Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, Check users, delete, edit, move, oversight, protect, rollback, Administrators
51,035
edits
Changes
Talk:Alliance Defending Freedom (view source)
Revision as of 02:42, June 27, 2018
, 02:42, June 27, 2018→Objection to recent edit
:::But LifeSiteNews did not file an amicus brief in the Trump travel ban case. ADF did, and went out of its way to distance itself from Trump. It's as though someone when to someone else's party and announced to everyone that "he's no friend" of the host. He's free to do that, and others are free to properly criticize him for it and speculate as to the motivation of the bizarre behavior.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:35, 26 June 2018 (EDT)
:::But LifeSiteNews did not file an amicus brief in the Trump travel ban case. ADF did, and went out of its way to distance itself from Trump. It's as though someone when to someone else's party and announced to everyone that "he's no friend" of the host. He's free to do that, and others are free to properly criticize him for it and speculate as to the motivation of the bizarre behavior.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:35, 26 June 2018 (EDT)
::::I support criticizing ADF for that, but I do '''not''' support completely condemning (in the very first sentence) the ADF on the same level as a group like the SPLC or Koch just because of this, when it (unlike the other groups) still does some legitimately good work. Surely, we can find a way to criticize its problems while still noting the good work, like defending creationists or the pro-life clinic case today, or the pending prayer case, or the florist case. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:42, 26 June 2018 (EDT)