Judge Rules Effort to Strip ACORN of Federal Funds Unconstitutional

The rights come from the law whether they are the same or now. It is legality we are talking about.

It would seem that so far the courts disagree with you and it is the courts opinion that is important. So far you have shown opinion, but no rational argument.

[/QUOTE]

As I said, federal funding of all private organizations should be stopped. But it isn't going to happen.

 

As I said, federal funding of all private organizations should be stopped. But it isn't going to happen.

Feel free to make up stuff...it's not like you already aren't doing that.

I repeat (factual information): individual rights aren't extended to a quasi-governmental group. That's not the same thing.

I can't believe that a Christian would justify giving $$ to an organization that justifies child sex trafficking.

But then again...I guess you're willing to make that sacrifice, as long as you can "stick it" to Conservatives.

I find that pitiable.

 

I am not justifying Acorn or defending them. Fortunately or unfortunately they also fall under the law and if it is legal, as this judge ruled, then it does not matter how I feel. I have never said I am defending Acorn. I am talking law, not ethics or morality. The law may or may not be moral. But until it is overturned it is still law and legal.

If you can prove they are trafficking children take them to court and prove it. That is a separate topic from receiving federal funding. I bet if you can prove child trafficking in a court of law the funding will stop. If you can prove it it is your responsibility to take them to court and convict them.

It is like I am against abortion, but abortion is legal, whether I like it or not.

 

Fair enough, then. Kindly point out to me in the Constitution your rationale. And kindly show me the court decisions that offer selfsame guarantees--to organizations on par with individual rights.

*crickets*

It's not there. Period. It may disappoint you (we all know what a fan of big, intrusive government you are...that's obvious), but it's not there. Organizations and individuals are not the same in the law's eyes; they are not afforded the same benefits; they do not receive the same Constitutional guarantees.

Um...yes, you are defending Acorn. Perhaps re-reading the thread will make that clear to you. I'm sure you're not for the horrible things they were willing to help with...but you are defending them.

So...it's my job to take this to court?
First of all, it's on tape. In a normal world--one that didn't pander to perverts at all costs--that would have been enough. Did you not see the tape? Or do you simply not care about it?
Secondly, you've once again made a logical equivalent of Evel Knievel's Grand Canyon stunt. ACORN's not an individual. You don't have to go to court with a "guilty beyond all doubt" approach. You don't have to go to trial to decide whether or not you're going to take money confiscated from working Americans, and give it to an organization that rewards sloth, dishonesty, and absolute filth and perversion (last I checked, prostitution and pedophilia were still filthy and perverted...or do we have to vote on that as well?)

And I cannot help but think that if the president were GW Bush, and the organization were a Christian organization...you'd be outside the White House with a torch and a pitchfork, leading the march.

 

Libbies are not outraged they are relieved. They will find a reason to be outraged when it gets over turned.