A “concerned” individual expressed that they were unable to find evidence supporting AFA’s statements of ACLU “support” on issues mentioned in my post, The War on Innocence.  I felt I should address this person’s “concerns”.

Support Defined

I’ll use Webster to make perfectly clear what I mean by “support”:

²   Main Entry: 1sup·port
Pronunciation: s&-'pOrt, -'port
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French supporter, from Late Latin supportare, from Latin, to carry, from sub- + portare to carry -- more at FARE
1 : to endure bravely or quietly : BEAR
2 a (1) : to promote the interests or cause of (2) : to uphold or defend as valid or right : ADVOCATE (3) : to argue or vote for b (1) : ASSIST, HELP (2) : to act with (a star actor) (3) : to bid in bridge so as to show support for c : to provide with substantiation : CORROBORATE
3 a : to pay the costs of : MAINTAIN b : to provide a basis for the existence or subsistence of
4 a : to hold up or serve as a foundation or prop for b : to maintain (a price) at a desired level by purchases or loans; also : to maintain the price of by purchases or loans
5 : to keep from fainting, yielding, or losing courage : COMFORT
6 : to keep (something) going

Child Pornography

I googled child pornography in relation to the ACLU.  I found plenty of references, and such by conservative and Christian sources backing my statement that they do support the legalization of Child Pornography.  One such site noted the ACLU’s amicus role in a 1982 Supreme Court Case (New York vs Ferber, 458 U.S. 747) where the legalization of sale and distribution of child pornography was being sought.  It was turned down in a unanimous decision by the Supreme Court.

In regard to this case a quote from the book Twilight Of Liberty: The Legacy of the ACLU

²    The ACLU's position is this: criminalize the production but legalize the sale and distribution of child pornography. This is the kind of lawyerly distinction that no one on the Supreme Court found convincing. And with good reason: as long as a free market in child pornography exists, there will always be some producers willing to risk prosecution. Beyond this, there is also the matter of how the sale of child pornography relates either to free speech or the ends of good government. But most important, the central issue is whether a free society should legalize transactions that involve the wholesale sexploitation of children for profit."

The ACLU objects to the idea that porn movie producers be required to maintain records of ages of its performers; this would be "a gross violation of privacy."

I realize that this is a book written by someone who does not completely agree with the ACLU and therefore many liberals say it is “biased”.  So, I looked up what an ACLU website had to say about child pornography and this is what I found:

²    3. Why does the ACLU support pornography? Why are you in favor of child porn?
The ACLU does not support pornography or child porn. However, we do oppose virtually all forms of censorship. Possessing certain books or films, even pornographic ones, should not make one a criminal. Once society starts censoring “bad or offensive” ideas, it becomes very difficult to draw the line. As the saying goes, “one man’s art is another man’s pornography.” As for child pornography, the ACLU supports the right of the government to prosecute the makers of child pornography for exploiting minors. (emphasis added)

So which is it?  They say they do “not support it” yet in New York vs Ferber they gave professional advice to those defending ones right to sell and distribute it.  Then, in their own statement on the subject they insinuate that it’s considered art by some and should be protected from censorship.  Decide for yourself, but to me you can’t ride the line on this one – you either support it or you don’t.  And what of the rights of those children being exploited, they say the government has the right to prosecute exploiters but that the exploiters have the right to be uncensored?  It’s ridiculous.

NAMBLA

There’s more than ample support on conservative and Christian sites in my opinion.  However, I found this on the ACLU website concerning their defense of NAMBLA:

²    Why did the ACLU defend NAMBLA?
In representing NAMBLA, the ACLU does not advocate sexual relationships between adults and children. What we do advocate is robust freedom of speech. This lawsuit strikes at the heart of freedom of speech. The defense of freedom of speech is most critical when the message is one most people find repulsive. For more information, please read the ACLU’s press release. (emphasis added)

Ok, so they say they’re defending NAMBLA’s “freedom of speech”.  I believe the statement in my post said they “defended” this organization, which is fact.  You may agree with the circumstances under which they chose to defend NAMBLA, that’s your prerogative of course.  The AFA statement was directed to the support and defense given to the NAMBLA organization by the ACLU.  Using support as defined above, they gave their service, which, in an active sense is giving support to said organization.    The statement is not false, it is quite true.  “Saying” they don’t advocate what this group represents and then defending their “right” to promote these atrocities against children…..well, it’s also ridiculous and contradictory in my opinion.  Actions speak louder than words.

Polygamy

Again, I found plenty of conservative and Christian sites citing the ACLU stance on this but referred also to the group’s own statements.  On the ACLU site, a quote from a press release regarding bigamy laws in Utah:

²    The American Civil Liberties Union of Utah told the paper that it plans to back the group's challenge to Utah's bigamy law.

"Living arrangements are really the most intimate kinds of decisions people make," said ACLU of Utah Legal Director Stephen Clark. "Talking to Utah's polygamists is like talking to gays and lesbians who really want the right to live their lives, and not live in fear because of whom they love. So certainly that kind of privacy expectation is something the ACLU is committed to protecting."

There you have it, the support (“backing”) of legalized polygamy.  Not sure much else could be said on that.  You decide. 

Thank you to “Concerned” for the challenge to do more research.  It is very important that none of us take any piece of information as fact before researching.  You may not agree with everything the AFA puts out there but on this, they were spot on.  It seems the ACLU has forgotten that children are being harmed by those rights they are defending.  Or maybe the children don’t have a loud enough voice and deep enough pocket books.