Where does the Constitution say religious freedom does not apply in daily life?!

The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution  (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Dominos Pizza Founder Wins Court Order Stopping HHS Abortion Mandate | LifeNews.com:
http://www.lifenews.com/2013/03/14/dominos-pizza-founder-wins-court-order-stopping-hhs-abortion-mandate/

From the article:

Mersino said Judge Zatkoff’s decision protects our freedoms granted under the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The Obama administration argued against the preliminary injunction by claiming that once a business owner chooses to enter into the marketplace, he surrenders his right to exercise his religious beliefs.

I find it incredible that an argument like this was even offered seriously in a courtroom. It’s getting crazier by the minute in America, and it shows how irrational the thinking can get when they blindly go along with whatever the Thought Police tell them to think. It’s like they subscribe to a Thought of the Month Club, and the mind benders are pushing it to see how crazy they can make it.

And since when does religious liberty only apply to groups of pastors and priests? Where is that in the First Amendment?! It. Is. Not. There. NOT!

Related articles

• Dominos Pizza Wins Court Order Stopping HHS Abortion Mandate. (libertynews.com)
• Dominos Pizza Wins Court Order Stopping HHS Abortion Mandate (breitbart.com)
• Domino’s founder wins injunction on ObamaCare (humanevents.com)
• Judicial Victory for Religious Freedom! (bokertov.typepad.com)

Can the Secret Service tell you to shut up?

Andrew Napolitano says it so well:
http://www.wnd.com/2012/03/can-the-secret-service-tell-you-to-shut-up/

Read the whole essay, he articulates the issue clearly.

Last week, President Obama signed into law the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. This law permits Secret Service agents to designate any place they wish as a place where free speech, association and petition of the government are prohibited. And it permits the Secret Service to make these determinations based on the content of speech.

Thus, federal agents whose work is to protect public officials and their friends may prohibit the speech and the gatherings of folks who disagree with those officials or permit the speech and the gatherings of those who would praise them, even though the First Amendment condemns content-based speech discrimination by the government. The new law also provides that anyone who gathers in a “restricted” area may be prosecuted. And because the statute does not require the government to prove intent, a person accidentally in a restricted area can be charged and prosecuted, as well.

Related articles

• NAPOLITANO: Can the Secret Service tell you to shut up? – Washington Times (gds44.wordpress.com)
• No More First Amendment – Thanks Obama! (stoshwolfen.wordpress.com)
• Joe Wolverton II – The New American – President Signs Law Placing Prior Restraint On Free Speech – 13 March 2012 (lucas2012infos.wordpress.com)
• Former Agent: New Bill Effectively Outlaws Protests Anywhere Secret Service Deems Off Limits (tarpon.wordpress.com)
• Breaking: Obama Signs Anti-Free Speech Bill into Law (destructionist.wordpress.com)
• GWU: Secret Service Sends Alert of Possible Gunman (abcnews.go.com)
• Hillary Clinton treated Secret Service like servants (fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com)
• Secret Service Protection For Gingrich (myfoxphoenix.com)
• Secret Service Protection For Gingrich (myfoxny.com)

Even liberals and atheists are outraged at this attack on religious freedom

Let’s hope the outrage lasts:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204369404577209112780407698.html

How much is too much, people?

When are Americans going to get sick and tired of getting told what to do in every moment of their lives in everything they do? Where is the limit?

We have federal legislation crammed down our throats against the will and demand of 70 percent of Americans that abdicated legislative authority to a federal branch of government, carte blanche to make up laws as they go along, and now they have made a rule that violates the First Amendment.

Read our lips, read the Constitution: The First Amendment says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, NOTHING! about any COMPROMISE of religious freedom.

Somebody complained to me about the “In God We Trust” motto the other day! As if it were a law that established religion! What religion, I asked her, which one? The Catholic? The Protestant?

Egads. Then they answer “the Christian religion“! The Judeo-Christian religion, as if!

It’s an abomination as a motto on the currency anyway. In God we (as the USA) do NOT trust!

Obviously with this outrage it’s not just we do not trust God as a nation, our high-and-mighty rulers are telling us we have to put our money where their mouth is and pay for things we do not agree with.

Before I go on, let me say that in my doctrine, I do think it’s better for couples (and women) to have faith in God for the children he permits with conception, but it’s also “According to your faith be it done unto you”. In other words, I don’t think chemical contraceptive methods violate Biblical faith.

However, when one man’s religious freedom is attacked, it is ALL of us who are being violated including atheists! The ACLU protests when a PRIVATE party expresses itself with a symbol of faith in public land, in cases where NOT ONE PENNY of government money is expended for it, and in fact they force governments to spend MILLIONS of dollars keeping crosses out of public parks.

So now you have a decree from federal dictators that says you have to spend private money to limit your own private free exercise of your religion.

And they act like the First Amendment only applies to cloisters that are almost nunneries and monasteries.

If the United States accepts this forcing of payments on people without allowing free exercise then it’s a lost cause and America is dead, dead, dead, and there is no chance of recuperating it. That and the whole federal nationalization of medicine.

Revelation 17 and 18. No wonder.

 

 

Related articles

• Every knee shall bow? Many atheist scientists take their kids to church | Deseret News (trutherator.wordpress.com)
• Attention Obama: We Will Not be Silent on Religious Liberty (5440fight.com)
• Richard Evans: Requiring Catholics to pay for insurance coverage that includes contraceptives, abortion-inducing drugs and sterilization procedures violation of First Amendment. (tcpalm.com)
• Speaker Boehner: Attack on Religious Freedom Will Not Stand (americanclarion.com)
• “Should Catholic Employers Be Exempted From Paying For Health Insurance Covering Contraception?” My Debate with Mary C. Young, Part 1 (freethoughtblogs.com)
• Should Catholic and Other Religious Institutions Have to Cover Birth Control? (usnews.com)
• What did the “Establishment of religion” mean in 1776 (trutherator.wordpress.com)
• Stand Up to Militant Atheists in Public Society (oneway2day.wordpress.com)
• When Is Religion Not Religion? (possil.wordpress.com)
• Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey joins objection to health care mandate; GOP congressmen Lou Barletta and Thomas Marino threaten to repeal (pennlive.com)
• Dems Blame Christians For Obamacare Assault on 1st Amdt, Claim Church ‘Discriminates Against Women’ (5440fight.com)
• 7 Quick Takes: Religious freedom edition (caritasestveritas.wordpress.com)
• Playing Chicken with Religious Freedoms (continuumfi.wordpress.com)
• WaPo Writer: The Founders Were Wrong to Guarantee Religious Freedom (americanclarion.com)
• John Boehner re Obama’s Assault on Religion: “This attack by the Federal government on religious freedom in our country must not stand and will not stand.” (pumabydesign001.com)
• Tidbits – February 9, 2012 (theamericanchroniclesaculturalreview.wordpress.com)

Free speech is a natural right

Image via Wikipedia

Arresting Christians costs U.S. city $100,000:
http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/arresting-christians-costs-u-s-city-100000/

The judge ruled properly here. When police powers are abused beyond those permitted by the natural rights listed in the Bill of Rights, there should be some kind of punitive remedy.

A judge in Detroit has ruled that the decision by police in neighboring Dearborn to arrest a Christian pastor who wanted to hand out Christian tracts at the city’s Arab fest in 2009 will cost the city some $100,000.

That’s the decision following a request from the pastor’s attorneys that the losing side in the First Amendment argument over expressing religious perspectives on city streets be required to pay them for their work on behalf of Christian Pastor George Saieg.

Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen said his recommendation for fees and costs totaling $103,401.96 be awarded in the case that was handled by attorney Robert J. Muise.

Of course the problem is that one must vote for people one trusts, BUT then one must keep their feet to the fire to make sure they respect the proper boundaries.

Related articles

• Court Awards Attorneys’ Fees Against Dearborn, Michigan for Violating Christian Pastor’s Right to Freedom of Speech (creepingsharia.wordpress.com)
• Time For Christians to Be Christians (loopyloo305.com)
• The Counterfeit Christian (apreachaskid.wordpress.com)
• The Government as Lawbreaker, Again – Judge Andrew Napolitano – Townhall Conservative (gds44.wordpress.com)
• 18 Examples Of How Christians Are Being Specifically Targeted By Big Brother (zionistoutrage.com)

Bloggers Are Not Journalists Rules Portland Judge

This blogger, Mona Zhang, wonders whether this judge did right in ruling that a blogger is not a journalist:

http://www.mediabistro.com/10000words/bloggers-are-not-journalists-rules-portland-judge-oregon-shield-law_b9043

Apparently it made a legal difference here in a defamation case. Crystal Cox was sued for defamation.

I’ll post here my comments in response:

 

The only “standard” for new media old media should be the same as always, and anybody who puts text in front of you qualifies as “press” for purposes of the definition in the First Amendment. Newspapers should not have one micron more privilege than any blogger or commenter anywhere on the Internet, period!

“Traditional journalism” has let us down in fact, due precisely to the legal and investment barriers for someone to speak their mind. For example, all traditional journalists have participated in another new mini-holocaust in Libya by leaving so under-reported the racist massacre of an entire town of 10,000 blacks.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new…

Some old-line media made it a back-page story for ONE DAY because it totally destroyed the conformist government-media complex line that these were simply freedom-fighters trying to end a dictatorship. And the fact that these “rebels” were cutting crosses into the bodies of these blacks (because many of them were Christians), barely made a blip.

The Electronic Freedom Foundation is a good place to find clarity with issues like this one:

https://www.eff.org/press/releases/oregon-defamation-decision-could-chill-free-speech

Related articles

 

• Bloggers Are Not Journalists Rules Portland Judge – 10,000 Words (currentbuzz.org)
• Bloggers: Journalists? (wir-sprechen-online.com)
• Federal judge: Montana blogger is not journalist (AP) (cash-bandit.com)
• Ore. judge rules blogger is not journalist (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Ore. judge rules blogger is not journalist (seattlepi.com)
• Is a blogger a journalist? Not in Oregon (chicagoreader.com)
• The Daring Digital Decision: Bloggers Are NOT Journalists (digitalbrandmarketing.com)
• Blogger Must Act Like Journalist To Be Treated Like One (pixiq.com)
• A $2.5 Million Libel Judgment Brings the Question: Are Bloggers Journalists? (foxnews.com)
• Crystal Cox Loses $2.5M Suit: When Is a Blogger a Journalist? Or Not? (blogher.com)
• Blogger in Oregon Loses Defamation Case, Judge Weighs in on Who is “Really” a Journalist (reason.com)
• U.S. Court: Crystal Cox, a blogger, isn’t a journalist – a costly $2.5m distinction line (nextlevelofnews.com)
• Oregon Defamation Decision Could Chill Free Speech (eff.org)