-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Apparently ACLU staff can be ignorant of civil liberties !?
- Thread starter icehorse
- Start date
Why do you object to the policy?
This wasn't a joke, @icehorse.
Please explain what problem you have.
I can imagine that an organization like ACLU might
want to hire some staff who are highly motivated,
but in need of training. Is this wrong?
Even though I have a subscription, there's a paywall.
What does the article say?
It's behind a paywall for me now too. Basically, the ACLU has an internal schism forming over how to handle supporting far-right cases, and balancing that with progressive causes.
"Its national and state staff members debate, often hotly, whether defense of speech conflicts with advocacy for a growing number of progressive causes, including voting rights, reparations, transgender rights and defunding the police.
Those debates mirror those of the larger culture, where a belief in the centrality of free speech to American democracy contends with ever more forceful progressive arguments that hate speech is a form of psychological and even physical violence. These conflicts are unsettling to many of the crusading lawyers who helped build the A.C.L.U."
Okay sorry, I honestly thought you were being sarcastic!
So, I guess I'm having trouble imagining that the ACLU is encountering lots of job applicants who simultaneously:
1 - are highly motivated to work at the american CIVIL LIBERTIES union
and
2 - Don't know much about civil liberties
And clearly, if your premise is correct, they must be inundated with such candidates for their director to be motivated to make such a statement.
I remain gobsmacked.
epronovost
Well-Known Member
I don't see why a special class on civil liberties would be necessary for a receptionist working for the ACLU, or someone working in they pay department or a janitor working for the organization. As for the actual lawyers, they already have to pass several exams on civil liberties just to pass the bar exam let alone their individual classes and civil rights lawyers need extra training and specialization in that domain too, making more exams rather superfluous in my opinion. It would be like asking an engineering firm to force its candidate to pass an engineering test before they can start to work for them; universities already do that. That's the entire point of a diploma; to relieve private businesses and organizations from having to train and verify the credential and abilities to perform a specific task.
Most people don't know much about civil liberties.
Without searching, can you enumerate the protections
in just the 1st Amendment?
I find that I must regularly consult the Constitution to
re-familiarize myself with key things of interest.
Do you think that the director of the ACLU issued that statement to attract receptionists and janitors?
Hah! That's a fun challenge, and I confess that I sometimes miscategorize which protections fall under which of the Bill of Rights. So, at the risk of embarrassing myself I'll take a stab that the first amendment discusses freedom of speech, maybe freedom to assemble, freedom of the press? And I'm pretty sure that what I just said is wrong
But this is a bit of a tangent. If I wanted to work at the ACLU in any sort of "higher in the organization than janitor or receptionist" position, I would first bone up on the constitution.
And most certainly, if I was the director, I would be looking for minimally qualified candidates.
I remain gobsmacked.
epronovost
Well-Known Member
I don't know, but what is sure is like in any lawyer firm, there is about as much non-lawyers as there are lawyers to make it work. Most of the people they recruit aren't lawyers and those who are already have passed bar exams and class exams and published a master or even doctoral thesis in most cases making passing tests completely superfluous. Have you not read the second part of the paragraph I posted?
That's a false test. In the IT realm what I have in my memory is a lot less than what I need to remember so I look things up as needed. The most important thing is attitude. For the ACLU obviously this involves loving civil liberties and training won't create that love.
It's dangerous to read too much into a quote thatHah! That's a fun challenge, and I confess that I sometimes miscategorize which protections fall under which of the Bill of Rights. So, at the risk of embarrassing myself I'll take a stab that the first amendment discusses freedom of speech, maybe freedom to assemble, freedom of the press? And I'm pretty sure that what I just said is wrong
But this is a bit of a tangent. If I wanted to work at the ACLU in any sort of "higher in the organization than janitor or receptionist" position, I would first bone up on the constitution.
And most certainly, if I was the director, I would be looking for minimally qualified candidates.
I remain gobsmacked.
says one specific thing without a context.
The claim was no entrance exam....not the same
as "minimally qualified". BTW, the 1st also covers
establishment of religion & petitioning government
Entrance exams typically don't allow internet searches.
For those of us interested in civil liberties, we should
have some knowledge of what they are, & the sources.
Kudos to the ice horse for trying, & getting most.
Last edited:
I once got a job out of ignorance. I was asked what I knew about (technical term). I said only the meaning of the acronym and then added "this is how I'd learn more". Honesty + knowing how to learn got me the job. Someone can be a great memorizer but have the logical capability of a kitten.