Posts Tagged ‘Freedom of religion’

My read on Florida’s proposed constitutional amendments.

October 27, 2012
English: Honduran girls demonstrating against ...

English: Honduran girls demonstrating against Manuel Zelaya. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

A fellow liberty champion in a meetup list shared the following link to a web site that has fairly good coverage of the amendments on the upcoming November ballot in Florida. Below are my decisions on these votes.

But before that, I want to say that I believe in a secret ballot and a secure ballot. Many states are passing voter-ID laws, and that makes all kinds of sense. In Latin America they would roll around in the floor with laughter for an hour about this. There is NOT ONE poor person in the United States, even in these Fed-infected economics, not one that can say they have more material obstacles to acquiring an official ID. And even the most corrupt of the rulers do not insult the intelligence of their victims that much.

That said, the tie-in to “secret” is that TOUCH SCREEN VOTING MACHINES ARE Trojan horses, whether by ignorance or design. You cannot trust them, and I’ve said this since the very first time I heard about them! But there must be a reason there was a mad rush to get them into voting booths long before the touch screens and touch pads got popular consumer market share!

Every programmer like me, or system administrator, knows that there is no security against the official, “legitimate” administrator of a system, no matter what. Like “Trust me, this is secure”?

What, like nobody’s cheated in an election before? Honduras’ ex-dictator Manuel Zelaya even admitted he got elected through fraud, out loud, in an interview on Univision with Jorge Ramos!

http://collinscenter.org/2012flamendments/proposed-constitutional-amendment-summary-information/

http://collinscenter.org/2012flamendments/home-2/
The following amendments will appear on the General Election ballot on November 6, 2012.  The Collins Center’s analysis of these proposed constitutional amendments provides  explanations of the proposals along with arguments for and against them.

For a brief summary of the proposed constitutional amendments, click here.  Select each link below for more information on each proposed amendment.

Amendment 1 : Health Care Services

    YES to banning medical insurance purchase command.

Amendment 2:  Veteran’s Property Tax Discount

YES to anything that lowers taxes for anybody

Amendment 3:  State Revenue Limitation

    YES – Limit revenue collection by the state to population and inflation growth (it’s a start)

Amendment 4:  Property tax limitations; property value decline; reduction for non-homesteaded assessment increases; delay of scheduled repeal

YES to limit taxes and cut the tie to incomes

Amendment 5:  State Courts

YES to more legislature oversight of the courts

Amendment 6:  Prohibition on Public Funding of Abortions; Construction of Abortion Rights

YES and YES

Amendment 7:   This proposal was known as Amendment 7 until a legal challenge by opponents led to the rewriting of some of the ballot language and its reinstatement on the ballot as Amendment 8. This is the reason there is no Amendment 7 on the 2012 ballot.

Amendment 8Religious Freedom

NO THE AMENDMENT SUMMARY FOR THIS IS WEASILY WORDED BY SOME OFFICIAL WEASEL SOMEWHERE. It does not say that this amendment would end the discrimination against the option by private citizens that is active today because of a court decision based on this amendment. The decision made some sense based on the law if the original statute used the word “indirect funding”. In any case, there should be no religious test in either direction, whether for public office or for public funds.

Really, the state should not be funding schools at all, including public schools, our graduates we are all dumb enough already!

Also I think all organizations with any religious or even non-religious purpose, profit or non-profit, should reject the chains that come with taxpayer-funded conditions.

The  ACLU‘s statements on this are self-contradictory. They claim there is no anti-religious bias in a statute that bans equal consideration for funding based on the recipient group’s religious character and prefers the secular. Second they specifically mention the voucher programs to argue against them, because PARENTS are prohibited from the free exercise of their own PRIVATE religious convictions in a decision on where they would place their children.

This again shows the ACLU’s own militant anti-religious proclivities.

There is a mention of Florida’s voucher program, which the Florida Supreme Court ruled that PARENTS of children (not government officials) could not use them to put a child into an explicitly religious school, based on the “no-aid” clause and also on a clause in the Constitution that requires the legislature to maintain a “uniform system of public schools”.

If that’s the essence of that constitutional clause, then the court ruling is a laughable and outrageous distortion of it; if it is not, then this explanation is bad. I suspect the former.

Amendment 9:  Homestead Property Tax Exemption for Surviving Spouse of Military Veteran or First Responder

YES to anything that lowers taxes for anybody

Amendment 10:  Tangible Personal Property Tax Exemption

YES to anything that lowers taxes for anybody

Amendment 11:  Additional Homestead Exemption; Low-Income Seniors Who Maintain Long-Term Residency on Property; Equal to Assessed Value

YES to anything that lowers taxes for anybody, although the fair thing to do would be lower them for everybody and stop spending so much of the money that wasn’t yours but confiscated.

Amendment 12:  Appointment of Student Body President to Board of Governors of the State University System

NO. In my opinion, this is something that leads to more bureaucracy controlled from top-down, and increases the conditioning of students to the current political structure that enforces conformity and compliance, and protects the incumbent two-party collusion.

 

 

White House claim that 98% of Catholic women use contraception a ‘damned lie’: Lutheran author

February 18, 2012

White House claim that 98% of Catholic women use contraception a ‘damned lie’: Lutheran author | LifeSiteNews.com:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/white-house-claim-that-98-of-catholic-women-use-contraception-a-damned-lie

Never mind that the statistic is irrelevant to an individual’s right to religious freedom and his right to be free of dictatorship anyway.

Hemingway cites an analysis by writer Lydia McGrew, who observes that the study was designed to measure contraceptive use exclusively among women who would have some reason to use contraception.

Because of this, it included only women of child-bearing age, and excluded those who were celibate, pregnant, post-partum, or trying to get pregnant.

McGrew points out that unmarried Catholic women who are faithful to the Church’s teachings are disproportionately more likely to be celibate, and married Catholic women faithful to the Church’s teachings are disproportionately more likely to be pregnant, post-partum, trying to get pregnant, or simply not trying to avoid pregnancy.

For those who are trying to paint a picture that Catholic women do not follow the teaching of their church on contraception, “these statistics are bogus,” she says.

However, she also points out, at the end of the day, the statistic is actually irrelevant.

“If a bunch of Quakers turn out to have gun licenses, employees of an expressly Quaker organization are not therefore entitled to have their fees paid to a shooting range or their ammo provided at no cost through an employer plan,” writes McGrew.

___ And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 184 other followers