[=Intervention=]

Straw man argument. You can do better. Posting only the times where the ACLU ended up strengthening the Constitution does not take into account the source of Freeper's point of dispute, namely, the cases in which they defended all sorts of anti-Constitutional positions. Duh.

[ConsistentLibertarian]

"Straw man argument. [...] Posting only the times where the ACLU ended up strengthening the Constitution does not take into account the source of Freeper's point of dispute, namely, the cases in which they defended all sorts of anti-Constitutional positions."

In post #28 to which I was replying, montag813 describes the ACLU as a "America-hating terror group" on a "jihad to ... subvert the Constitution"

And this, by the way, was in response to my original claim that much of the hostility towards the ACLU on FR stems from ignorance.

Apparently you agree, since you suggest that in every case listed in post #46 the ACLU successfully strengthened the Constitution and that the only judicious complaint a Freeper could have is that in other cases one might (and many here do) disagree with their position on the Constitution.

Now, if you're suggesting that montag813 is a straw man easily blown over, I might agree with you. But that's evidence for my original claim: there's a great deal of hostility towards the ACLU on FR, but very little of it is well-informed.