What did the defend that's objectionable. Promoting changes to statuatory rape laws?
You may not be aware of this, but having sex with children is illegal. NAMBLA promotes illegal behavior. But I don't want to acctually have to explain to you why the rape of children is wrong. If you don't know then there's no point discussing it.
And I disagree with their defense of them. They were defending the right of Nambla to publish their literature. The ACLU seems to have a blind defense policy where they defend all first ammendment cases, hence their defense of Falwell after he blamed 9/11 on them.
