don’t know what to say to make him stop.” I had no idea what to do. My stress was getting bad enough that I was considering just dropping the class. But I needed it for my major. What I’m describing is, in essence, the plot of the first God’s Not Dead movie, right? But my friends didn’t suggest a debate about Creationism. They had something else entirely in mind. Every one of them, including my then-boyfriend Biff, suggested I contact the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Yes. You heard me. This group is now one of the most-demonized groups in the entire country. Once fundamentalists merged with evangelicals, creating the foul, lumbering, drooling behemoth that is fundagelicalism, one of the first groups they set up as their tribal enemy was this group of lawyers who are dedicated to protecting people’s rights and liberties. It wasn’t always like that though. In the late 1980s, the ACLU was considered a friend to Christians. By 2006, Christianity Today was running pleading op-eds trying to defend it. By 2015, someone was whining at the misleadingly-named Reason.com about how the ACLU was being totally meeeeeeeeeeean to bigoted Christians. Today, fundagelicals take it as a point of doctrine that the ACLU has it out for them specifically, and specifically that this crusade against them is happening jus’ fer bein’ Christian. Back in my college days, Christians enjoyed a position of uncontested dominance in popular culture. Nobody could even imagine a future in which Christians were anything but an effortless majority, much less no longer the arbiters of cultural mores. We had a great respect for higher education, though we still thought that the inspiration of the Holy Ghost could make up for it. We saw ourselves as the future leaders of our country. Even I–a woman–could imagine a future as a professional in the sciences. And we certainly didn’t see watchdog groups as anything but helpers to us. We were doing nothing wrong, and so we had nothing to fear from any such groups. Wow, a lot can happen in a few decades, right? Somewhere in those intervening decades, Christians began subscribing to a totally different narrative about the ACLU. Their stunning about-face didn’t happen in a vacuum, of course. Those were also the years in which they began engaging in their cruelest, most extremist culture wars. The ACLU stood against their constant, nonstop attempts to hijack American law and culture, and so the ACLU became their most dreaded enemies. But fundagelicals don’t think they changed at all. To them, the ACLU changed. I’ve no doubt that their elders can’t even remember a time when Christians thought anything on the topic but what they think now. But I do. When my friends suggested this course of action, I felt unnerved. I wasn’t hesitating because I dreaded the help of a tribal enemy. No, I was simply nervous about tangling with lawyers and court cases. It felt like a lot of trouble over something that might be able to be resolved in some other way. But even the older guys at my church thought it was a great idea. One of them, a genial deacon, was ready to make some phone calls. No, Brother Flowers, I told him. Please, not yet. Though the idea made me want to throw up from dread, I decided to talk to the professor first. And that proved to be all that was necessary. Unlike Dr. Radisson in the dumb Christian movie, this real instructor toned down his sniping, and I was able to continue taking the class with no further stress. I got a good grade in it, even. Even more than that, though, I wonder who the first right-wing Christian was who went from HOORAY, the ACLU is helping to stop others from infringing on our rights! to Whoa, why is the ACLU now stopping us from doing what we want to do? I think there must have been a first Christian to make that observation, back then. But they weren’t quite self-aware enough to make that vital connection: that the ACLU that had once helped them and now opposed them was doing so because they were now the oppressors, not the ones in need of help against oppression. See, back then my tribe seemed like they had a faint understanding of why we needed the ACLU. America was a secular country, yes. But sometimes a legislative group might make a law that pushed against religious people’s rights. And sometimes someone in authority might get out of hand, like my professor had, and maybe that person wouldn’t be reasonable when asked to stop. That’s why it was so vitally important that we had a legal watchdog group that was willing to step in between oppressed citizens and those figures of authority who had crossed boundaries. None of us specifically talked about it like that, but it’s how I sure as heck thought of the situation. The ACLU was our friend–not our enemy. It was part of that very necessary system of checks and balances upon power–where rubber met the road—where the buck stopped. No wonder right-wing Christians today hate this group. They’re focused single-mindedly on power, and consequently aren’t real fans of obstacles to their overreach that they can’t simply steamroll, trample, or ignore. Nor have they ever been fans of abiding by rules that everybody has to follow. When a group of people enjoy unwarranted perks and privileges for decades and centuries, losing even a little of them can feel an awful lot like persecution. Instead of seeing the ACLU’s firm opposition to fundagelicals’ culture warring as maybe a sign that they’re overstepping boundaries, fundagelicals are instead seeing that opposition as a sign that Satan’s gotten into this onetime friend’s heart. One absolutely hysterical Catholic forum outright calls the ACLU “Satan’s Army.” The poster breathlessly talks about his suspicions that the leader of the ACLU is–GASP!!! OMG!!!–a “militant gay,” which appears to mean someone who absolutely won’t put up with his bigotry. The poster’s main issue with the ACLU appears to be their campaigns against bigotry, in fact. Though he did get some pushback from some of the posters, most of them were totally on board with his shrill denunciation. They were so outraged about the ACLU that they couldn’t think of a more serious accusation to fling at them than simply stating that they were directly affiliated with their religion’s worst boogeyman. (They were Catholic, not Protestant, but there isn’t any difference between their respective ultra-conservative members anymore, really; they’ve been merging ever since they teamed up for their cynically-manufactured culture war against abortion.) This bizarre hate hard-on for the ACLU is about par for the course for Christians since I left the religion and it went full-throttle extremist. If anything, Christians have only grown more extreme in their hatred and vitriol year by year. And as with everything in that end of the religion, there’s a reason why this is happening. Often these Christians don’t even have any idea what the ACLU is or what it does–like this pastor, who thinks the ACLU is “Marxist.” He doesn’t appear to have the faintest idea why the lawsuits he names happened, but bless his little cotton socks, that isn’t stopping him from making some wild speculations. But he does dimly sense–as do his bunkmates in their tent of wackadoodlery–that the ACLU stands between him and his tribe’s goal of domination. That opposition is what makes the ACLU evil, to extremist Christians. Of course, when we remember that they define evil as, largely, anybody who opposes them in their grab for power, the picture comes into sharper focus. Their leaders egg them on in this hatred, and neither they nor their followers actually look for themselves to see that why yes, the ACLU has steadfastly and constantly defended Christians’ religious rights. And I could have been one of the Christians they defended, in the late 1980s, back when I was a bright-eyed, true-blue little Pentecostal lass. Oh, but that was back before fundagelicals saw the ACLU as the enemy, and back before they’d made themselves the enemy of rights and liberties. Now, years after leaving the religion, I look at a Christian’s opinion about the ACLU as a barometer that tells me what kind of person they are. If they’re aware of the ACLU’s function and necessity in a secular country with robust protections for individuals’ liberties and are completely on board with that idea, then they’re probably all right. Probably. If they freak out about demons and get frothy-mouthed about their weirdly-defined, self-serving version of religious liberty, then I know to avoid that person. So I suppose their war against the ACLU has accomplished something–for us at least. 
(Scott Granneman, CC-SA.) Set The Wayback Machine.
Always Be Ready.
You’re Now Entering the Twilight Zone.
The Culture-War Model of Christianity.
Back When I Was Young.
The Party of Leopards Eating People’s Faces.
“Satan’s Army.”
Another Example of Extremism in Far-Right Christianity.
Poster Comment:
Repeating the closing remark in the commentary: Now, years after leaving the religion, I look at a Christian’s opinion about the ACLU as a barometer that tells me what kind of person they are. If they’re aware of the ACLU’s function and necessity in a secular country with robust protections for individuals’ liberties and are completely on board with that idea, then they’re probably all right. Probably. If they freak out about demons and get frothy-mouthed about their weirdly-defined, self-serving version of religious liberty, then I know to avoid that person. So I suppose their war against the ACLU has accomplished something–for us at least.As I read the last sentence, I visualized old “frothy-mouthed” Liberator freaking out at the “demon ACLU” while he read my Post #9, Post #4, and Post #17 ... shaking head ... |
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Tater, America lost its love for the ACLU years ago. The ACLU is a putrid, cesspool of communists and has no connection to liberties, freedoms and rights.
#2. To: buckeroo (#1) (Edited)
You made it blatantly obvious that you lost your love for America when you deserted America and moved out of our beloved great nation. You have no creditability to say anything about America or how America feels....you no longer live here. God Bless America....and long live our wonderful President Donald Trump. Tater, America lost its love for the ACLU years ago.
Foreigner, YOU don’t speak for America.
#3. To: buckeroo, Gatlin (#1)
The ACLU is a putrid, cesspool of communists and has no connection to liberties, freedoms and rights.
+100. And NOTHING BUT.
No real American supports the subversive policies of the ACLU and its close fascist-Commie cousin, the SPLC.
#4. To: Gatlin, buckeroo (#2)
You have no creditability to say anything about America or how America feels....
You of ALL people cannot be serious.
You're a Police Statist FIRST, Obedient To Your CO (whomever, WHATEVER it is) SECOND, and "American" and In Name Only, THIRD.
....you no longer live here.
So you're saying Mexican Invaders that DO "live here" are MORE "American" than a patriot who merely resides elsewhere?
I know a LOT of Americans who've served but who now live in Costa Rica. You gonna tell THEM they're "discredited" as Americans with "no love" for the USA?
#5. To: Liberator (#4)
It is YOU who is saying that I said that....when I never did. How long have you had your problem of making false perceptions? Your suggestive accusations are a complete and total work of fiction, so they are really of no interest to me. You of ALL people cannot be serious.
I was as serious as a heart attack. You're a Police Statist FIRST, Obedient To Your CO (whomever, WHATEVER it is) SECOND, and "American" and In Name Only, THIRD.
Wrong. So you're saying Mexican Invaders that DO "live here" are MORE "American" than a patriot who merely resides elsewhere?
No! I know a LOT of Americans who've served but who now live in Costa Rica.
So what? You gonna tell THEM they're "discredited" as Americans with "no love" for the USA?
No, I am not gonna TELL them anything of the sort.
#6. To: Gatlin, Fred Mertz, Buckeroo (#5)
You're a Police Statist FIRST, Obedient To Your CO (whomever, WHATEVER it is) SECOND, and "American" and In Name Only, THIRD.Wrong.
Ok, maybe the order is wrong. If I had boxed that, I'd still have won the Trifecta.
So you're saying Mexican Invaders that DO "live here" are MORE "American" than a patriot who merely resides elsewhere?
No!
It is YOU who is saying that I said that....when I never did.
I'm only connecting the dots from what you DID say.
In your response to Bucky, you've based your presumption of his "love for America" and "credibility" solely on his current *residence*.
If THAT is your opinion, wouldn't that mean that you, Gatlin, regards domestic enemies and illegal invaders who reside *within* US borders as "loving" America MORE than expats?
Not only that, you, Gatlin, also strongly stated that any opinion on America by Bucky (and apparently any other expats) is invalid OR lacking "credibility".
Still standing by your accusatory statements?
How long have you had your problem of making false perceptions?
Your own words are "perceptions"? Nice spin. (Oh wait -- it was lame.)
Your suggestive accusations are a complete and total work of fiction, so they are really of no interest to me.
YOU, Gatlin, stated Bucky as NOT loving America. You also claimed any opinion of his is "discredited".
It is crystal clear exactly who made up "accusations" and fictionalized presumptions: Gatlin.
#7. To: Liberator (#3)
I don’t know if you consider the folks on the list below to be real Americans, but it would be a logical conclusion that based on what the ACLU did for these CONSERVATIVE Americans, that they probably do fully support the ACLU on certain causes. The ACLU even helped Rush Limbaugh – ACLU Asks Court to Protect Confidentiality of Rush Limbaugh's Medical Records. The ACLU defended Ann Coulter after the conservative pundit cancelled a speech at the University of California, Berkeley, citing security concerns. The ACLU defended Milo Yiannopoulos’ right to free speech after D.C.’s transit removed the conservative author’s ads.. The ACLU defended a Confederate veterans group that wanted the state of Texas to approve a specialty license plate with the Confederate flag. The state denied the plate, and the veterans group sued Texas for violating its free speech. When Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy said in 2012 he believes marriage is between a man and a woman, city mayors in Boston and Chicago wanted to give the Christian- owned restaurant the boot. But the ACLU very publicly had Chick-fil-A's back. When Congress was debating renewing the Patriot Act (the 2001 law that allowed the National Security Agency to collect Americans' phone data) the ACLU and the tea party started running TV ads together calling for the end of the NSA program. The head of the ACLU and the president of Tea Party Patriots co-wrote an op-ed in The Des Moines Register on the issue. When Republican mega-donors Charles and David Koch announced a Koch-funded public campaign for criminal justice reform, the ACLU hopped on board. And the list goes on ... No real American supports the subversive policies of the ACLU.
It is not within your power to decide what real Americans support or do not support. You cannot speak for them. However, your speculation is probably correct in this case since no real American probably would ever support the subversive policies of any group. The most famous conservative that the ACLU went to bat for was Ollie North, improperly convicted in the Iran–Contra affair - Wikipedia . It was the ACLU that got him out of prison. See: Ollie’s allies at the ACLU .
#8. To: Gatlin (#7)
How did the ACLU get Olive North out of prison when he was never there?
#9. To: Liberator (#3)
You are essentially making a rushed conclusion without considering verifiable facts. Please document and validate your allegation by naming all members of the ACLU who are communists. IOW – put up or shut up. The ACLU is a putrid, cesspool of communists ...
You are erroneously attempting to make a reasonable argument out of a hasty generalization. The hasty generalization you have made is an informal fallacy and faulty generalization since you are reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence.
#10. To: Gatlin (#7) (Edited)
It is not within your power to decide what real Americans support or do not support.
You actually mean to say: "It is the "right" of elites and Statists to rule over the lowly citizenry as ALL policy, law, and especially agenda are ours alone to make."
"Power" is not actually the issue here, but then Statists always seem to parse life through the lens of "power" and subjugation. AND prioritizing "power" over everything else, don't they?
What IS important is the power for REAL Americans to voice their/our opinion as a matter of PRINCIPLE. This Republic was founded NOT ON the whims of self-anointed overlords, so-called Elites and Statist soldiers who attempt to usurp the power of We The People.
....and essence of American *consensus* IS.
You can wear out your knee pads and drool over the anti-America, anti-Christian, anti-soverignty fascist-Communist policies all you want -- it doesn't change THE truth:
The ACLU is a subversive, reptilian organization that has been undermining and sabotaging America from within.
#11. To: A K A Stone (#8)
How did the ACLU get Olive North out of prison when he was never there?
Ooops.
Notice the parsing of the word, "defending"; The ACLU *never* went to court to sue on behalf of any "conservative" or conservative org. They merely go on record half-heartedly as a stunt. "Publicly having their back" = BS.
The ACLU reminds me of what the Soviets did ONLY once the US dropped their nukes on Japan; They "declared war" on Japan. IOW, phony displays of support.
The ACLU actually "defended" NONE of those entities Gatlin mentioned in a court of law. Thus, his list is just "FAKE-DEFENSE".
#12. To: A K A Stone (#8)
Details: Civil Liberties Union Asks Court To Quash Iran-Contra Indictment. How did the ACLU get Olive North out of prison when he was never there?
Sorry, that should have been “kept out of prison with a suspended prison term.” Thanks. I need to slow down a bit. Ollie North was convicted in the Iran–Contra affair of the late 1980s .He was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Gerhard Gesell on July 5, 1989 to a three-year suspended prison term, two years probation and $150,000 in fines. But his convictions were vacated and reversed, and all charges against him dismissed in 1991.
I think I got it right now....please let me know if I did not.
#13. To: Gatlin (#12)
I need to slow down a bit.
You are so slow-w-w-w that you have to correct your own posts. How did you ever land a job in the USAF as a tater peeler for 20 years?
#14. To: Gatlin, A K A Stone (#12)
Thanks. I need to slow down a bit.
From what? Defending the ACLU so HARD?
Can't wait for your stanch defense of the SPLC and Rosenstein.
#15. To: Gatlin (#12)
Details: Civil Liberties Union Asks Court To Quash Iran-Contra Indictment.
Wow. The ACLU "axed" the court not to do something?
Chyeah -- nothing like WORDS tossed out there by a red ACLU carrier pigeon as a "defense" of ANYTHING. I'm sure Ollie North was relieved.
#16. To: buckeroo (#13)
How did you ever land a job in the USAF as a tater peeler for 20 years?
I don't even want to imagine *that* process.
#17. To: Gatlin, Buckeroo (#6) (Edited)
Gatlin,
Are you still standing by your above accusatory statements made to Bucky regarding his "love" of America AND degree of "credibility" based on his expat status?
And simple YES or NO will suffice.
Thanks.
#18. To: Liberator, A K A Stone (#11)
In a legal brief filed in a Federal appeals cour, the liberties union said the conspiracy indictment against the defendants must be dismissed on grounds that their testimony before Congress was being used against them in violation of the Constitution. The three testified under grants of limited immunity from prosecution. The ACLU actually "defended" NONE of those entities Gatlin mentioned in a court of law. The ACLU *never* went to court to sue on behalf of any "conservative" or conservative org. Thus, his list is just "FAKE-DEFENSE".
Oh, but the ACLU most certainly did “DEFEND.”. I will take time to prove only one of the instances to show that you are lying. The ACLU filing a legal brief in a Federal appeals court is not just “FAKE-DEFENSE.” It was a full- fledged legal action (REAL-DEFENSE) in a court of law to clear Ollie North and tow others indicted for their roles in the Iran-contra affair.
You really need to give it up, Liberator, and come out of denial....STOP YOUR DAMN LYING.
#19. To: buckeroo, Liberator (#16)
It was with superior intellect and extremely warm personal charm. I enlisted at the age of 17 years and rose up through 12 ranks in 10 pay grades going from Private to Tech Sergeant and then Second Lieutenant to Major. Toot—Toot—Toot ... Thanks for asking. Bucky: How did you ever land a job in the USAF as a tater peeler for 20 years?
Off topic, but I will answer your question. Liberator: I don't even want to imagine *that* process.
You really need to imagine that process, for “imagining” and “dreaming” about the possibility of you ever being able to have done the same is probably all you could ever do.
#20. To: Liberator (#17)
Are you still standing by your above accusatory statements made to Bucky regarding his "love" of America AND degree of "credibility" based on his expat status? And simple YES or NO will suffice. Thanks. Gatlin,
Your question is based on false premises, in which case it is not sound....and a YES or NO answer is not possible.
#21. To: Liberator (#15)
Furthermore, your sarcasm to mask your ignorance was an abject failure. Details: Civil Liberties Union Asks Court To Quash Iran-Contra Indictment.
Yep, and the filing of that legal brief by the ACLU for Ollie North with the appeals court proved you to be a liar....admit it!
#22. To: Liberator, A K A Stone (#14)
I try to cover ground as quickly as I can when dealing with a totally ignorant person, one who is unknowledgeable, uneducated and uninformed. Thanks. I need to slow down a bit.
No, From dealing with ignoramuses like I am doing with you now.
From what? Defending the ACLU so HARD? Can't wait for your stanch defense of the SPLC and Rosenstein.
Another false presumption by you. I see no reason or way that will ever happen.
#23. To: buckeroo (#13)
How did you ever land a job in the USAF as a tater peeler for 20 years?
Asked and answered on how I got a job in the Air Force and I never pulled one day of KP duty....hence, no potato peeling for me.
#24. To: Liberator (#10)
You actually mean to say: "It is the "right" of elites and Statists to rule over the lowly citizenry as ALL policy, law, and especially agenda are ours alone to make." So, what you said is your opinion and you are entitled to your opinion. I resect that and I was prepared for 24 years to give my life for tjhat freedom. Since you obviously feel so strongly about that opinion, you should have absolutely no trouble elucidating for me as to what caused you to form that strong opinion by relating specifics and and not generalities. I would like to hear your reason(s). It is not within your power to decide what real Americans support or do not support.
“There you go again!” No, I never “mean” to say anything. I say exactly what I want to and I say it when I want to....to the point. "Power" is not actually the issue here ...
You took the word out of context....don’t do hat. I said “within your power.” Look up the use of that phrase and you will find that if it is in someone’s power to do something, they have the authority or ability to do it. You have neither the authority or the ability to decide what real Americans support or do not support. What IS important is the power for REAL Americans to voice their/our opinion as a matter of PRINCIPLE.
That is true. But is is MORE important that they do not voice their opinion on FALSE PREMISES like you have been dong....actually lying....and try to browbeat others into agreeing with you. Statists always seem to parse life through the lens of "power" and subjugation. AND prioritizing "power" over everything else, don't they?
No, I would use the word CONTROL. Statists advocate for a political system in which the state has substantial centralized control over social and economic affairs. And if that is the system they desire, then they have the ABSOLUTE right to advocate for it. I would never advocate for SUBSTANTIAL centralized control, although I see that limited controls over social and economic affairs are necessary in a society. Republic was founded NOT ON the whims of self-anointed overlords, so-called Elites and Statist soldiers who attempt to usurp the power of We The People.
What a profound ridiculously ignorant statement to make. Of course it was not. ....and essence of American *consensus* IS.
I really don’t understand what you are TRYING to say here. But consensus in the wrong word to use when you are tying it to your statement on how the Rebpulic was founded. You can wear out your knee pads and drool over the anti-America, anti-Christian, anti-soverignty fascist-Communist policies all you want -- it doesn't change THE truth ...
Not doing that....never have done that....never intend todo that! The ACLU is a subversive, reptilian organization that has been undermining and sabotaging America from within.
You keep making these charges and you NEVER show any proof of them. I am still waiting for you to list all the communists you say are in the ACLU. Why haven’t you already done that?
#25. To: Liberator (#6)
Wrong. Ok, maybe the order is wrong. If I had boxed that, I'd still have won the Trifecta. No! I'm only connecting the dots from what you DID say. Now, how about listing the communists you say fill the ACLU? You're a Police Statist FIRST, Obedient To Your CO (whomever, WHATEVER it is) SECOND, and "American" and In Name Only, THIRD.
It has nothing to do with the “order.” The premises are wrong. So you're saying Mexican Invaders that DO "live here" are MORE "American" than a patriot who merely resides elsewhere?
Nope, you are making up bullshit. In your response to Bucky, you've based your presumption of his "love for America" and "credibility" solely on his current *residence*.
Nope. If THAT is your opinion, wouldn't that mean that you, Gatlin, regards domestic enemies and illegal invaders who reside *within* US borders as "loving" America MORE than expats?
No. Not only that, you, Gatlin, also strongly stated that any opinion on America by Bucky (and apparently any other expats) is invalid OR lacking "credibility".
Nothing to do with other expats. Still standing by your accusatory statements?
Yes. And you should notice that he has denied none of them. Your own words are "perceptions"? Nice spin. (Oh wait -- it was lame.)
Yes, they are. YOU, Gatlin, stated Bucky as NOT loving America. You also claimed any opinion of his is "discredited".
Yes I did that. Have I miss where he denied it. It is crystal clear exactly who made up "accusations" and fictionalized presumptions: Gatlin.
I never made any "accusations." An “accusation” is: A charge or claim that someone has done something illegal or wrong. I never indicated in any way what Bukcy did or said was “illegal” or “wrong.” Did I?
#26. To: Gatlin (#25)
Now, how about listing the communists you say fill the ACLU?
Ok, I laughed. HARD.
Gatlin at Nuremberg: "Name the'Nazis'!!"
Gatlin in Shanghai: "WHAT Chinese??"
Gatlin at the National P*ssy-Hat Convention: "List the Feminists!"
Gatlin at the Cemetery: "I suppose you'll tell me only dead people live here!"
I think we're about done here, Major Comrade.
#27. To: Liberator (#6)
Anyone else wondering about Gatlin's apparent joy in doing free PR for the ACLU? Is he getting paid?
...llegal invaders who reside *within* US borders...
On that topic - did you happen to catch any of the pro-illegal immigration protests earlier today?
Now they are calling for ICE to be disbanded.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#28. To: Liberator (#26)
Ok, I laughed. HARD. I went into my library and looked up the title of a book. I refreshed myself on the contents while there. The study is titled Flustered and faithful: embarrassment as a signal of prosociality. There is a section that described what you apparently was undergoing when you had a HARD laugh. It was an Embarrassed Laugh evidently brought on by the fact that you could in no way document your contention that the ACLU is filled with communist and the fact that I proved to you beyond a shadow of a doubt that the ACLU did indeed DEFEND many conservatives in court cases, starting with Ollie North. BTW. as I said to you before....your attempt at sarcastic humor leaves a lot to be desired. In fact, you really should give it up so you will not continue to make a fool of yourself. Just sayin’ ... Now, how about listing the communists you say fill the ACLU?
I find that extremely interesting, that you laughed....and especially laughed HARD. I wondered what could have been so funny to you. Then I remembered a study I read a few years back. I think we're about done here ...
I can understand how you feel that way. I know that I have been consistently tough on you after I drilled into you, my factual points time after time. But I had no desire to inflict any pain and I do apologize for your hurt feelings.
#29. To: Deckard (#27) (Edited)
Anyone else wondering about Gatlin's apparent joy in doing free PR for the ACLU?
Is he getting paid?
They could never afford me.
#30. To: Gatlin, Koch Bros ACLU libertarian (#28)
Koch Brothers ACLU Libertarian
Let the free market decide what's for lunch
#31. To: hondo68 (#30)
The government fucks them every day. Libertarians say they don’t need sex.
#32. To: Gatlin (#28) (Edited)
I wondered what could have been so funny to you. Then I remembered a study I read a few years back.I went into my library and looked up the title of a book. I refreshed myself on the contents while there. The study is titled Flustered and faithful: embarrassment as a signal of prosociality.
Don't try and play psychiatrist. It only serves to reinforce your own insecurities and impotency as a debater, a patriot, an honest broker.
It was an Embarrassed Laugh evidently brought on by the fact that you could in no way document your contention that the ACLU is filled with communist and the fact that I proved to you beyond a shadow of a doubt that the ACLU did indeed DEFEND many conservatives in court.
That kind of "hard laugh" is one of incredulity, of contempt, of that which hits an "11" on the 1-10 scale of stupidity.
I don't make it a practice to "debate" an opponent whose perception of reality is far beyond the scope of the "normal" range, scraping the "INSANE" Zone.
If you took a poll of conservatives on their opinion BASED ON ACTUAL REALITY, 95% of conservatives would concur with the notion that the ACLU is IN FACT a Communist Organization.
IF the ACLU just happened to have supported any conservative in ANY case, the chances Conservatives by and large recognize such cases to be highly questionable at best, motives conspicuous, and likely self-serving. The ACLU only takes cases in which the Leftist/Commie cause will be buttressed and supported for their OWN future cases and causes.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]