11 - 20 of 34 Comments

1. JoAnn

   1 year ago

   Rob: When Obama can't get his way, he has a temper tantrum just like a child. He oversteps the Constitution and does anything he wants. He even defies the Supreme Ct. when they tell him NO. Seems like he doesn't like that word. Does dictator come to mind? When he had a majority in Congress, Congress gave this man so much power that they have rendered themselves irrelevant. Yes, executive orders are needed sometimes but most of the time they have been utilized when Congress was not in session. Now, when he doesn't get what he wants from Congress, he just finds some way to do it anyway, violating the Constitution. Regarding the Espionage Act, the article was in the NY Times just a couple of days ago. http://www.nytimes.com The speech by Michelle Obama was given in San Juan, Puerto Rico on May 14, 2008 during the 2008 presidential campaign. I watched her make the statement myself on the news. http://savingcommonsense.blogspot.com/2010/07. Happy reading. This is the last time I am going to do homework for you. Next time, if you doubt me, look it up yourself. That's what I do on everything I hear. I don't trust anyone's word. I always do my own homework. Not being nasty, just encouraging you to check out the things that I have been telling you all along. God bless.

2. Rob

   1 year ago

   JoAnn, given the dysfunction of our house and senate right now, I don't think you should be suprised that any President would go around them, as they always do. If they didn't want the President to have that power, it's within their ability to remove it, never mind the fact that if they actually functioned as legislators, Presidents may not have to do that. I would also say that in regards to regulations, sometimes they are necessary. We don't live in the 1800's. A complex world sometimes requires complex regulations. Statutues that are passed provide the overarching rule with the agencies charged with enforcement are given some leeway to pass regulations. It's the way it works for administrations. As for your statements on the espionage act, what is your source for that statement? I know there were allegations of misuse, but I'm not sure what became of them. But it seems like the law has been used to prosecute people quite often. As for the first lady's comments, I would need to hear the rest of the conversation to ensure I have the right context....what's the source?

3. JoAnn

   1 year ago

   Rob, you are right. Besides entitlements, there have been 100's of regulations imposed on us that are stripping us of our freedoms. Making up excuses to use executive orders to by-pass Congress, even when the ARE in session. And using the Espionage Act against people's right to free speech and sending them to prison because they disagreed with him. You know Obama has used the Espionage Act more times in the 3 years that he has been in office and it has only been used 3 times by other presidents in the entire history of our country. Yes, let's just give him another 4 years and we will have to get permission from him to blow our noses. Don't you remember what Michelle Obama said. She said "Barach knows that we will have to change our conversation, our traditions and our history. We are going to have to move into a different place." What do you think she meant by that? God bless.

4. Amy11215

   1 year ago

   The Supreme Court ruled in 1971 Wisconsin v. Yoder that compulsory school-attendance law to them violated their rights under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment."
   
   The U.S. Supreme Court held as follows[2]:
   
   1.States cannot force individuals to attend school (insert: purchase contraceptive services) when it infringes on their First Amendment rights. In this case, the state of Wisconsin interfered with the practice of a legitimate religious belief.
   
   2.Not all beliefs rise to the demands of the religious clause of the First Amendment. There needs to be evidence of true and objective religious practices, instead of an individual making his or her standards on such matters. The Amish way of life is one of deep religious convictions that stems from the Bible. It is determined by their religion, which involves their rejection of worldly goods and their living in the Biblical simplicity. The modern compulsory secondary education is in sharp conflict with their way of life.(insert: the Catholic church has never believed in birth control or abortion)
   
   3.With respect to the State of Wisconsin’s argument that additional modern education beyond 8th grade is necessary to prepare citizens to participate effectively and productively in America’s political system, the Court disagreed. It argued that the State provided no evidence showing any great benefit to having two extra years in the public schools.(insert: The women who really want birth control or abortions could still get them for free or at low cost as they do now.)
   
   4.The Court found no evidence that by leaving the Amish community without two additional years of schooling, young Amish children would become burdens on society. To the contrary, the Court argued that they had good vocational background to rely upon. It was the State’s mistaken assumption that Amish children were ignorant. Compulsory education after elementary school was a recent movement that developed in the early 20th century in order to prevent child labor and keep children of certain ages in school. The State of Wisconsin’s arguments about compelling the school attendance were therefore less substantial. (insert: Who would be harmed here except for the people of faith.)
   
   5.Responding to Justice Douglas' dissent, the Court argued that the question before it was about the interests of the parents to exercise free religion, and did not relate to the child's First Amendment's rights. As such, the argument pertaining to the child's right to exercise free religion was irrelevant in this case.
   
   Is it just me or could the same logic be held for the one who is being forced to comply with the HHS mandate. I guess that is why the media keeps harping on the statistic of 98% of catholic women having used b.c. at some point. Maybe I am just reaching too far out there. I am really disturbed at the way our government is out to make unlawful citizens out of faithful Christians
   

5. Rob

   1 year ago

   JoAnn, I would propose to you that when you consider the Patriot Act and everything that has come with that, we have been giving up our freedom for security all along. Entitlements are not the only way that our liberty is being taken from us. As to the other comment, both the left and right believe that if they say something enough times then it will be true. When I say right wing nonsense, I mean just that. The things that are said that are either half truths or just flat out lies. And the left does it too. We have no respect in our discourse anymore, and hardly any truth. Our news today serves to shock only and truth is negotiable.

6. JoAnn

   1 year ago

   techwreak: You are so right. "Anyone who will give up freedom for security, deserves neither." God bless.

7. techwreck

   1 year ago

   Mark, It sounds like you are worshiping at the church of Obama, and willing to give up your constitutional rights to the government. Men and women have died to secure and protect those God-given rights for you, so don't be so quick to throw them away.

8. techwreck

   1 year ago

   Joe Jr., while the comments in the article on an "unjust law" are interesting, they are not the issue. Our Constitution is the sole basis for securing our God-given rights in the U.S., and it has been ignored by the Obama administration in mandating Obamacare. The Supreme Court is set to rule on the broader aspects of the mandate, but churches must challenge the specific mandate that requires them to provide "health care" contrary to their beliefs or suffer punishment by the almighty (that's the almighty Obama administration). If a specific right in the Bill of Rights can be ignored by government, then none of our God-given rights are safe.

9. Mary W.

   1 year ago

   Michael: You have been listening to too much "History" channel drivel about our founding fathers all being Masonic. Read the founding fathers actual letters and writings and you will see that media is again casting our founding fathers as non-Christian men.

10. Jeff

    1 year ago

    Our national government has apologized to Islam around the world for the accidental burning of a Koran, however the same government insults, no attacks, the religious views of over 77 million Americans.This is incredible.

Leave a Comment