Constitutional "experts"
This is something that should bother everyone. Doubtful.
Ever since the 1960s, we have heard a bunch of BS about "separation of church and state". These would be "scholars" and even Supreme Court Justices, who have sworn oaths to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution, go on and on about a Thomas Jefferson letter regarding the Establishment Clause in the 1st Amendment. Here is the amendment: Note that the words "Separation of church and state" do not appear in it.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
What they don't understand is that Thomas Jefferson had NOTHING to do with the Constitution. He would probably have said that the Articles of Confederation would not have allowed the Convention to begin with. (He was in France on a diplomatic mission). In fact, many states in the early Republic had taxes to fund churches. (Gasp!). But I am not writing about what is, indeed, the first freedom of the Bill of Rights. (FYI)
The violence that is happening on campuses, and other places to protest free speech is getting worse. The Democrats, and those that they incite to domestic terror, have replaced their Klan robes with black combat gear, with masks replacing hoods. Even UC-Berkeley, the so-called cradle of the Free Speech movement, has essentially shut down dissenting opinion.
Enter the primal scream. Governor Howard Dean (D-VT), former governor, presidential candidate, and DNC National Chairman, has opined that Freedom of Speech (the 2nd right) does not protect Hate Speech (how is that defined anyway?). I think most real scholars would go so far as to say that it was Hate Speech, in particular, that was MEANT to be protected. After getting creamed on Twitter, he counters with Chaplinsky, a free speech case that determined that "fighting words" were not protected. Fighting words. If speech that we disagree with has become "fighting words", then it may be too late.
When a freedom that is enumerated is threatened, they all are threatened. Proof that the progressives in this country could care less about the Constitution. They claim to, but they are showing their true colors.
One more Constitutional "scholar" to deal with. Apparently, Bill Nye the Science Guy has bought his delusions of grandeur, and has decided that he is qualified to interpret the founders as well. As he was being beat up on CNN by a REAL scientist, he decided to rely on the Constitution, for proof that government was supposed to fund science. Article 1, Clause 8:
Clause 8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
Even a casual reading of this clause, for most, would indicate the recording and protecting patents and copyrights, not the funding of science. Maybe he should stick to the science he knows..
The President should go to Congress for authorization for any action wherever it may be. He should have done it BEFORE the attack on Syria. And certainly before anything in Korea. After decades of inaction by Presidents of both parties, the danger there is too great to not have a vote of authorization, or better, a declaration of war. If you can't get majorities in Congress to agree, time to rethink, and besides, it is what the Constitution requires.
Ever since the 1960s, we have heard a bunch of BS about "separation of church and state". These would be "scholars" and even Supreme Court Justices, who have sworn oaths to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution, go on and on about a Thomas Jefferson letter regarding the Establishment Clause in the 1st Amendment. Here is the amendment: Note that the words "Separation of church and state" do not appear in it.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
What they don't understand is that Thomas Jefferson had NOTHING to do with the Constitution. He would probably have said that the Articles of Confederation would not have allowed the Convention to begin with. (He was in France on a diplomatic mission). In fact, many states in the early Republic had taxes to fund churches. (Gasp!). But I am not writing about what is, indeed, the first freedom of the Bill of Rights. (FYI)
The violence that is happening on campuses, and other places to protest free speech is getting worse. The Democrats, and those that they incite to domestic terror, have replaced their Klan robes with black combat gear, with masks replacing hoods. Even UC-Berkeley, the so-called cradle of the Free Speech movement, has essentially shut down dissenting opinion.
Enter the primal scream. Governor Howard Dean (D-VT), former governor, presidential candidate, and DNC National Chairman, has opined that Freedom of Speech (the 2nd right) does not protect Hate Speech (how is that defined anyway?). I think most real scholars would go so far as to say that it was Hate Speech, in particular, that was MEANT to be protected. After getting creamed on Twitter, he counters with Chaplinsky, a free speech case that determined that "fighting words" were not protected. Fighting words. If speech that we disagree with has become "fighting words", then it may be too late.
When a freedom that is enumerated is threatened, they all are threatened. Proof that the progressives in this country could care less about the Constitution. They claim to, but they are showing their true colors.
One more Constitutional "scholar" to deal with. Apparently, Bill Nye the Science Guy has bought his delusions of grandeur, and has decided that he is qualified to interpret the founders as well. As he was being beat up on CNN by a REAL scientist, he decided to rely on the Constitution, for proof that government was supposed to fund science. Article 1, Clause 8:
Clause 8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
Even a casual reading of this clause, for most, would indicate the recording and protecting patents and copyrights, not the funding of science. Maybe he should stick to the science he knows..
The President should go to Congress for authorization for any action wherever it may be. He should have done it BEFORE the attack on Syria. And certainly before anything in Korea. After decades of inaction by Presidents of both parties, the danger there is too great to not have a vote of authorization, or better, a declaration of war. If you can't get majorities in Congress to agree, time to rethink, and besides, it is what the Constitution requires.
Comments
Post a Comment