1a) from libertyheadlines.com: ‘DEFAMATION: Christian Group Sues SPLC for inclusion on its ‘Hate Map’’ - Brendan Clarey - August 25
(Some Christian ‘ministries’ are banding together to sue the SPLC for putting them on their ‘hate map’ - and thus subjecting them to defamation (“subjects the ministry to disgrace, ridicule, odium, and contempt in the estimation of the public”) - because they speak out (biblically centered as they are) against the LGBT ‘movement’. )
..
I hope they burn that racist SPLC for all they have. They need to be curtailed with their lies. CAIR and BLM and ANTIFA all need to be on the list of terrorist organizations. None or them promote good in America. They all promote hate and dissention. CAIR wants to bring in more muslims and promotes Sharia law. BLM is racist against all whites. ANTIFA is actually a fascist organization promoting hate against all conservatives and President Trump in particular. SPLC promotes racism and division of the country through liberal intent.
2
•
Reply
kibitzer3 Marinevet • a minute ago (August 25)
Just to clarify about ANTIFA: It is precisely modeled after the Communist Party in 1932 Germany, down even to its logo/flag. And the far Left is, indeed, behind a lot of what is going on these days, in the way of bully demonstrations and propaganda. But not exclusively.
This 'fascist' term has been bandied about a bit loosely for some time now. It seems to refer in the public's mind to any group that advocates violence or strong-arm tactics - in a word: oppressive activity. But the term factually refers to a form of government that is a corporate-government complex - the owner class in totalitarian control. As in Mussolini's Italy. The Communists are the natural, extreme opponents of that sort of societal structure - hence the term, Anti-Fascist. So the terms are a bit muddled these days - 'fascists' being on both far sides of the political aisle. But to further clarify (or muddle) the matter: the actual PTB behind what is going on are not the communists. They are being used as cannon fodder by the real culprits, who are, indeed, fascists - the New World Order mob. Who plan to rule the world, in their totalitarian global police state. And I've got apparent news for them: It ain't gonna happen. Not once the REAL People reach their stride. And boot both totalitarian camps out of the picture. As a New World comes into being, alright. Just not the one planned for the planet by the Dark side.
He who has ears to hear, let him hear. And get busy, helping to bring about the ascendancy of the Light on this sorely put-upon planet. Soon to be released from its captivity under satanic forces. Who have had their 'innings'. It's time now for a change.
A fundamental change.
—
1b) from libertyheadlines.com: ‘California Could Jail People Who Don’t Use Transgender Pronouns’ - August 25
(“A bill that passed the California state Senate and is now moving through the Assembly would threaten jail time for anyone that refuses to use a transgender person’s preferred pronoun…”)
..
Now we know why Loony Toons came out of California. Looks like they don't have a judge out there who's read the first amendment.
4
•
Reply
- Unfortunately it's more complicated than that, George. In the original U.S.A. the Constitution, including its amendments (called the Bill of Rights), applied only to the federal government, in limiting its powers over the people. (Thus, the First Amendment's opening statement: "Congress shall make no law respecting..." etc.) The People in their daily lives lived under the terms of their individual state's constitutions (which usually reflected such basic sentiments). But in the early 20th century the Bill of Rights was turned upside down, when The Supremes in effect changed the Bill of Rights from applying TO the federal government, to applying FROM the federal government TO the states. It was a maneuver that has been called the 'Incorporation Doctrine,' i.e., that all the terms of the B of R were 'incorporated' in some wording in the 14th Amendment that actually meant to apply in no such way (the 'original intent' argument, about our Constitution, vs. the idea of its being 'a living document'. Otherwise known as a wet noodle). But that didn't stop the people in this country who have hankered after its becoming, not a federal form of government, but a centralized one - the easier to take it over with, my dears.
I am saying that, in effect, we CAN appeal to the federal courts on such issues as free speech. But that is not strictly the way to go about such things in this country - this federal constitutional republic. The Constitution has been sorely dealt with, in such matters; and the proper place to deal with them is in our respective state's constitutions. But try telling that to anybody with any sort of political clout these days. We have been taken over by charlatans - and both the Democrat AND Republican Parties have gone along with the deceit. A sorry, sorry state of affairs, indeed.
Good post, you make a number of interesting points concerning the Constitution. With all due respect, I would like to make one (that not many people comprehend). Article. VI. cl 2 (the Supremacy Clause) ...."any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding". Most of us believe something is true, especially when we hear it over and over. The text needs no interpretation from legal experts. It says the Constitution has always applied to all of the States.
Reply
- Two points pursuant thereof. 1) The 9th and 10th Amendments were added in the Bill of Rights by concerned citizens in their respective states to make sure that the federal government remained one of limited and delegated powers - "few and defined," in the rather authoritative words of the man called, with good reason, the Father of the Constitution, James Madison. And 2) Such matters as 'free speech' did not apply to the States until the 14th Amendment stood the Constitution on its head and made it apply FROM the federal government TO the states. Which, as I say, was a false reading of the 14th Amendment and its intent.
INTERPRETATIONS of the Constitution have gotten us into a whole heap of trouble over the years. But not to worry. I think that fundamental changes are afoot in the world, anyway.
--
...And interesting timing on this subject:
from newswithviews.com: ‘Are We In Danger Of Losing Our Constitutional Form Of Government - Or Have We Already Lost It?’ - Attorney Don Brockett - August 26
(A former Prosecuting Attorney in Spokane County, OR, Don retired and wrote a book entitled ‘The Tyrannical Rule of the U.S. Supreme Court: How the Court Has Violated the Constitution’ Sounds interesting..)
Posted at 04:44h, 26 August
Amen. Nice summary, Don. Although it may indeed be a matter of closing the barn door after the horse has bolted.
A good case in point (besides your own book, obviously): The book ‘Who Killed The Constitution?’ by Thomas E. Woods, Jr. and Kevin R. C. Gutzman. Which I happen to be reading right now, as a matter of synchronous fact. It appears that we were done in particularly in the 1930s, under FDR and the spirit of his New Deal. Not sure if the damage can be overcome or not, given the Court’s notorious reluctance to challenge precedent. But we need to make the attempt. We are heading into terribly troubled waters if we don’t.
No comments:
Post a Comment