Excellent Letter To Liberals
Oct 22, 2013 Political
Jeremy Choate at Sufficient Reason has written a brilliant letter to liberals entitled “Dear Liberal…Here’s Why I’m So Hostile” and it is spot on. The portion dealing with people’s rights is well thought and clearly explained so that anyone should be able to understand.
Here is a snippet:
If you’re moderately intelligent and intellectually honest, you’ll quickly see what separates the rights laid out in the real Bill of Rights from those laid out in FDR’s misguided list — none of the rights listed above [Bill of Rights] require the time, treasure, or talents of another human being. Your right to speak requires nothing from anyone else. Your right to practice your religion requires nothing from any of your fellow citizens. Your right to bear arms means that you are allowed to possess weapons to defend yourself and your family, but it makes no demand that a weapon be provided to you by anyone. A true human right is one that you possess, even if you’re the only person on the entire planet — and it is unconditional.
The entire letter is here and I highly recommend it.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: abortion rights, demands, fdr, liberals, Obama, rights
Catholic Bishops Set Political Agenda
Nov 14, 2007 General
The US Conference of Catholic Bishops developed guidelines for voting in the next elections stating that open discussion was needed and that decisions have an impact on the whole. This is certainly very true. If Catholics (or members of any other religion) ignore a candidate’s pro abortion stance in favor of other attributes then they should not be surprised when the candidate, if elected, pushes for abortion rights and will not listen to those asking for it to be abolished. They should not be surprised when the candidate, if elected, nominates judges who are pro abortion and these adherents to religion should not cry because their acts allowed it to happen. Does this mean people from a religion should march in lock step and vote in one particular way? Certainly not, but it does mean that the choices we make have repercussions and as a group, the people should be willing to accept those if they vote for a certain person. The Catholic Bishops did not mention any candidate by name and did not endorse anyone. They merely decided upon a platform. This is no different than any other group (like the teacher’s union or the young college Democrats) deciding upon a platform. They do not force their members to vote a certain way but they put out a platform they believe is best for them.
There are those who would look at the Catholic Bishops and what they are doing and condemn them. The uniformed or under educated would say that the country was set up based on separation of church and state for a reason and that the Catholic Bishops are violating that. The problem with this line of thinking is that it is wrong on many levels.
First of all, there is no such thing as separation of church and state. I defy anyone to find those words in the Constitution. The Constitution states that the government may not establish a religion and they may not prohibit the free exercise of religion. It does not say that the two should be separated, only that government may not establish a national religion. That is why the display of the Koran, the Ten Commandments, a Crucifix, or the Star of David in federal buildings does not violate the Constitution. Government is not establishing any religion but it is allowing the free expression (or exercise) thereof. Those are the people’s buildings, after all. If the government allowed only the display of one religion’s items, then there would be a problem.
The words separation of church and state were taken from a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists when they expressed concerns that in their state religion was seen as a privilege or favor granted by the state. Jefferson did not address the state issue but addressed establishment on the national level when he wrote; ‘I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.’ He meant that the words of the Constitution provided a wall that protects religion from government. His words have been misused to push the secularist agenda as advanced by the Communist organization, the ACLU.
The second issue is that the Catholic Bishops violated no rules even if we accept that there is such a thing as separation of church and state. The First Amendment is designed to keep government out of religion not the other way around. Religious groups are free to discuss politics, support positions or candidates and they are free to push for those items that they believe to be in the best interest of their beliefs. The church is not restricted by the Constitution, the government is. The church has freedom under the First Amendment while the government does not. Therefore, the various religions around the country are FREE to decide how what agenda they want to push. Their members do not have to follow those guidelines and are free to vote as they wish, just as with the teacher’s unions or young Democrats mentioned above. Even if the Church told its members that they had to vote a certain way it would not violate the Constitution. Once again, it prohibits the government from establishing a religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The Church is not the government and is free to tell its members how they should vote and what they may be involved in and still remain a member of the church.
This is no different than the right to free speech. The government is not allowed to restrict your free speech but others may. Your work can tell you what you are and are not allowed to discuss and it can fire you for using profanity or discussing what you have been told not to. You can be told not to say certain things in a church, a school, a store or anywhere else because it is not the government keeping you from speaking. In the case of the church, it is they and not the government that is making the decisions so nothing is violated.
People belong to various religions for a number of reasons. Those religions are free to tell their people the best way to vote. Jews overwhelmingly support Democrats (even though the Democrats screw them and ignore Israel) and there is nothing wrong with it. If all the Muslims decided they wanted to vote for Hillary then that would be their right and it does not violate the Constitution.
I know this was lengthy but it is important to combat ignorance if we want to have a better society.
Source:
My Way News
Tags: abortion rights, abortion stance, conference of catholic bishops, free exercise, pro abortion, religion, repercussions, separation of church and state