Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, Check users, delete, edit, move, oversight, protect, rollback, Administrators
51,035
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 61:
Line 61: + + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Alliance Defending Freedom (view source)
Revision as of 01:30, June 27, 2018
, 01:30, June 27, 2018no edit summary
How about their recent (successful) defense of Jack Phillips? They protected his religious liberty and right to refuse service on those grounds. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 13:40, 26 June 2018 (EDT)
How about their recent (successful) defense of Jack Phillips? They protected his religious liberty and right to refuse service on those grounds. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 13:40, 26 June 2018 (EDT)
:That case began before the Supreme Court in July 2016 - six months before the coup at ADF. I agree that ADF was good before the coup at ADF. Also, Trump supported ADF in this case; why didn't ADF support Trump in his case? But thanks for your feedback.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 18:14, 26 June 2018 (EDT)
:That case began before the Supreme Court in July 2016 - six months before the coup at ADF. I agree that ADF was good before the coup at ADF. Also, Trump supported ADF in this case; why didn't ADF support Trump in his case? But thanks for your feedback.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 18:14, 26 June 2018 (EDT)
::You say it was good before 2016, but surely it's not ''terrible'' now -- they're not anywhere near the level of the SPLC, ACLU, or Koch Brothers (and the SPLC still labels them a "hate group", which is a very good sign for the ADF). They're not fighting for left-wing causes like those groups are, and much the opposite -- they just won ''Arlene's Flowers v. State of Washington'' and ''National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra'' in the Supreme Court, and they're trying to get the Court to hear ''Rowan County v. Lund''. In May 2017, they ''willingly agreed'' to defend a young Earth creation scientist (Andrew Snelling) who was being discriminated against by the National Park Service -- how many organizations would do that??? The point is that even with its flaws, the ADF is '''nowhere close''' to leftist groups like the SPLC or Koch brothers, and unlike those groups, they're still fighting for conservative Christians. The intro should make it clear and not misrepresent anything -- that the ADF definitely has flaws, but that it still does some very good work. Why does the intro have to read completely pro or completely con for a group with a mixed record?
::In addition to what I wrote above, let me repeat what I mentioned above -- '''why''' does the ADF (a religious freedom group) have to take a stance on immigration, which is outside of the organization's original scope? The ADF commented on what it had to (and even defended the Trump Administration, such as on the tweeting thing) and appropriately left the immigration issue for actual immigration groups (Center for Immigration Studies, NumbersUSA) to defend.
::Also:
::*Must a pro-Second Amendment group be required to publically praise Trump's immigration or trade policies?
::*Must a pro-life group be required to publically praise Trump's general deregulatory agenda?
::*Must a conservative veterans group be required to publically praise Trump's trade policies?
::*Must a pro-religious freedom group (like ADF) be required to publically praise Trump's immigration policies?
::All of these groups have very narrow focuses -- and there's nothing wrong with that. They focus on one specific area, where they excel, and they usually refrain from commenting on political issues outside of their expertise. The ADF is no different. Also, I know of several Christian groups that are clearly and overwhelmingly conservative (even politically), but they refrain from explicitly commenting on politics other than when it is relevant to their focuses on promoting correct Christian doctrine. Conservative and Christian groups are under no obligation to comment on every single political issue out there -- and oftentimes, it's better that they don't. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:30, 26 June 2018 (EDT)