Here you go folks, Harry Reid stated that hes going to do something about Hobby Lobby, in spite of the Supreme Court Ruling, which doesnt amount to very much at all, You think this cant be true? WTF up, our own government is declaring war on Christians and Jews and bringing Demonic Muslims and putting them in government. Dems vote for constitutional amendment to limit free speech and freedom of religion WDTPRS ^| 7/11/2014 | Fr. John Zuhlsdorf Posted on Saturday, July 12, 2014 6:26:45 AM by markomalley [rights] This is by Zac Morgan, a staff attorney at the Center for Competitive Politics writing at NRO. My emphases and comments. Does Religious Speech Threaten Democracy?.. ....It could be restricted ....or banned under a constitutional amendment ... Democrats have proposed. The Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday approved .... by a 10–8 vote a constitutional amendment .... that, if passed, ....wouldfunctionally eliminate ....the political rights of speech .... and association. While the committee made the language ....more succinct than in its original iteration, ....the law still poses a profound threat .... to fundamental liberties. [Mind you, a constitutional amendment doesnt happen over night, but... it has to start somewhere.] For instance, .... Congress probably would have the power .... to ban religious sermons and church literature . [Can you feel things sliding in this direction? This will fail, of course. BUT... in the failure, they will have bumped the paradigm a little bit in this direction. Call it creeping incrementalism. Thats how liberals work.] Section 1 of the amendment .... permits Congress and the states ....to “advance democratic self-government” — ....whatever that means — .... “and political equality” .... by “regulat[ing] and set[ting] reasonable limits ... on the raising and spending of money ...by candidates and others to influence elections.” [Thus limiting free speech. No. You may not freely spend your own money to advance some cause.] Section 2 ....specifically permits the federal and state governments ....to “distinguish between natural persons and corporations ... or other artificial entities created by law, ...including prohibiting such entities ...from spending money to influence elections.” And section 3 — ....in a perfect demonstration ...that the eight Judiciary Committee members who are lawyers, ... yet voted for the measure, ... failed to pay attention in law school — claims to prevent anyone from reading the amendment ...in such a way as ...“to grant Congress or the States the power to abridge the freedom of the press.” [the press... which is on the side of the dems] The First Amendment, .... as drafted by men such as Fisher Ames ....and James Madison, .... protects five freedoms: .... speech, .... press, .... assembly, .... petition, ....and religion. The newly minted constitutional amendment ....mentions only one of those as being untarnished — ....“press.” Under a longstanding principle of statutory interpretation — ....expressio unius est exclusio alterius — ...the explicit naming of one member of a class ...means that the other members of that class are excluded. So, under this amendment, ... as long as the interests of “democratic self-governance” ... and “political equality” ... are “reasonably” at issue, ...Congress or the states ...may infringe on speech, assembly, petition, and religious freedoms. There’s honestly no limit ... to the number of examples of “reasonable” restrictions ...that could be drawn under this amendment, ... but let’s discuss a particularly troubling one. [...]
Posted on: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 22:50:57 +0000