Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register


The American Civil Liberties Union invited activists, pundits and media types – like Pam Spaulding, Rachel Maddow and John Aravosis – to write a few words on gay pride. And, for some reason, they asked our editor, who wrote a surprisingly earnest piece. Here’s but a taste: “When I think of gay pride, I don’t think of gay people. Okay, well, that’s not true. I do think of gay people… But, more than all those communities, that proverbial melting pot, I see America: a nation built on the revolutionary idea that citizens should live as individuals, free of tyranny.” [ACLU]

On:           Jun 17, 2008
Tagged: , , , , , ,
    • Charley

      You said the right talking points. Non-profits are hurting during these downward spiraling economic times. Charitable contributions are the first to suffer.

      Jun 18, 2008 at 7:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charley

      The ACLU has done great things for civil rights, but they also defended Fred Phelps “God Hates Fags”. Also neo-Nazi’s.

      Jun 18, 2008 at 7:29 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charley

      ACLU played a minor role in the recent California Supreme Court marriage case by sibmitting a legal brief amoung many briefs. I guess they want to step in and take credit and suddenly get real LGBT friendly. They have a broad spectrum and possibly end up defending NAMBLA.

      Jun 18, 2008 at 7:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chris Hampton

      I think it’s hardly fair to describe the ACLU’s role in the California marriage lawsuit as “minor” and as only submitting a legal brief. There were four or five lawsuits at the outset, one of which was the ACLU’s. The lawsuits were then merged, and the ACLU worked side-by-side with all the other groups. We did a LOT of work at the trial court and all stages of the appeals process. To minimize our role is not only inaccurate, but insulting to the plaintiffs we represented.

      As for the NAMBLA lawsuit which the ACLU of Massachusetts handled, this statement can explain that better — as well as why we defended the First Amendment rights of neo-Nazis and other such groups:


      Hope maybe that helps you understand a little.

      Jun 18, 2008 at 12:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • Copyright 2016 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.