Tag Archives: Supreme Court

A little self-reflection for America as a new president takes the oath of office

The Obama years brought us the Arab Spring, Benghazi, ISIS, civil war in Syria, civil war in Ukraine and the secret Iran nuclear deal.  On the home front we got Obamacare, “Fast and Furious” gun-running, IRS targeting of conservative groups, the Solyndra scandal, the VA scandal, NSA spying on US citizens, a Justice department that tried to enforce lawlessness, a State department that was the most ineffective we ever sent abroad to show the world what the USA really stood for, an Oval Office occupant who tried again and again to prove to US citizens that he was not a leader, not a truth-teller, but was a Muslim sympathizer. Oh, and we also got the worst “economic recovery” since the end of World War II along with a level of racial tension not seen in this country for fifty years.  And right at the end of his term, Barack Obama committed the greatest betrayal of Israel in U.S. history and brought us dangerously close to war with Russia.

During his time in the White House, Barack Obama used the full diplomatic power of the government to promote “abortion rights”, “gay rights” and other empty “liberal values” to the farthest corners of the globe.  Here at home, the appointment of two new Supreme Court justices under Obama paved the way for a Supreme Court decision that forced all 50 states to recognize gay marriage.  During his final press conference on Wednesday, Barack Obama told the media that he was particularly proud of this

Obama said he’s particularly proud of the “transformation” on gay rights during his presidency, which saw monumental Supreme Court decisions on gays in the military and same-sex marriage. Obama said his role was mostly to deliver “a good block downfield to help the movement advance.”

He said gay and lesbian activists deserve most of the credit, and singled out talk-show host Ellen DeGeneres, to whom he awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom last year.

And the final press conference of his presidency also afforded Obama the opportunity to talk about UN Security Council Resolution 2334.  Sadly, Obama still does not have any regrets for betraying Israel so dramatically.

Obama took an oath of office which legally obligated him to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States” and then did all he possibly could to destroy it.  Obama as an elected president was and is guilty of treason.

If we can be proud of anything today as Donald Trump assumes his duties, we can absolutely be proud that we as a people and a country survived the Obama experiment and watched it go up in smoke.

 

[From an article published by The Economic Collapse Blog]

 

………………………………………..

 

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

It’s already been proven that Obama and DOJ have lied, deceived, and deliberately misled in and out of court. Now there is evidence Obama hid from Congress and the American people a secret deal with Iran

The Obama Administration’s continuing surrender to lawless Executive overreach is predictable, disappointing, and a threat to the rule of law.

Last month, the United States Supreme Court slapped down the Administration’s lawless Executive action unilaterally rewriting our nation’s immigration laws despite President Obama’s admission that he is not a king.

At the same time, evidence has emerged that the Obama Administration hid from Congress and the American people key information about a secret deal with Iran that apparently enables the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism to maintain critical aspects of its nuclear program.  We have already filed one federal lawsuit against the Obama Administration’s State Department for their lies and censorship of the truth about its nuclear negotiations with Iran. And this latest bombshell reveals that Iran’s pathway to a nuclear weapon could be months instead of more than a year.

The arrogance of the Obama Administration’s Executive overreach and Executive lies grows each and every single day.

This week, dissatisfied with the Court’s ruling in State of Texas v. United States, which blocked the Administration’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) proposal to shield as many as five million illegal immigrants from deportation and provide them numerous benefits, the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a petition with the Court for a rehearing. In contradicting the President’s observation that he is not a monarch, the Administration seeks to place the Supreme Court’s original decision on hold until there is a ninth Justice on the Court rather than allowing the current affirmation of the lower court’s judgment by an equally divided 4-4 Court to stand.

Every American who is committed to the notion that we are a country of laws and not of kings should be concerned by the Justice Department’s petition striving to reinstate a policy that the President has repeatedly said exceeds his authority. Evidence that this Administration has surrendered to Executive overreach can be found in District Court Judge Hanen’s blistering opinion finding that DOJ lawyers admitted making intentional misstatements of facts. In essence, the DOJ misled the District Court and opposing counsel both in writing and in open court on multiple occasions on the timing of the commencement of DHS’s Directive establishing Deferred Action. In essence DOJ lawyers who have sworn to uphold the law violated the very canons necessary to ensure democracy and the rule of law prevail.

Deception, particularly by lawyers and Presidents, erodes the rule of law, undermines public trust, and diminishes our democracy.

The Administration’s legal and moral dysfunction runs roughshod over (1) Article II’s Take Care Clause that prevents the President from claiming the same lawmaking powers as Congress, (2) prevents the Administration from violating the notice-and-comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act and (3) its self-proclaimed commitment to openness, transparency, and full disclosure.

The Obama Administration, either through deception or otherwise, has violated its legal and moral obligations with impunity. The President continues to keep Congress in the dark about its secret Iran deal that has released billions to the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism. This all exposes President Obama’s claim that Congress’s failure to act on his Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland as merely more political games instead of serious statesmanship. Although he continues to castigate Congress for failing to move on his nominee, it is clear that the Administration remains oblivious to the fact that it is its own lawless action rather than Congressional inaction that truly undermines the rule of law.

Right now the Administration’s petition for a rehearing before a nine-member Supreme Court hangs in the balance. If five justices vote to rehear this case and therefore place the Supreme Court’s current decision on hold, that would place all Americans at the mercy of an out of control bureaucracy that appears to have no regard for the rule of law.

That is why it is so important for concerned citizens to oppose the DOJ’s recent petition for a rehearing on the DHS Deferred Action program, to realize that the President is constitutionally allowed to nominate Supreme Court justices and the Senate is constitutionally allowed to act or not act, and to remember that every election for officials at every level of our federal and state governments has an impact on the rule of law.

[by Harry G. Hutchison, for American Center for Law and Justice]

………………………………………….

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

You think ISIS is barbaric when it stages a “beheading infidels” event for the video cameras? Take another look at the United States of America…

Executives of Planned Parenthood’s federally subsidized meat markets — your tax dollars at work — lack the courage of their convictions. They should drop the pretense of conducting a complex moral calculus about the organs they harvest from the babies they kill.

First came the video showing a salad-nibbling, wine-sipping Planned Parenthood official explaining how “I’m going to basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above” whatever organ (“heart, lung, liver”) is being harvested. Then the president of a Planned Parenthood chapter explained the happy side of harvesting: “For a lot of the women participating in the fetal tissue donation program, they’re having a procedure that may be a very difficult decision for them and this is a way for them to feel that something positive is coming from … a very difficult time.”

“Having a procedure” — stopping the beating of a human heart — can indeed be a difficult decision for the woman involved. But it never is difficult for Planned Parenthood’s abortionists administering the “procedure.” The abortion industry’s premise is: At no point in the gestation of a human infant does this living being have a trace of personhood that must be respected. Never does it have a moral standing superior to a tumor or a hamburger in the mother’s stomach.

In 1973, the Supreme Court, simultaneously frivolous and arrogant, discovered constitutional significance in the fact that the number nine is divisible by three. It decreed that the status of pre-born human life changes with pregnancy’s trimesters.

(What would abortion law be if the number of months of gestation were a prime number — 7 or 11?) The court followed this preposterous assertion with faux humility, insisting it could not say when life begins. Then, swerving back to breathtaking vanity, it declared when “meaningful” life begins — “viability,” when the fetus “is potentially able” to survive outside the womb.

When life begins is a scientific not a philosophic or theological question: Life begins when the chromosomes of the sperm fuse with those of the ovum, forming a distinctive DNA complex that controls the new organism’s growth. This growth process continues unless a natural accident interrupts it, or it is ended by the sort of deliberate violence Planned Parenthood sells.

Another video shows the craftsmanship of Planned Parenthood’s abortionists — tiny limbs and hands from dismembered babies. To the craftsmen, however, these fragments are considered mere organic stuff. People who proclaim themselves both pro-choice and appalled by the videos are flinching from the logic of their extremism.

Cecile Richards, Planned Parenthood’s president, apologizes “for the tone” of her operatives’ chatter about crushing babies. But the tone flows from Planned Parenthood’s premise: Why be solemn about meat?

Even partial-birth abortion is — must be — a sacrament in the Church of “Choice.” This sect knows that its entire edifice depends on not yielding an inch on its insistence that what an abortion kills never possesses a scintilla of moral significance.

In partial-birth abortion, a near-term baby is pulled by the legs almost out of the birth canal, until the base of the skull is exposed so the abortionist can suck out its contents. During Senate debates on this procedure, three Democrats were asked: Suppose a baby’s head slips out of the birth canal — the baby is born — before the abortionist can kill it. Does the baby then have a right to live? Two of the Democrats refused to answer. The third said the baby acquires a right to life when it leaves the hospital.

The nonnegotiable tenet in today’s Democratic Party catechism is not opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline or support for a $15 minimum wage. These are evanescent fevers. As the decades roll by, the single unshakable commitment is opposition to any restriction on the right to inflict violence on pre-born babies. So today there is a limitless right to kill, and distribute fragments of, babies that intrauterine medicine can increasingly treat as patients.

We are wallowing in this moral swamp because the Supreme Court accelerated the desensitization of the nation by using words and categories about abortion the way infants use knives and forks — with gusto, but sloppily. Because Planned Parenthood’s snout is deep in the federal trough, decent taxpayers find themselves complicit in the organization’s vileness. What kind of a government disdains the deepest convictions of citizens by forcing them to finance what they see in videos — Planned Parenthood operatives chattering about bloody human fragments? “Taxes,” said Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., “are what we pay for civilized society.”

Today our taxes finance barbarism.

 

[by George Will, writing for The Washington Post]

 

NORM ‘n’ AL Note:  Just so you have a perspective on the matter, go to your favorite search engine and do an image search. Enter “cruel and barbaric” and see what the search engine brings you. Do you flinch when you see an act of animal cruelty?  (The ASPCA hopes you do.)  Are you able to watch a video of ISIS beheading a human being…with a hunting knife?  Now do another image search. Enter the term “abortion.”  Now have a nice day…if you still can.

 

…………………………………………

 

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

 

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Planned Parenthood is committed to two things: murder and money.

What happened to them?

We’re about to take Planned Parenthood to the Supreme Court.

The abortion giant is committed to two things: death and money.  It slaughters hundreds of thousands of unborn children and takes hundreds of millions of our tax dollars.

We represent a former Planned Parenthood employee who blew the whistle on millions of dollars of outright fraud.  This may be the largest case against the abortion industry ever.

My mom will kill me...

We’re exposing fraud and defending life at the highest court in the land, and we need your support.

A defeat at the Supreme Court would be a monumental blow to big abortion.

Your tax dollars fund Planned Parenthood — which means your tax dollars are being used against us in court.

Our deadline is one week from tomorrow. We need your tax-deductible gift to defend life today.

The abortion industry had a banner year in 2014 at your expense.

Planned Parenthood aborted – murdered – 327,653 babies last year – an average of one abortion every 90 seconds.  At the same time, the abortion giant received more than $528 million of your tax dollars.

Planned Parenthood is profiting from death, bragging about ObamaCare, and touting how many pro-life laws it has defeated.  And it still wants even more of your tax dollars.

Planned Parenthood aborts more children than any other organization. Taxpayers should not be forced to fund the abortion industry. It’s time for Congress to take action. Defund Planned Parenthood now.

 

Where is YOUR concern?

 

Let's pretend...
The text above is from a letter sent to us by the American Center for Law and Justice. We added the images.

………………………………………
As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

How much are YOU WILLING TO PAY to continue to kill unborn children in the US?

Legislation is being introduced today in Congress to defund Planned Parenthood.

Yesterday, a federal appeals court heard arguments on a critical pro-life law that could shut down Planned Parenthood and 80% of abortion clinics in Texas.

According to its own reports, Planned Parenthood aborted nearly 330,000 babies last year.

It took over half a billion tax dollars from the American people.

We’re being forced to fund the abortion industry with our tax dollars as they kill unborn children.

We’re fighting Planned Parenthood in court, exposing fraud and defending life. We filed a critical amicus brief defending Texas’s pro-life law, and we’re fighting in Congress to end Planned Parenthood’s funding.

Forcing pro-life Americans to fund death is immoral. It must end.

Stand with us to demand an end to taxpayer funding for the abortion industry.

Sign Our Petition: Defund Planned Parenthood Today.

 

NORM ‘n’ AL Note:  It has often been said that an abortion produces one dead and one wounded. Most women who go through the procedure experience a level of psychological pain they never imagined.

Since Roe v. Wade was made law by our Supreme Court, we have murdered almost 60 MILLION babies in this once-great country.  We will all admit, if we’re honest, that we hold life more cheaply today than ever before, as people are now permitted by law to end their own lives in certain cases.

Why is it “abortion” to kill a baby in the womb, but “murder” to end the same life once the child is born? Does that make any sense to you? Ending a life is murder, period.

Consider a passage from the Bible’s Psalm 139: You formed my inward parts; You wove me together in my mother’s womb. I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; wonderful are Your works, and my soul knows it very well. (Verses 13 and 14.)

We are terminating a life that only God could begin. And we’re doing it more than a million times every year.

Planned Parenthood and their supporters call it “choice.” “I’m pro-choice,” they tell us. “Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures available.” It sure isn’t safe for the child who is growing, hoping to be given the same chance at life that you were given. Trying to hide the death in calling it “pro-choice” and “birth control” does absolutely nothing to disguise the fact that a very small, very vulnerable human being is going to die a very painful death.

God doesn’t call it pro-choice. He sees it as pro-death.

The Holocaust killed 6 million Jewish people, men, women, and children, during WWII. If 6 million is a holocaust, what in the world do we call 60 million?

 

[The letter above came to us from the American Center for Law and Justice]

…………………………………….

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

ACLU loses again…

ACLU loses again...How To Protect The Forest? Simple. Just Cut Down All The Trees.

Score:   GOD and ONEIDA, Tennessee:   1000,       ACLU:   0

After Oneida, Tenn., school officials decided not to fight the American Civil Liberties Union’s (ACLU) demand that they cease an opening prayer before high school football games, the school’s cheerleaders tackled the matter.

Led by cheerleader Asia Canada, the Oneida Indians’ squad used the moment of silence before the Sept. 12 football game with Watertown to deliver a cheer – for God.

“[The announcer] called for the moment of silence, and I started off, ‘Our Father who art in heaven’ and everyone joined in,” Miss Canada, the ringleader of the revolt, told WBIR.

As Asia began reciting the Lord’s Prayer, her teammates joined her, along with Watertown’s cheerleaders. Then, hundreds of people in the stands rose to get in on the prayer. For the record, ACLU attorneys did not demand that local police arrest everyone on the spot. Also for the record, Oneida crushed the Purple Tigers 47-7.

School officials had agreed to stop the 84-year tradition of opening games with a prayer and replace it with a moment of silence after the ACLU threw a flag on their prayer. However, that wasn’t the end of the story in this Bible Belt town 60 miles north of Knoxville.

Kevin Acres, the announcer, distanced himself from the change, explaining that, “first off, I wanted to let everyone know on both sides of the field, this wasn’t our decision or the school board, it was pressure from outside groups.”

The exuberant demonstration of faith that erupted was not exactly spontaneous, said football coach Tony Lambert.

“We went to the cheerleaders and said ‘would you consider leading the Lord’s Prayer during the moment of silence for anyone that would want to join in?’” said Mr. Lambert, a self-professed Christian. “It was at their discretion, and they organized it. We announced the moment of silence, the girls formed a circle and read the Lord’s Prayer and others in the stands followed in. I got a lot of positive feedback from it. I’m very proud of our cheerleaders and fans.”

In an Oct. 3, 2013, letter sent to schools all over Tennessee, ACLU of Tennessee Executive Director Hedy M. Weinberg cited the Supreme Court rulings Lee v. Weisman (1992), which bars adult-led school prayer, and Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe (2000), which bars student-led amplified prayer. In the latter case, dissenting Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote that Justice John Paul Stevens’ 6-3 majority opinion “bristles with hostility to all things religious in public life.”

Explaining the ACLU’s aim to silence the prayers, Ms. Weinberg wrote in Orwellian fashion about “protecting religious freedom for all students, including athletes, and for their families who attend the games.” In the ACLU’s world, you preserve the forest by cutting down all the trees.

She noted that, “It is well settled that school faculty, coaches, administrators or invited clergy may not lead students in prayer or conduct a prayer during a school event.”

The school had been allowing public prayer at football games since 1930. Is that “well settled?” America’s Founders, including Thomas Jefferson, attended Christian services in the chamber of the House of Representatives, and presidents have incorporated prayer in public events on government property right up to the current day.

Unable to prohibit presidents of the United States from indulging in this disturbing behavior, the ACLU has been more successful rooting out religious heritage in communities like Oneida (pop. 3,700).

That brings us to the question of how you define success. Before the ACLU’s threat, one man with a microphone would give a prayer at the games. Now, hundreds, perhaps as many as a thousand, according to Mr. Acres, pray together, led by cheerleaders who won’t knuckle under to a team of ACLU lawyers.

The football fans of Oneida apparently revere God more than they do man. There’s a good chance that many are familiar with the words of Jesus in Matthew 10:32-33:

Therefore everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven.

Oneida High School Principal Kevin Byrd said the ACLU’s legal victory has united the town of Oneida like nothing else.

“We are in the heart of the Bible Belt,” Mr. Byrd told The Knoxville News. “Nothing galvanizes us more than our faith. This just reassured us where our school stands. We’re gonna stand true to our beliefs.”

This is reminiscent, on a larger scale, of a famous incident in May 2001, when a commencement speaker at Washington Community High School in Washington, Ill., faked a sneeze so that a number of students could loudly say “God bless you.” The student, Ryan Brown, did it to get around a court order obtained by the ACLU on behalf of the school’s valedictorian, who did not want an invocation or benediction at the event.

As even the liberal fact-checking site Snopes.com put it, “people were angered by the decision, which overturned a tradition of 80 years’ standing.”

So, if you have something even faintly “religious” going on in public in your community, and it goes back 80 years, watch out for an ACLU goon unit.

No word yet on whether the ACLU will be back in Oneida with another threat. After all, the school football team’s name is … the Indians.

[by Robert Knight, writing for BARBWIRE.COM]

……………………………….

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Atheists want Obama’s IRS to target and monitor churches…and IRS agrees!

NORM ‘n’ AL Note:  THIS IS NOT YOUR GRANDFATHER’S U.S.A. ANYMORE, FOLKS.  IT IS TIME FOR YOU TO WRITE A LETTER TO YOUR ELECTED SENATORS AND REPS AND DEMAND (D-E-M-A-N-D) THAT THEY SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTION. BETTER YET, WRITE THE LETTER AND THEN CALL TO MAKE SURE THEY RECEIVED IT. (BE SURE TO SEND THEM A COPY OF THIS BLOG POST ALSO.) NOW PLEASE SEE BELOW.

The Holy Bible

If the Obama Administration’s IRS targeting of conservative groups wasn’t bizarre and draconian enough, the IRS is now planning to target, and far worse, monitor, churches.

The new IRS targeting program has been instituted at the behest of the angry atheist group Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF).

The IRS caved in before to the same FFRF that has tried, and notoriously failed, to strip “In God We Trust” from our currency, tear down World War II memorials, ban the National Day of Prayer, attack the Star of David in a Holocaust memorial, and even deny that Moses is depicted in the Supreme Court.

FFRF filed a lawsuit against the IRS in 2012 demanding that the Obama Administration delve deep into preaching from the pulpit to ensure that pastors, priests, and parishioners don’t say anything within the four walls of a church that could be construed as political.

Instead of refusing to impose a draconian monitoring program into the free speech of churches, the IRS caved, settling the case and agreeing with the angry atheist group that churches should be targets of federal IRS monitoring.  The worst part? The IRS is keeping the details of its settlement, agreeing to target churches, a secret.

As Fox News reported, this deal with the IRS not only violates the First Amendment but could lead to the IRS literally monitoring sermons on Sunday morning and challenging churches’ tax-exempt status if they take a religious position on issues such as abortion.

FFRF responded that these concerns are nothing more than the “hysterical disinformation machine that is Fox News Network.”

Nothing could be further from the truth.  This is a real and direct threat to the religious freedom and free speech of churches.

Churches have a constitutionally protected right to discuss issues of faith, even ones that might be considered political.  They do not loose their right to free speech just because they are churches.

In fact, the Supreme Court has made this very clear: “Indeed, in Anglo-American history, at least, government suppression of speech has so commonly been directed precisely at religious speech that a free-speech clause without religion would be Hamlet without the prince.”

The Supreme Court could not have been more clear when it held:

Adherents of particular faiths and individual churches frequently take strong positions on public issues, including . . . vigorous advocacy of legal or constitutional positions. Of course, churches, as much as secular bodies and private citizens, have that right.

An intentional, targeted campaign to monitor churches would violate the Constitution.  The constitutional protection outlined in the “Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses has prevented the kind of involvement that would tip the balance toward government control of churches or governmental restraint on religious practice.”  That is precisely what IRS monitoring of churches would bring about.

Targeting churches at the behest of religious opponents, angry atheists, is an abhorrent abuse of government power.

One can only image how a Lois Lerner, the former senior IRS official at the center of the IRS targeting scandal who called conservatives “a**holes,” “TeRrorists” (capitalizing the “R” to emphasize the point), and “crazies,” would implement the targeting of churches and which churches she would choose to monitor.

The IRS clearly hasn’t learned its lesson.  It’s gone from targeting the Tea Party to directly targeting churches.  This cannot stand.

It MUST NOT STAND.

[from a letter sent by the American Center for Law and Justice]

……………………………….

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Radical (and not so radical) left in US now moving to outlaw Christianity…

The mask is off. All pretense has been dropped, and the anti-Christian left’s boundless depth of hatred for individual liberty, our First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) is now on full display.

I wrote last week about the Supreme Court’s recent Hobby Lobby opinion, a rather tepid acknowledgement of every American’s non-negotiable right to religious free exercise (yes, that includes Christian business owners). I observed, among other things, that “the secularist left’s utter meltdown over having but a small measure of control over others wrested away is highly instructive.”

The meltdown continues. This week brings two new developments: 1) Democrats in Congress are readying a legislative “Hobby Lobby fix” that stands exactly zero chance of passing and would be struck down as unconstitutional even if it did, and 2) The ACLU, AFL-CIO, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, Lambda Legal and a hodgepodge of other left-wing extremist groups have withdrawn support for the ironically tagged “Employment Non-Discrimination Act,” the crown jewel of homofascism, because the bill’s paper-thin “religious exemption” does not adequately outlaw the practice of Christianity.

The Hobby Lobby ‘fix’

Addressing the high court’s Hobby Lobby decision on Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., fumed, “We have so much to do this month, but the one thing we’re going to do during this work period – sooner rather than later – is to ensure that women’s lives are not determined by virtue of five white men.”

To which Justice Clarence Thomas replied, “Say what, honkey?”

“This Hobby Lobby decision is outrageous,” continued Reid, “and we’re going to do something about it.”

Well, “do something about it” they shall try. TalkingPointsMemo.com reported on legislation Democrats introduced Thursday that would do away with religious liberty protections altogether:

“The legislation will be sponsored by Sens. Patty Murray, D-Wash., and Mark Udall, D-Colo. According to a summary reviewed by TPM, it prohibits employers from refusing to provide health services, including contraception [and abortion pills], to their employees if required by federal law. It clarifies that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the basis for the Supreme Court’s ruling against the mandate, and all other federal laws don’t permit businesses to opt out of the Obamacare requirement.

“The legislation also puts the kibosh on legal challenges by religious nonprofits, like Wheaton College, instead declaring that the accommodation they’re provided under the law [there is none] is sufficient to respect their religious liberties.”

This reactionary response to the Hobby Lobby ruling is, of course, little more than an election year fundraising scheme for the Democratic National Committee.

Withdrawn support for ENDA

The Washington Post reports, “Several major gay rights groups withdrew support Tuesday for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act that would bolster gay and transgender rights in the workplace, saying they fear that broad religious exemptions included in the current bill might compel private companies to begin citing objections similar to those that prevailed in a U.S. Supreme Court case last week. …

“But the groups said they can no longer back ENDA as currently written in light of the Supreme Court’s decision last week to strike down a key part of President Obama’s health-care law. The court ruled that family-owned businesses do not have to offer their employees contraceptive coverage that conflicts with the owners’ religious beliefs,” concluded the Post.

Gary Glenn is a candidate for the Michigan State House. He’s also president of AFA Michigan. Glenn has been a national leader in defense of religious liberty for well upon two decades. In an email, Glenn wrote, “The extremely limited religious exemptions typically included in discriminatory homosexual and cross-dressing ‘rights’ laws have always been mere window-dressing with no real protection or effect, as witnessed by the ongoing persecution and discrimination under such laws against Christian business owners and community organizations such as the Boy Scouts, Catholic Charities, Salvation Army, and even the United Way.

“But now that the U.S. Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision threatens to give real teeth to such exemptions, the AFL-CIO’s in-house homosexual activist group has announced it will no longer support discriminatory ‘sexual orientation’ legislation that includes even limited exemptions for religious institutions.

“If this zero tolerance stance spreads to larger groups such as the Human Rights Campaign and National Gay and Lesbian Task Force [it now has], this could become the sticking point which hamstrings future attempts to pass federal, state, and local homosexual ‘rights’ legislation. These supposed religious exemptions, which the AFL-CIO’s homosexual lobby at least now says it will no longer support, have been a key propaganda point in blunting the opposition of churches and citizens concerned about the obvious threat such laws pose to religious freedom.”

According to its leftist proponents, ENDA would merely insulate people who choose to engage in homosexual conduct (sexual orientation) or those who suffer from gender confusion (gender identity) against employment intolerance. In truth, however, this legislation effectively would codify the very thing it purports to combat: workplace discrimination.

Though in its current form ENDA contains an extremely weak religious exemption that might – and I mean might – partially protect some churches and religious organizations (until they’re sued by “gay” activists), this so-called exemption would leave most others, such as Bible bookstores and many Christian schools and para-church organizations, entirely unprotected. It would additionally crush individual business owners’ guaranteed First Amendment rights.

Any “religious exemption” is meaningless. Last year Harry Reid promised homosexual pressure groups that Democrats would remove all protections for Christians and other people of faith on the flipside – after ENDA passed. The homosexual news site Washington Blade reported that homosexual activist Derek Washington of “GetEqual” confirmed Reid’s promise. In a conference call with homosexual activists, Washington admitted that Reid vowed, as goes any religious exemption, “the main thing to do was get the vote taken care of, and then deal with it later. As oftentimes happens, you don’t get something perfect the first time around, you go back and fix it later, so that was basically his take on it.”

According to the Blade, “That account was corroborated by Faiz Shakir, a Reid spokesperson, who said the Democratic leader understands the concerns, but wants to get the bill passed first, then go back and address the exemptions.”

They’ve stopped pretending, folks. This is about criminalizing Christianity. The Hobby Lobby decision has merely made secular liberals forget themselves momentarily. It’s blown back the propagandist curtain to expose their truly sinister aims. Hobby Lobby hasn’t put the “culture war” to rest. It’s taken a gavel to the “progressive” hornets’ nest.

Break out the popcorn and Jujubes. It’s about to get interesting.

[by Matt Barber, writing for WND.com]

……………………………….

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Obamacare facing another court threat, and this one could be fatal…

The threats to Obamacare just keep on coming.

A case before the U.S. District Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia may determine the Affordable Care Act was written in such a way that it prevents the federal government’s HealthCare.gov web site from offering subsidies.

Now such a ruling would have a long way to go before it actually would become enacted — and a lot of legal hoops would have to be jumped through — but such a finding could be a show-stopper for Obamacare. More than 5 million of the 8 million who signed up for Obamacare through the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ web site would thus not be eligible for tax credits. Most, presumably, would fall off the rolls of the insured.

The case that could be ruled upon as early as Tuesday is known as Halbig v. Burwell, formerly Halbig v. Sebelius. CNBC reported Monday two of the three judges who heard the case in March indicated they might rule in favor of the plaintiffs. And an op-ed piece in last week’s Los Angeles Times noted that lower courts may follow the Supreme Court’s lead, which has ruled the Obama administration has overstepped its bounds in recent cases.

There are at least three other similar cases to Halbig. They all contend that the ACA was written to grant subsidies only to people in states that have established their own health-insurance exchanges. It was something the federal government could not have foreseen, since it expected all states to set up their own networks, but only 16 states and the District of Columbia accomplished that task. Thirty-four states are using the federal government’s HealthCare.gov web site to find health coverage.

Phrasing in the law uses the words “established by the State” as opposed to “established under this Act” and plaintiffs in the cases have construed that to mean exchanges only established by a state. But the Halbig case, along with another in Virginia, were dismissed earlier this year when lower-court judges found the arguments for the plaintiffs to be off base, since the ACA’s subsidies clearly were meant for those in states where the federal government had to step in to establish the exchange.

Both Halbig and the Virginia case will be ruled upon by appeals courts. Two other cases are awaiting rulings on motions to dismiss those cases by district judges.

Should Halbig prevail, it’s expected the Obama administration will appeal immediately to all judges at the D.C. Circuit Court, and then it would go on to the Supreme Court from there. It’s not guaranteed, though, that the high court would hear the case. Obama administration officials are mum on the case until there is a ruling in the D.C. court.

One question that remains unanswered: Why didn’t Obamacare opponents in Congress key in on this when the law was being implemented late last year and early this year?

[by Russ Britt, writing for MARKETWATCH]

……………………………….

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Four of our nine Supreme Court justices do not respect our country or its Constitution…

While reams have already been penned examining the implications of last week’s Hobby Lobby decision, most of what’s been written, particularly in the liberal press, has missed the point entirely.

Though I’m mildly pleased that the Supreme Court is not quite ready to take gasoline to both the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) signed into law by Bill Clinton, a liberal, in 1993, I am alarmed, and so too should you be, that only 56 percent of our sitting U.S. Supreme Court justices are still willing to give the U.S. Constitution a modicum of the respect, recognition and compliance it not only deserves, but requires.

America was dragged before Emperor Obama’s counter-constitutional, secular-”progressive” firing squad and remarkably, miraculously, they missed.

But it’s a false sense of security. As we Christians and conservatives celebrate with chest bumps and high fives, we remain bound, gagged and blindfolded while these “progressive” fascists reload. The next volley of cultural Marxist lead is but moments away.

Tick, tick goes the judicial-supremacy time bomb.

I don’t mean to throw a wet blanket on the party. There is much to celebrate, and this ruling’s broader implications are profound indeed. The opinion simply doesn’t go far enough.

Yes, Hobby Lobby was, in part, about the non-negotiable fact that government cannot compel religious business owners of private, closely held corporations to be complicit in abortion homicide. It was also, tangentially, about the self-evident reality that women are not, never have been and never will be, entitled to expect Christian men, who are not their husbands, to pay for their birth control and abortion drugs so that they can have consequence-free sex or otherwise murder their pre-born babies.

Hobby Lobby was chiefly about one of our very first freedoms: religious liberty.

How is it that this was a 5-4 decision? Even an elementary understanding of American history and a cursory analysis of both our U.S. Constitution and RFRA establish that this opinion should have been roundly unanimous. The majority decision merely recognized, in the weakest of terms, Americans’ God-given, inalienable, constitutionally guaranteed right to religious free exercise (yes, even for those pesky Christian business owners).

Still, while lovers of freedom rejoice across the nation, the reality is that there are at least four domestic “enemies within” currently sitting on the highest bench in the land, not the least of whom is Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Ruth Bader GinsburgGinsburg tells you everything you need to know about Ginsburg: “I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a Constitution in the year 2012,” she disgracefully vomited a couple years back in an interview about the fledgling Egyptian government. “I might look at the Constitution of South Africa. That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights. … It really is, I think, a great piece of work that was done. Much more recent than the U.S. Constitution.”

Ginsburg hates the America of our founding. She hates our constitution and, like all true “progressives,” endeavors to circumvent it at every turn.

And that’s the prism through which we must interpret the parade of hyperbolic horribles in her scathing Hobby Lobby dissent. She excoriated the constitutionalist majority for its ruling, calling it a “radical” decision “of startling breadth.” Still, when you cut through the alarmist tripe, she actually gets to the meat of the matter.

“In a decision of startling breadth,” she wrote, “the Court holds that commercial enterprises, including corporations, along with partnerships and sole proprietorships, can opt out of any law (saving only tax laws) they judge incompatible with their sincerely held religious beliefs.”

Uh, yeah, and?

Here’s what Ginsburg actually meant: “I hate the First Amendment. It’s broad, inalienable, and I want to alienate it. Oh, and dead babies. Lots of dead babies.”

Ginsburg is right. This decision was “of startling breadth,” but only if you happen to be a secular elitist hell-bent on marginalizing Christians and wielding unchecked power over your fellow Americans.

Indeed, the secularist left’s utter meltdown over having but a small measure of control over others wrested away is highly instructive. Still, why would we expect lefties to understand the First Amendment when these Rhodes Scholars are calling a decision penned by Justice Alito “#ScaliaLaw” on Twitter?

In his concurring opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy, who more often than not gets it wrong, got one right:

“In our constitutional tradition, freedom means that all persons have the right to believe or strive to believe in a divine creator and a divine law. For those who choose this course, free exercise is essential in preserving their own dignity and in striving for a self-definition shaped by their religious precepts. Free exercise in this sense implicates more than just freedom of belief. … It means, too, the right to express those beliefs and to establish one’s religious (or non-religious) self-definition in the political, civic, and economic life of our larger community.”

Wow. And now for the pink elephant in the room: Although the Hobby Lobby decision did not directly address the raging cultural debate over counterfeit “gay marriage” and the irreconcilable friction this modern, sin-centric novelty has with the long-established and inalienable right to religious free exercise, it doesn’t take a Phi Beta Kappa to read between the lines and discover, as Ginsburg and Kennedy evidently agree, that the “startling breadth” of the decision most assuredly touches and concerns the debate head on. (And not in favor, I might add, of the homofascist “you-have-to-affirm-my-faux-marriage-or-go-to-jail” crowd.)

While Justice Kennedy is anything but predictable on these matters, this ruling makes it pretty clear that, as both the First Amendment and RFRA already assure, the Christian baker, photographer, florist or any other business owner, is protected from being forced, under penalty of law, into indentured servitude – from having to give their God-given time and talent to create goods or services that require they violate sincerely held religious beliefs.

In other words, both the First Amendment and RFRA trump any and all so-called “sexual orientation” laws. Or, as Ginsburg put it, private businesses “can opt out of any law (saving only tax laws) they judge incompatible with their sincerely held religious beliefs.”

Darn skippy.

Furthermore, Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act expressly protects religious free exercise while ignoring newfangled notions of “sexual orientation” or “gender identity.”

When religious belief comes into conflict with sexual identity politics, religious belief wins every time. Period.

 Let me be clear so there’s no misunderstanding. I’m a Christian. If I’m a business owner and someone comes in requesting goods or services that would require me to violate my conscience – especially my biblically based, sincerely held religious beliefs – I will not, under any circumstances, provide those goods or services. This is my absolute, non-negotiable, constitutionally guaranteed right.

No debate. No question. No compromise.

The language of the Hobby Lobby decision simply acknowledges this reality.

[by Matt Barber, writing for EAGLE RISING]

……………………………….

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized