Changes

→‎Objection to recent edit: Its stinging statement of neutrality on Trump's attempt to protect our country is striking and insulting. If you can point to good conservative work ADF has done since its coup, such as filing amicus briefs against a ri
Line 6: Line 6:     
I am OK leaving all of the info in the article, but the intro should be rephrased closer to how it was before. Taking no position on a non-religious liberty case is not enough to defame the organization. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:01, 24 June 2018 (EDT)
 
I am OK leaving all of the info in the article, but the intro should be rephrased closer to how it was before. Taking no position on a non-religious liberty case is not enough to defame the organization. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:01, 24 June 2018 (EDT)
 +
:I have an open mind about this, but there was a "coup" at ADF in early 2017 and [[Never Trump movement|Never Trump]]ers apparently took over.  ADF '''''was''''' a great organization but today it looks more like yet another anti-Trump group.  Its stinging statement of neutrality on Trump's attempt to protect our country is striking and insulting.  If you can point to good [[conservative]] work ADF has done since its coup, such as filing amicus briefs against a right to [[abortion]] by [[illegal aliens]], I'd love to see it.  I don't think the new ADF has done so.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:48, 24 June 2018 (EDT)
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,437

edits