| | |  | |
01-16-2008, 08:06 PM
|
#31 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: New Jersey
Posts: 2,064
|
Coureur, why in the world would social conservatives want Craig saved? He is a "stinky albatross" in the words of VD Hanson. And the only thing he was known for that would fall under the social conservative umbrella was his objection to gay marriage. (Oh, the irony...) He was championing amnesty for illegals, but othewise was a faceless dud in congress.
|
| Reply
|
01-16-2008, 08:09 PM
|
#32 | | Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 263
|
I saw a store clerk in a furniture store get tipped by 2 men when he gave them the keys to a private locked restroom. The problem is that it does tie the restroom up for a few minutes, but my guess is that the clerk made a nice sum on the side because of the area it was in.
|
| Reply
|
01-16-2008, 08:11 PM
|
#33 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: New Jersey
Posts: 2,064
|
Remind me never to buy a floor sample.
|
| Reply
|
01-16-2008, 08:46 PM
|
#34 | | Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 760
|
The ACLU doesn't take sides.
|
| Reply
|
01-16-2008, 09:12 PM
|
#35 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Olympia, WA
Posts: 9,662
|
"If Craig uses this as a DEFENSE, isn't that basically an admission of guilt??"
yes.
(the cure is worse than the disease.)
|
| Reply
|
01-16-2008, 09:56 PM
|
#36 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,688
|
How did I miss this thread? OMGosh...wild ACLU attorneys in splattered stalls with swinging doors? Foot tapping Senators...
Now I remember - it grosses me out.
Uh, how could you tell they were ACLU attorneys and not regular attorneys? (just curious...is it like "gaydar"?)
Last edited by parent2noles; 01-16-2008 at 10:03 PM.
|
| Reply
|
01-16-2008, 10:22 PM
|
#37 | | New Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 18
|
I'm a liberal, but this is a bonehead move by the ACLU.
I think the Bush administration would have given 20 ACLUs more work then they could handle without worrying about this BS.
|
| Reply
|
01-16-2008, 10:45 PM
|
#38 | | Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 582
|
Why does this thread keep referring to two ACLU lawyers having sex in a public rest room? They have long since moved here to MA, gotten married, and opened a bed-and-breakfast. A much more likely scenario is two Republican married "but I'm not really gay" Evangelicals.
|
| Reply
|
01-17-2008, 06:38 AM
|
#39 | | Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 893
|
I guess if a woman can find a stall she better be prepared to make full use of it.
Last edited by 07DAD; 01-17-2008 at 06:53 AM.
|
| Reply
|
01-17-2008, 08:10 AM
|
#40 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,311
|
My daughter's all-women's dorm has co-ed bathrooms in several parts of the building for the convenience of male visitors (and also to protect their plumbing -- the individual dorm rooms each have their own sinks, and we all know what male visitors would do in those sinks if there was no bathroom nearby). Perhaps the co-ed facilities could be helpful to girls living in doubles who otherwise would have to sexile their roommates.
|
| Reply
|
01-17-2008, 08:33 AM
|
#41 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,688
|
OK, I now have to admit it'd be interesting to see the bathrooms in that B&B. |
| Reply
|
01-17-2008, 08:58 AM
|
#42 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: CT
Posts: 1,947
|
Coureur, the ACLU truly focuses on freedoms and civil rights -- everyone's, not just those of liberals. They act on the concept of "I may hate what you have to say but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." It is a very impressive organization, not a liberal organization.
|
| Reply
|
01-17-2008, 09:35 AM
|
#43 | | Senior Member
Join Date: May 2007 Location: Coastal village, Suffolk County, NY
Posts: 3,426
|
Showers are a great place for a co-ed tryst at Barnard. Oops! Bursting the bubbles of mothers who send D's there to avoid boys.
Some of us, however, are vertically challenged. Plumbing problems again.
|
| Reply
|
01-17-2008, 10:21 AM
|
#44 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,435
|
^^Exactly. Which is why Republicans and social conservatives should be applauding and not condemning the ACLU in this matter. It's willing to go to bat for them too and not just for the poor, weak, and downtrodden.
If the ACLU were the unprincipled, God-hating, commie-lovers that conservatives often demonize it as, it should sneering and laughing at Senator Craig's troubles instead of trying to help him.
|
| Reply
|
01-17-2008, 10:47 AM
|
#45 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,118
|
"The privacy argument is just a technicality for a guilty person to avoid conviction but will not help Craig's reputation at all"
I certainly agree that it isn't going to help his reputation. But independent of whether this particular privacy argument has any legal merit, I don't agree that a privacy argument (or any argument that a criminal prosecution was unconstitutional) is a "technicality" for guilty people. The Bill of Rights is not a technicality. The vast majority of privacy arguments in the criminal context come in the area of search and seizure. For example, it's an extremely big deal that the police can't come in and search your house without a warrant or an emergency. That brings tremendous benefits to everyone, whether you're trying to hide marijuana in your house or not.
I don't think the ACLU is likely to carry the day here, but I'm grateful that they pursue these principles so aggressively, even in the case of guilty liars like Sen. Craig.
|
| Reply
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:49 PM. |