You Know Things Are Changing When

[DudleySmith]

A list of the law firms who provide the most 'volunteers' to the ACLU tells the whole story; follow the money.

David vs. Goliath and the ACLU

The Corporate Law Firms Behind Trans Rights Activism

lisaselindavis.substack.com

Where Does the ACLU Get Its Money?

Transcript: Bill O'Reilly's famous "Talking Points Memo" and his "Most Ridiculous Item of the Day"

www.foxnews.com

The A.C.L.U. Has Raised So Much Money that Silicon Valley Is Rushing in to Help

If the tech world knows one thing, it’s how to scale after receiving a massive new investment.

www.vanityfair.com

ACLU loses its biggest donor: $19 million a year

The American Civil Liberties Union has lost a quarter of its yearly donations after a major donor cut off $19 million in annual donations because of economic difficulties.

www.nbcnews.com

$50 Million Soros Grant to Fund ACLU for Reduction of Incarceration - Non Profit News | Nonprofit Quarterly

Leaders across party lines appear to support the ACLU’s campaign for decriminalization efforts at the local, state and federal level.

nonprofitquarterly.org

Big Law loves the big bux from all the civil suits, same as Sharpton and his ilk do with fake 'racism' suits against cities and big companies. They're just the equivalent of ambulance chasers; they don't do squat for free.

Just one example:

David vs. Goliath and the ACLU

The Corporate Law Firms Behind Trans Rights Activism

lisaselindavis.substack.com

So who are the biglaw attorneys who join forces with trans rights activists below the radar? Why do their cosmopolitan employers pay them to rain hellfire down on local school boards? Where are the conservative biglaw attorneys in all this?

I decided to investigate these questions because, as a lawyer myself, I can’t help but gawk at biglaw’s latest folly.

....

The Arkansas litigation is one of at least 22 cases in recent years in which major corporate law firms—the industry is known as “biglaw”—have co-counseled with advocacy groups like the ACLU and Lambda Legal on trans lawsuits, pro bono. Often they face off against state or local government agencies. At least fifteen of these actions concern trans-identified minors’ “medical care” or participation in girls’ sports.

Biglaw can provide manpower, money, and clout to the causes they support. The attorneys staffing the trans cases self-identify as liberals or progressives, most likely, but they earn salaries over $200,000 because of their employers’ commercial practices —which routinely pit them against the interests of poor and middle-income people. In addition to Sullivan & Cromwell, the firms fighting to open girls’ sports to trans-identified boys or allow doctors to modify teens’ secondary sex traits include Debevoise & Plimpton, Baker Botts, Bryan Cave, Perkins Coie, Pillsbury Winthrop, Akin Gump, Arnold & Porter, King & Spalding, and Cooley. These litigation powerhouses represent banks, oil companies, pro sports teams, business executives accused of crimes, and more.


Inventing new 'Civil Rights' is big money for lawyers and big firms. Claiming these ass clowns are working 'pro bono' for 'justice' is laughable nonsense.

 

[martybegan]

This isn’t a religious debate. That’s not what courts are for. If people say that’s their religious beliefs, you have no right to challenge them.

ACLU disagrees and has disagreed since the civil rights act was passed. This isn’t new. They haven’t changed.

Actually you do because nothing exists in a vacuum. The issue becomes free exercise vs. the right to commerce of the other side.

If they were to put a sign out and say "no gays" for point of sale services, commerce would win out. In the case of a contracted wedding cake, free exercise wins out.

The ACLU has given up on pure freedoms and has morphed into a SJW mill that gives crumbs occasionally to right leaning causes.

 

[martybegan]

Yet racists do use the Bible to justify segregation, racism, and slavery.

When I was stationed in the Deep South, I heard that shit countless times.

And now they use the Bible to justify their hatred and discrimination against gays.

This is exactly why our Founder's did all they could to avoid a theocracy.

And those arguments have been debunked repeatedly by biblical scholars, except for the slavery thing, and that form of slavery wasn't chattel slavery, but class slavery. It also said treat your slaves well.

The Bible is pretty explicit on homosexuality being sinful.

They also didn't want to create a country hostile to religion.

 

[martybegan]

A bakery is a public accommodation, just like a lunch counter.

When it does point of sale services, yes. When it does a contracted service, no.

You also have to realize the baker will sell non custom cakes point of sale or contracted to anyone.

 

[Marener]

If they were to put a sign out and say "no gays" for point of sale services, commerce would win out. In the case of a contracted wedding cake, free exercise wins out.

Nope. There is no relevant distinction between point of sale and contract.

 

[Marener]

And those arguments have been debunked repeatedly by biblical scholars, except for the slavery thing, and that form of slavery wasn't chattel slavery, but class slavery. It also said treat your slaves well.

Biblical scholars or apoligists?

 

[martybegan]

Nope. There is no relevant distinction between point of sale and contract.

Yes, there is. Originally public accommodations were just that, restaurants, theaters, hotels. In fact those are what federal laws consider PA's. It took States to bastardize the definition to basically say it's "whenever money changes hands"

In any event PA's are laws, and laws can't deny someone their right to free exercise without a compelling government interest. Even then the conflict has to be resolved via strict scrutiny, and use the minimum level of compulsion to achieve a resolution.

 

[martybegan]

Biblical scholars or apoligists?

View attachment 848854

Life was tough back then. Still better than other groups at the time and how they treated their slaves, such as the Egyptians.

 

[Marener]

Life was tough back then. Still better than other groups at the time and how they treated their slaves, such as the Egyptians.

Moving the goalposts.

 

[martybegan]

Moving the goalposts.

Not at all. Notice the passage you quoted said nothing about race.

 

[Marener]

Yes, there is. Originally public accommodations were just that, restaurants, theaters, hotels. In fact those are what federal laws consider PA's. It took States to bastardize the definition to basically say it's "whenever money changes hands"

In any event PA's are laws, and laws can't deny someone their right to free exercise without a compelling government interest. Even then the conflict has to be resolved via strict scrutiny, and use the minimum level of compulsion to achieve a resolution.

The compelling public interest is commerce, and that’s true with “point of sale” as well as “contracted services”, a distinction which has no relevance to the compelling public interest.

They’re both commerce.

 

[Marener]

Not at all. Notice the passage you quoted said nothing about race.

That’s not what chattel means.

Read a book.

Oh, and you say the bible means they should be treated well, which to you is “beat them but not to death”. Then you move the goalposts to say that was better than historical peers.

 

[martybegan]

The compelling public interest is commerce, and that’s true with “point of sale” as well as “contracted services”, a distinction which has no relevance to the compelling public interest.

They’re both commerce.

Not in this very specific case. It doesn't override free exercise. You see commerce as operating in a vacuum all by itself.

Just because you despise this one form of free exercise.

 

[martybegan]

That’s not what chattel means.

Read a book.

Oh, and you say the bible means they should be treated well, which to you is “beat them but not to death”. GFY

more than 2000 years ago.

Chattel slavery was property slavery. Slavery in Antiquity was class slavery.

 

[Marener]

Not in this very specific case. It doesn't override free exercise. You see commerce as operating in a vacuum all by itself.

Just because you despise this one form of free exercise.

Are point of sale and contract services both commerce? Yes or no?

 

[DudleySmith]

Life was tough back then. Still better than other groups at the time and how they treated their slaves, such as the Egyptians.

Slavery was also a means to pay debts, and was in many cases temporary, for a specific length of time.

 

[Marener]

more than 2000 years ago.

Chattel slavery was property slavery. Slavery in Antiquity was class slavery.

It would help if you would actually read.

 

[martybegan]

Are point of sale and contract services both commerce? Yes or no?

Of course they are. The difference is one is a true PA, the other is not.

And again, Commerce doesn't automatically override free exercise.

It's in the 1st amendment for a reason, they found it to be the most important concepts.

Also, there really isn't a "right" to commerce in the Constitution, only that the government can regulate it.

 

[martybegan]

View attachment 848871

It would help if you would actually read.

I give that over to translation issues, but antiquity slavery was nothing like chattel pre-modern slavery.

 

[Marener]

Of course they are. The difference is one is a true PA, the other is not.

And again, Commerce doesn't automatically override free exercise.

It's in the 1st amendment for a reason, they found it to be the most important concepts.

Also, there really isn't a "right" to commerce in the Constitution, only that the government can regulate it.

So why does on type of commerce apply to public accommodation and one doesn’t?

You keep acting like there’s a significant difference but refuse to explain the rationale.

There probably isn’t a rationale