Tag Archives: first amendment

Jabberwonky Christians are CRAZY style – October 18th

JabberwonkyCDNFinal

When: Friday, October 18th, 11pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: Jabberwonky on Blog Talk Radio

What:

`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.

Whether it’s “down the rabbit hole”, or “through the looking glass”, the world of politics is often referred to in the lexicon given to us by Lewis Carroll. No matter what, those terms are resurrected when referring to something that has gone terribly wrong. And that’s what’s here on Jabberwonky…

Tonight: No, you’re not dreaming, or confused. Well, maybe you are a little confused… It’s Friday, not Sunday. The show is on at 11pm Eastern, not 10pm. Jabberwonky obviously has moved, and that’s because there will be a new show on Sunday nights. (More on that later!) For now, Liz is ticked at liberals – nothing new, but this time it’s a little worse than usual. Yes, they have been absolutely disgusting in their political and press porn lately, whether it’s picking on stenographers, or setting up the Republicans for more garbage after the new year. So, listen in to see just what happens when there isn’t anyone around to keep things a little calm!

Listen to internet radio with CDNews Radio on BlogTalkRadio

Avoiding the truth about Dianne Reidy

500px-Sleeping_in_Sepia

The liberal media has been having a field day with Dianne Reidy, the woman that stepped up to the podium in the House Chamber and started talking about God. And why wouldn’t they? It’s yet another situation where they can poke fun at individuals that happen to believe in God. It doesn’t matter to them that those beliefs are shared by many people in this country, and that belief in a higher being arguably guided the founding of this nation. Remember? People made the treacherous journey to this continent not only for business affairs, but also to escape religious persecution. Well, the world has changed significantly since then, and in spite of the fact that this nation was founded on the principle of freedom of the people to observe their chosen faiths (whatever they may be), the current climate tends more toward the very persecution our forefathers sought to escape by coming here.

And that is precisely what is happening to Reidy. Honestly, I thought there would be a barrage of scholarly items pointing to the psychological aspect of what probably happened to this woman – scientific debunking of her beliefs. That, while generally annoying, is far less reprehensible than the overt ridicule that is being aimed at her. The award for sleaziest coverage so far has to go to Vanity Fair. Sure, it definitely isn’t a bastion of journalistic integrity, so one must lower one’s expectations in reading their drivel. But, their imaginary conversation with the Holy Spirit that they had the audacity to attribute to God himself is a new low for them. I’ve no doubt that they thought it would be amusing – it probably is to many of their readers. Of course, the next time they think it’s a good idea to start touting how tolerant they are of varying views, they should be attacked with both barrels. My advice to their editors? Stick to what you’re good at – putting controversial nudes of celebrities on your front cover, so you can annoy grocery store managers that get complaints from mothers about their young boys ogling skin in the check-out lanes.

The Daily Beast was only slightly less annoying. At least they didn’t overtly ridicule Reidy, or her husband Dan. They even bothered to place a little context to the story – they reported that Dan is a non-denominational minister, and took the time to get a long statement from him that included information about his wife’s history. The only thing they didn’t bother to say is that the most likely culprit in this situation is the House of Representatives itself.

Reidy had been working long hours, and had been a first-hand witness to the shenanigans being perpetrated by the members of the House. She saw more than the journalists that were covering the nonsense, and were lucky enough to be able to pick and choose source material from C-Span, as opposed to the ones that were camped out on the floor. Based on her husband’s statement, it’s likely that she took a great deal of the nonsense to heart, and ended up having trouble sleeping. As a religious woman, she read the Bible when she couldn’t sleep, and that undoubtedly affected her dreams at least a little. While Reidy and her husband contend that this was a religious experience, there is also a scientific explanation for it. Oddly enough, something about the biological portion of that science actually turned up in the headlines at the same time as these stories about Reidy.

Enjoy the irony folks! The National Institutes of Health funded a study on the effects of sleep on the brain. Low and behold, they figured out that when people sleep, the brain gets rid of waste that causes problems with concentration, among other things. It even clears away amyloid beta, a protein that is associated with Alzheimer’s Disease. Otherwise, psychiatric professionals have either contended that dreams are meaningless dumping of information while we sleep, or meaningful indicators of issues that may be bothering us subconsciously. Either way, they are in agreement that dreams are generally a healthy way of ridding our minds of thoughts that can preoccupy us.

What was it that Reidy was suffering from for weeks before, and during the shutdown? Oh yes, she was suffering from lack of sleep. That means that her brain wasn’t being given the opportunity to clear toxins as well it should, and that her dreams may have been interrupted thus preventing her from moving on from whatever issues were bothering her. And as a daily witness to the posturing and viciousness on the House floor, what can one think would be bothering her? Being a woman of faith, no doubt all that toxic behavior she witnessed daily weighed down on her heavily. And what did she say? That the government is a godless creation. Doubt that? Just read what Todd Starnes reports about our government’s war on religion. Now, if anyone is surprised at that contention, after watching even a portion of the infantile, hateful, and petty behavior of our supposed leaders over the past several months, they’re the ones that need psychiatric help.

(Originally posted at The Conservative Feminist)

Saturday Night Cigar Lounge with Taylor – September 14th

sncl_logocdnWhen:Saturday, September 14th, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: Saturday Night Cigar Lounge with Taylor on Blog Talk Radio

What: Saturday nights were meant for cigars and politics.

Hear Taylor and his co-host Liz Harrison talk about everything from the past week – from politics, to news, to books, and entertainment. Whatever comes to mind, and of course, sobriety is not likely.

Tonight: Tonight Taylor talks with @MrFoPow, Sean Venkman, about Syria, plus probably at least a little about Freedom of the Press, and the left’s war on citizen journalism. And maybe there will be some tweet defending!

Listen to internet radio with CDNews Radio on BlogTalkRadio

Pentagon Owes Veterans an Explanation!

Extremist revolutionary  general George Washington

Extremist revolutionary general George Washington

Recently the Pentagon released a training document labeling certain people as extremists, allegedly to inform Soldiers on the changing face of extremist groups. But, the people who are lumped into this new category may surprise you. The  Pentagon owes its veterans an explanation.

 

Judicial Watch, the conservative watchdog organization, obtained the document published by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Office through a FOIA request. Within the 133-page training document is a training document warning Soldiers of individuals who may be members of extremist organizations.

The DOD document warns, that many extremists will talk of individual liberties, states’ rights and how to make the world a better place.”

 

In a section entitled “Extremist Ideologies”, the training document explains, “In U.S. history, there are many examples of extremist ideologies and movements. The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule and the Confederate states who sought to secede from the Northern states are just two examples.”

 

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton making comments to Fox News said he was “disturbed” by what he read in the document.

 

“It’s disturbing insight into what’s happening inside Obama’s Pentagon,” Fitton said. “The Obama administration has a nasty habit of equating basic conservative values with terrorism.”

 

Later in the interview, Fitton said, “It’s craziness! It’s political correctness run amok.” Fitton’s comments are included in a great article from Todd Starnes appearing this week in Townhall.com. Read the full article here.

 

With language like this, veterans may well raise an eyebrow, or express outright disgust, especially after serving their country and declaring their oath to the Founding Document, the Constitution.

 

“Nowadays, instead of dressing in sheets or publically espousing hate messages, many extremists will talk of individual liberties, states’ rights and how to make the world a better place.”

 

That right there is a definition of the Soldier’s duty here in the U.S., or so we thought.

One has to wonder why such a document ever saw the light of day; until one finds that it relied heavily in wording and sourcing from the Southern Poverty Law Center, a leftist organization with connections to the White House.

Veterans and Soldiers, Airmen and Marines, are forbidden by the UCMJ to comment or question their civilian leadership, and yet their leadership constantly manipulate the services for their own purposes. This is not the first time the DOD has been in trouble for labeling Christians and Conservatives as extremists to be watched. An e-mail to Soldiers from a Lieutenant Colonel at Fort Cambell Kentucky warned the Soldiers of so-called hate groups like the Family Research Council and the American Family Association, organizations the SPLC has targeted as domestic hate groups in the past. The e-mail was intercepted by Fox News last April.

 

In the e-mail, the unnamed colonel writes, “When we see behaviors that are inconsistent with Army Values – don’t just walk by – do the right thing and address the concern before it becomes a problem.”

 

If the colonel had been writing about sexual harassment or assault of women in uniform, or the harassment and hazing of minorities, I would have to agree. But in the intentional labeling of Founding Fathers such as Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and George Washington as “extremists” I would have to say, with all do respect to the colonel, “take a giant leap, Sir!”

 

The Pentagon really owes an explanation to their servicemembers and veterans of foreign wars. As a DOD trained public affairs operative myself, I have this advice for the Pentagon that I offer for free. You need to distance yourself from these documents and offer an explanation and apology to your core audience. It needs to be sincere and it needs to be in person. I recommend a high-ranking subject matter expert, like a JAG officer of the colonel rank or higher, personally addressing a veterans group such as the Veterans of Foreign Wars or the American Legion. He needs to explain that those incidents and documents do not represent DOD policy and are isolated incidents not properly vetted by command. He or she needs to assure the veterans that such documents will not be published again and they need to explain the Pentagon holds the Founders and the Founding Documents in the highest esteem, respecting the sacrifice of the nation’s veterans who fought, bled and died for the principles that they inculcate.

 

Confederate Corner with George Neat June 18th – Obama waste, guns and free speech

confedcornercdnlogo

When: Tuesday, June 18th, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: Confederate Corner with George Neat on Blog Talk Radio

What: Yes there are Confederates north of the Mason-Dixon line, and George Neat is one of them. And we’re happy to bring his views to you in the “Confederate Corner” radio show.

For more information on George and his political views, please drop by the Confederate Corner at GoldwaterGal.com. (http://goldwatergal.com/goldwater-gal-media/confederate-corner/)

Tonight: George will be talking about Obama wasting money, Star Wars, and the liberals keeping up their war on guns and free speech. Of course there will also be a Soldier Salute, and a “nearly-infamous” Crack Pipe Moment.

Listen to internet radio with CDNews Radio on BlogTalkRadio

Confederate Corner with George Neat June 4th – Liberals just cannot learn

confedcornercdnlogo

When: Tuesday, June 4th, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: Confederate Corner with George Neat on Blog Talk Radio

What: Yes there are Confederates north of the Mason-Dixon line, and George Neat is one of them. And we’re happy to bring his views to you in the “Confederate Corner” radio show.

For more information on George and his political views, please drop by the Confederate Corner at GoldwaterGal.com. (http://goldwatergal.com/goldwater-gal-media/confederate-corner/)

Tonight: George will be talking about public education, guns, freedom of speech, and sharia law. Of course there will also be a Soldier Salute, and a “nearly-infamous” Crack Pipe Moment.

Listen to internet radio with CDNews Radio on BlogTalkRadio

Demand Answers

For all the complaints about Mitch McConnell that have floated around over the years, one thing can be said about him now. At least he is attempting to appear like he is standing on principles, and demanding that there are real answers given on one of the scandals currently dogging the Obama Administration. Whether or not he sticks to his guns remains to be seen. At least this is a start.

TX Cheerleaders Win 1st Amendment Victory

A Texas court judge ruled today that signs displayed by high school cheerleaders quoting biblical verses were cheerleaders “constitutionally permissible,” and that the Kountze High School cheerleaders could continue to display them at the school’s football games.

The high school cheerleaders had sued the Kountze Independent School District after after they were told they could no longer display the banners with religious messages over arguments that it violated the First Amendment. Earlier in the school year, one unidentified spectator had complained to the Freedom From Religion Foundation. The group argued that the banners amounted to a public school’s advocating a particular religion, which was unconstitutional.

The cheerleaders contention was that these banners were student led and initiated and so private speech. Attorneys for the cheerleaders argued the girls’ First Amendment rights to free speech were being violated by the school district and that the messages on the banners were not asking anyone to believe in Christianity or accept the faith.

In his ruling, State District Judge Steve Thomas said that no law “prohibits cheerleaders from using religious-themed banners at school sporting events and that the banners did not create an establishment of religion in the school.

Gov. Rick Perry offered a statement on the ruling: Today’s ruling is a win for free speech and religious freedom. The Kountze High School cheerleaders showed great resolve and maturity beyond their years in standing up for their beliefs and constitutional rights. I’m proud of them and I celebrate this victory alongside them.

 
For more information watch the video below:

Mark Dice Handcuffed and Detained While Making YouTube Video

Mark Dice finds out the hard way that people really don’t like the idea of having their cars searched by “Obama’s Civilian National Security Force”. That just gets Dice handcuffed, and detained by the police. However, he does find people willing to sign petitions to revoke the 1st and 2nd amendments – at least as long that applies only to conservatives. Also, folks are concerned about pressure cookers in the aftermath of the Boston Bombings. (I wish I was making this up!)

(H/T MarkDice.com)

Religious gesture leads to team’s disqualification

After completing a winning relay and looking forward to competing in state championships, a Texas high school track team has been disqualified for a benign gesture by one of the participants.
When runner Derrick Hayes pointed toward the sky after completing the team’s fastest race of the year, the school district decided to ban the team from further competition for a purported rule violation.

Robert O’Connor, the district’s superintendent, explained rules dictate no participant can engage in celebratory acts, including raised hands.

Hayes’ father said his son was just acknowledging God’s role in the successful run.

He is among a number of other individuals who are actively disputing the ruling, though there is no indication state officials will overturn the decision.

“You cross a finish line and you’ve accomplished a goal and within seconds it’s gone,” said the elder Hayes, wondering “what does that tell them about the rest of their lives? You’re going to do what’s right, work extra hard, and have it ripped away from you?”

Though O’Connor doesn’t see Hayes’ display as “technically a terrible scenario,” he said “the action did violate the context of the rule.”

Many oppose the disqualification on religious freedom grounds, though I contend this incident also highlights another unfortunate trend in today’s society.

Removing any sign of celebration from a victory sends precisely the wrong message to the next generation – though from a leftist standpoint, it makes perfect sense.

While good sportsmanship should always be expected, there should be a reward for hard work and these students deserve a bit of self-congratulation. Instead, the progressive agenda calls for all participants to be treated equally, despite effort or achievement.

As we’ve seen in countless other aspects of life, this practice only serves to disincentivize success, lowering the overall quality of life across the board.

Click here to get B. Christopher Agee’s latest book for less than $5! Like his Facebook page for engaging, relevant conservative content daily.

URGENT: How to beat Barack Obama’s executive order gun control

thoughts from a conservative mom2

It is often said that the Second Amendment is the First Amendment. Without it there can be no others. The Obama Administration just announced plans to use as many as 23 new executive orders to weaken our Second Amendment. These new orders will chip away at our Constitutional right to possess and bear arms. From limiting the amount of ammunition we can buy to an outright reinstatement of the assault weapons ban; the government is coming hard after our firearms.

The Democratic Party are very adept at using horrifying events to force their will on the American people. Never one to let a good crisis go to waste they are masters at capitalizing politically on major events they see fit to further their agenda. So whenever there is a tragic and catastrophic occurrence that brings our nation to its knees they are ready to take advantage.

First it starts with their cohorts in the media sensationalizing the story. Next it is usually followed by the anti gun lobby pressuring Congress to act. Finally after the major pushback from the NRA and pro gun lobby it usually just ends with a whimper, some sharp rhetoric, and empty speeches.

Not this time. Something is different. Barack Obama feels politically indestructible after winning reelection under the weight of the worst economy since the Great Depression. He feels emboldened by his victory and unstoppable in the face of his adversaries. The fact is he should feel that way. The Republicans in Congress have already capitulated on the fiscal cliff so why would they stop him on anything else?

The answer is they won’t but the American people can and here is how we can do it.

The Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution, which was ratified as part of the Bill of Rights, codifies the right to a jury trial in certain civil cases, and asserts that cases may not be re-examined by another court.

The key here is civil cases. The Seventh Amendment actually could be used effectively to thwart any attempts by Barack Obama to restrict our Second Amendment rights through the use of executive orders. Anyone who has ever needed to retain legal counsel knows just how expensive it can be to litigate as well as defend from litigation. Why not put that same expense and burden on the Obama Administration instead?

According to recent figures from the Department of Health and Human Services there are approximately 80 million gun owners in America. Gun owners in this country are a very diverse group. Contrary to what the liberals want you to believe they are not all hillbilly, bible thumping, Southerners. They are as varied as the avid hunter to the single mother and everyone in-between.

According to The American Bar Association there are approximately 1.2 million attorneys practicing law here in America. Imagine if we could get at least five million of the 80 million gun owners to file separate and individual civil rights lawsuits simultaneously against our government? Think about what kind of impact that would have on our Justice Department? The Obama Administration and Attorney General Eric Holder would be so overwhelmed with trying to answer all those lawsuits they would probably just give up and here are the reasons why.

In order to make these lawsuits more impactful on our government it is vitally important to file these lawsuits in such a way where the risk for the government is greater than the reward. In filing these lawsuits the petitioners must demand a jury trial of their peers.

Additionally, they must also request that the respondent, in this case the government, pays their attorney fees. By adding these two caveats into the language of the lawsuits it would make the government think twice in regards to fighting them.

Furthermore, the cost associated with defending the executive orders would be so astronomical that it would literally bankrupt our already bankrupt nation; and stall Barack Obama’s draconian remake of America in the process. Our government is already 16 trillion dollars in debt so there is no extra money to fight back with. With the economy already on the constant brink of collapse the political risk would be too damaging to survive. It is for these reasons that the government would rescind any and all executive orders in regards to gun control.

For those of you who are reading this let me save you the suspense. I am not an attorney nor do I play one on television. What I am is an expert in politics and strategy.

The Republicans in Congress have already shown us that they are not up to the challenge. Their actions on the fiscal cliff deal were nothing short of inept. If we are to count on them to protect us we will never survive as a nation.

Barack Obama and the Democratic Party know they can run roughshod over the Republicans in Congress. They also know that they can execute their leftist agenda on America with little to no resistance. It will be up to us Americans to stop them. We need to outsmart, outfox, and out think the left in order to halt their oppressive agenda for America. We must think outside the box and be more creative in how we attack them.

We can throw around words like treason and impeachment all we want but lets be honest we don’t have the votes right now to see that through. If we win back the Senate and keep the House that’s a different story. But for now we must remain steadfast and vigilant.

Our Founding Fathers were true visionaries. They were the best and brightest men of their time. They created the Constitution in order to protect us from enemies both foreign and domestic. It is time we use what they gave us to defend ourselves and our nation from our government.

My goal is for this article to get passed around more times than a peace pipe at an Occupy Wall Street Rally. So please email, repost, and retweet this to as many people as you know, especially gun owners and attorneys. Time is of the essence here and we must fight now to preserve our rights later. A good idea can only become a great idea when it is acted upon.
..

Suggested by the author:
www.joshbernsteinpoliticalwriter.com
An armed society is a polite society
Reading, writing, and marksmanship
What the word forward means in Obama’s America
House Republicans cave on spending cuts and embrace higher taxes

The War on Christmas – First Amendment Style

With Christmas now less than two weeks away, the attacks on Christmas and the first amendment are in full swing – this is nothing really out of the norm in modern America.

The Christmas tree is now the “Holiday Tree”, and you are no longer allowed to display your nativity scene without some Athiest group filling a lawsuit because it offends them.

This is where I draw the line, and I am glad that Bill O’Reilly has too.

Celebrating Christmas was a staple of American culture. But now, if you celebrate Christmas you are not being tolerant of others feelings, concerns, or religions.

This is more than wrong and it is just not rational.

What hurts just as bad as Christmas and Christianity being demonized, is the first amendment is always used as the lefts’ argument against Christmas. “Separation of Church and State,” they will always say.

But let’s get one thing right: Legally, there is no such thing as separation of church and state. It completely doesn’t exist. The first amendment reads:

“..Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion, nor preventing the free exercise thereof..”

I didn’t see the Separation of Church and State Clause, did you?

The first amendment doesn’t say anything about Ten Commandments in the public square, nativity scenes on public property, or even that the government cannot favor a particular religion. The first amendment clearly says that Congress cannot establish a religion.

But, what does this mean?

This means that Congress cannot make a law declaring Christianity the official religion of the United States, and if you don’t openly practice Christianity you could be prosecuted for treason.

However, this also means that Congress and governmental level cannot tell a man that he cannot openly practice his religion, even if it means having a nativity scene, a Christmas Tree, or displaying the Ten Commandments.

The actual meaning of the first amendment has long been lost in translation, and most Americans don’t actually know what the first amendment says, nor what it means.

If I told the average American that there is no “Separation of Church and State Clause,” they would probably argue to the death with me that there is such a thing.

I am absolutely tired and more than disgusted with people who infringe on my rights given to me by our founding fathers, because they think I’m infringing on theirs.

But let me ask a question.

If having a nativity scene in a public square infringes on your rights because you aren’t a Christian, does it not infringe on my rights to not be able to have it placed there? If you don’t like it, go ahead and place your Buddha statue or crescent moon next to it, and I’ll shake your hand and call you my fellow brother.

The Progressive left, I think, is doing the absolute opposite of the first amendment.

I think they are trying to demonize all Christians, and establish a Secular Humanist religion in America. But that’s just me, what do I know?

America used to be the land of the free, and home of the brave. Now we are America the land of the lawsuit, and home of the coward. It’s sickening.

I hope we can rediscover the true meaning of the first amendment and Christmas for that matter. Those are two long lost things that used to make American exceptional.

Merry Christmas and God Bless you!

Follow Chris On Twitter!

The First Amendment – Only applies to Obama supporters

Sadly, this is not news. As the president of the First Amendment Center Ken Paulson  has pointed out, it is necessary to call attention to cases where conservatives are being targeted for speaking out against Obama. Unfortunatelty, the targets are in the classrooms – teachers and students alike.

Katie Tegtmeyer (CC)

The primary argument, in the case of the teachers, appears to be that they should be held to a higher standard. That statement in itself is disconcerting, considering that it isn’t in the context of suggesting that teachers should be competent at teaching. (That wouldn’t fit in well with the modis operandi of the teacher unions, that have built a long history of protecting incompetent educators from permanent dismissal from the classroom.) Of course, this begs the question – what does this teach our youth?

Other than trampling the right to free speech, the arguably more troubling lesson is that the people, in the minds of the liberals, are no longer charged with holding their government accountable – for anything. That is not surprising, given the fact that the media has essentially stopped its role as watchdog. But, that does not justify setting up the next generation for a lifetime of subjugation.

Conservatives often bandy about the term “socialism” in reference to the Obama administration, and when cases like this come up, we are literally handed proof of our contentions on a silver platter. One of the primary goals of leaders in a socialist society is to control communications of the people. Individuals that do not submit to the will of the state disappear – literally, and historically. They are written out of history, airbrushed out of the collective memory. The attacks we are seeing now against conservatives that dare to speak out against this administration are merely the beginning of that sort of systemic censorship.

In the case of the students speaking out on social media, we are already on the slippery slope. Courts have started ruling against their right to speak freely, offering the thin excuse that social media interactions can lead to disruptive behavior in the classrooms. There is no mention of the possibility that these situations could become teaching moments, but that would require that public schools actually attempt to encourage students to engage in free and critical thought exercises. Obviously, that doesn’t fit into the curriculum anymore.

Paulson suggested that perhaps it is time to have a website devoted to tracking these violations of the First Amendment. Perhaps that is a good idea. However, I humbly suggest that if such a thing would come into existence, it would also need to create a resource for individuals that are targeted in these insidious attacks by the left. Whoever creates this clearing house of information also needs to recruit attorneys to represent these people – particularly the students, since they are the most vulnerable targets involved. (Yes, that is a hint to conservative lawyers to start helping fellow conservatives!)

Catholics: Some Things are Non-Negotiable

Faith in America has been under attack in the United States for years.  The ACLU and similar groups promote ‘freedom from religion’ rather than ‘freedom of religion.’ But this current administration has taken the push against people of faith to a breaking point.  After feeling backed into a corner through policies set by the current administration the Catholics are responding. When birth control trumped religious freedom and the Catholic Church was told it must violate its conscience people of faith stood together and said, “Enough.”

To many outside the church, it appears the Catholics have had a line drawn in the sand; that some things are non-negotiable. Today many other religions, fearing similar loss of religious rights, are joining their Catholic brethren and speaking out.

Catholics Called to Witness  is a faith-based organization dedicated to upholding and promoting religious liberty. People of faith aren’t being told for whom to vote instead they are being reminded of their values.  Their powerful new ad reminds people of faith the importance of standing strong for beliefs.

 

 
This may be the most important election of our country. We cannot allow the doctrines of our religions to be canceled through government order. Our country was founded on religious freedom. When we vote in November we need to support our religious freedom.
 

Sebelius Gets Education on the Constitution but Left Might Get a Weapon

The First Amendment is bandied about more often than just about any of the others, and it got a full work-out thanks to Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) during his grilling of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. It definitely is worth viewing, even if you’ve seen it before:

While that was undoubtedly painful for Sebelius, in theory, it may have opened a whole new can of worms. By taking it from the purely legal standpoint, Gowdy may have inadvertently opened an opportunity for the left on other issues, including abortion. Yes, there are religions out there that do not have strict restrictions against abortion, Judaism included. In theory, the left could use the same balancing act Gowdy used to justify preventing legislation against abortion, at least in the circumstances permitted by given religions.

Now, before anyone starts frothing at the mouth, that is an unlikely result of this little moment, if for no other reason, the left-wing would have to find people that observe those faiths to come forward and file lawsuits. That’s unlikely, of course.

But, the hearing did cause me to think yet again about the economic end of this perennial debate. Yet again, I am wondering about the feasibility of the I.R.S. adding a checkbox to tax forms that could settle it once and for all. If taxpayers could just tell the government whether or not they were willing to have their tax dollars be applied to public funds for contraception and/or abortion, then the crusade to end all abortions should be considered a purely religious movement. Arguably, it would be rendered moot, at least on the Federal level.

If no one is paying for something that they disagree with based on religious belief, then the government is not preventing anyone from observing their faith. Remember, the rights granted by the Bill of Rights end where the rights of another individual begin. That’s why those of us from the generally Libertarian neck of the woods don’t tend to join in social conservative crusades. It’s none of our business. It shouldn’t be the business of government. Gowdy had it right when he pointed out that Sebelius was wrong when she pushed the mandate for coverage of contraceptives. While what I’ve said here might annoy some social conservatives, keep in mind that I’m suggesting that we take Gowdy’s principle a step farther, and include individuals, not just religious institutions. If you personally do not believe it is moral to have contraceptives, your hard-earned money should not pay for it, ever. If you personally do not believe that abortion is acceptable for anyone, the same applies. But, that should be the extent of your rights. You do not have the right to force those that disagree with your belief system to comply with it. Fairly simple, so it’s highly unlikely it would work in this country. After all, we love having a government that could mess up a one man parade.

Crossposted at Goldwater Gal

« Older Entries