Whenever the ACLU comes up in discussion in school, there is a great backlash against it. OF course, i live in naperville and sometimes the loyalties there are deafening, and as usual many of the kids are retarded...and thats no disrespect to the real mentally challenged. But, the point I always bring up, is that a group like that should be rather radical in its challenges. The point of an ACLU should be to always force our courts to define our rights. If they challenge every near infringement on whats percieved to be a right, we are able to have reference in the courts over what are truly our rights and what aren't. Its hard to sometimes back the organization that gave help to try and get the klu klux klan rights to march in the town in illinois with the highest level of holocaust survivors. But its those times of defending the wickeds rights, that will allow a group of good to have a voice that may change the country for the better. That's always how i've felt and i've admire many of the lawyers because they take on some very difficult cases. However, that one where they challenged that the people of cali didn't have enough time to choose a candidate still puzzles me because it doesn't seem like thats their area. But my point is if they are extreme they define our boundaries. That's all. My name is ben.