They defend the KKK's rights to free speech, not their abhorrent views. Protecting freedom of speech and the press is increasingly necessary in today's world, given how vocal Trump and his staffers are about shutting down dissenting views.
Also, I see that you are a new account. You should read up on the standards for discussion here on Hackernews.
You have a right to free speech, and these websites have a right to publish whatever they want. You are free to type things or to say things, there's no obligation for anyone else to host them or transmit them for you.
The actions of some groups defended by the ACLU are pretty unsavory (like the Westboro Baptist Church), but if anything that shows how true they are to their mission of fighting to protect our rights, regardless of ideology, and that's nothing but commendable.
No, I don't think you are right. Even a brief perusal of the history of the ACLU is one of liberals defending the Constitution. The Scopes trial, Pentagon Papers, Japanese internment, segregation, interracial marriage, McCarthyism, Patriot Act, etc. So liberals have supported the ACLU to defend the Constitution throughout its history, and not just for liberal issues. ACLU supports Citizens United and defended Rush Limbaugh's right to privacy.
ACLU is not in the business of protecting the Second Amendment, and they're upfront about it.
NRA is not in the business of protecting the First Amendment, and they're upfront about it.
Why do you have a different standard for ACLU compared to NRA? You're saying that you're unwilling to financially supporting them, not based on what they do, but based on what they do not. How does what they do not diminish the utility of what they do?
ACLU is not in the business of protecting the Second Amendment, and they're upfront about it.
The ACLU claims to be in the business of protecting the constitution, not only the parts that people with left of center politics like.
They're liars.
NRA is not in the business of protecting the First Amendment, and they're upfront about it.
The NRA is a gun owner's lobbying organization. Their primary activity is the promotion of the second amendment but they have fought for the first amendment. The NRA Civil Defense Fund has taken up First Amendment cases too.
Why do you have a different standard for ACLU compared to NRA?
I don't. The ACLU lies.
You're saying that you're unwilling to financially supporting them, not based on what they do, but based on what they do not. How does what they do not diminish the utility of what they do?
Because the ACLU doesn't defend the Constitution, they have weaponized it.
>In a report issued in February, the Texas affiliate of the National Rifle Association joined the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas and the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition “to spotlight unlawful, unnecessary governmental encroachment on average law-abiding citizens.”
Not defending the 2nd amendment is different than opposing it. You could consider donating to the ACLU and also to an organization that defends the 2nd amendment; assuming there's no blanket organization to your liking. There are many organizations specializing in the 2nd amendment, so it makes some amount of sense for the ACLU to let them do that work, while it's more of a generalist.
>Not defending the 2nd amendment is different than opposing it.
That's not how it works, at least not in my mind. When dealing with something that is assailed as frequently as gun rights, lack of support is the same as opposition.
I want an organization that supports the Constitution, completely and fully.
ACLU is not that organization, and doesn't claim to be.
But then I hope you're not sending a single cent of your money to NRA, either? I mean, they also don't "support the Constitution, completely and fully", right?
Or is that okay because they're explicitly scoped to the Second Amendment?
If so, then ACLU is in the same exact boat, being explicitly scoped to everything other than the Second. And then some: ACLU is the American Civil Liberties Union, not American Constitutional Liberties Union - US Constitution to them is a tool to aid in protecting the civil rights they care about, it's not a definitive list of rights that are worth defending.
It's not hypocrisy, it's just their point of view on the 2nd amendment differs from your view.
ACLU position:
Given the reference to "a well regulated Militia" and "the security of a free State," the ACLU has long taken the position that the Second Amendment protects a collective right rather than an individual right.
And the Supreme Court has ruled, again and again, that it is an individual right. How is it that the ACLU is an originalist when it comes to every amendment except the Second?
