Just a Thought

Just a Thought

Lately, I have been given considerable thought to what we refer to in this nation as Religious Rights. Let’s just take up the religious rights as we are told and taught that is quite evident in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The reason I chose this source is because of the massive amount of sources that have been used directly, during there time, to make some sense out of what we refer to as religious rights. Using the final draft of the basic ten amendments as penned by President James Madison in 1787, it is doubtful altogether that the language would have come so easily to him. In fact, the majority of these amendments came from phrases that the English people (remember England’s great and vast territories that existed literally around the earth) had gone through the struggles in order to gain these rights.

Therefore, let’s begin with the year of the Magna Carta, 1215, which serves notice to everyone that this was indeed the precedent year and prominence given to that enormous writing surface. This clause should be remembered from all clauses from the Magna Carta,

                No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned or be disseized of his freehold, or liberties, or free customs, or be outlawed or exiled, or any otherwise destroyed, nor will we pass upon him, nor condemn him, but by lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land.

What does this segment from the Magna Carta tell us? Although, it uses “...the law of the land...” but who actually can define this? But there was a law; this the charter says very strongly. And law – Mrs. Clinton, and just about every first time Representative from the House means procedures, procedures even a King (at that time) or President must follow – suffice it to say that no one is bigger or better than the law.

In fact, there were no less than 30 more meetings that were used by townspeople for refining these personal and private laws. William Penn, Roger Sherman, the entire state of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Maryland as did the Quakers, Catholics, Episcopalians, stepped up to maintain their own religious rights were being protected.

Indeed, the conference committee made only one important change in the amendments in 1788, just prior to their release as part of the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution. That was the weight and absolute interpretations of the first guarantee of the First Amendment, resulting in the absolute clarity and separation between the church and the state.

                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.

As with all civil liberties, these are not absolute. They must be exercised in a manner that does not conflict with the rights of others.

Having stated this, it is overwhelmingly important to verify and clear up a few things. Basically, this amendment is known as the “Freedom of Religion, Speech, Press, Assemble, and Petition” amendment. However, to avoid conflict say that on March 16, 2019, there was a scheduled Immigration Peace Movement planned at the Empire State Building as put forth by the Irish-Americans and exactly at the same time of 1:00 pm on 3-16-2019. This is a conflict waiting to happen.

To be certain, in my days of protesting one needed to have a signed and true Assembly at streets so as to ensure there would not be any fighting.

How a person could take an oath of office with their hand on the Quran is beyond me. As is the wearing the headscarf whilst being either in the House, Senate, White House, or any government agency is pure.

“They won’t let us,” says Harry Reid

Here is notwithstanding anything else the worst and most obvious problem with America: Dissention and lack of personal responsibility.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid made a push for Hispanic voters Tuesday by arguing Republicans are to blame for the Senate’s inability to move forward with immigration reform efforts. “I don’t know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican, OK,” Reid said, according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal. “Do I need to say more?”

Reid consistently blames the lack of GOP support for the Senate’s failure to take up immigration reform. “So why don’t we fix it? They won’t let us,” he told Latino voters.

Seriously all things being equal doesn’t Harry Reid sound and present himself as an incapable infant? Oh, “They won’t let us” as if he doesn’t have the majority of the Senate within his political party. Are you ready for this double-speak?

One bipartisan effort, a $600 million border security bill, having passed in the Senate, is headed back to the Senate after a procedural problem caused it to start over in the House. Losing sufficient Republican support, and more GOP members are using harsh rhetoric against illegal immigrants and their families. The problem: All bills that stipulate money are started in the House, and not the Senate Harry!

In April, Reid promised a rally of Hispanic activists in Las Vegas that he would deliver comprehensive immigration reform this year and that there would be "no excuses" for failure.

"Republicans," Reid replied Tuesday when asked what kept him from keeping his promise. First Harry Reid has no authority to make a ludicrous promise such as that; stooping even lower, Reid stated at the same meeting of special interest groups that, “Republicans are blocking comprehensive immigration reform and told Hispanics they shouldn't be treated differently because "their skin's a tone darker" than that of America's early European immigrants.

Quite openly this is the same namby-pamby two faced “Senator” who stated amidst the Iraq War, “…we lost…we’ve already lost the war…” A great vote of confidence for our military – after what he and his party has pulled with health care reform and immigration reform we’re surprised that our good Hispanic’s would even vote for any member of that party, having already been burned.

Cluster-puck this: DHS, TSA, INS, & ICE

All one really needs to do is look at the revolving doors of press releases issued by Janet Napolitano, Secretary Department of Homeland Security, to come to grips with just how misguided and literally inept these public officials are. Michelle Malkin has prepared a lovely and impressive expose on "Clown Alert: Janet Napolitano says 'the system worked'" which Ms. Malkin has again supported every claim made with supporting documentation as well as impeccable sources. This is only a teaser and we implore you to rush over and see how incredibly well Michelle lists the events.

Beginning with her embrace of the impotent euphemism “man-caused disasters” to the hit job on conservatives and veterans that she was forced to apologize for, to her assertion that crossing the border illegally “isn’t a crime per se”, to her boneheaded claim that 9/11 terrorists came in through the Canadian border, "Ja-No" has confirmed time and again that she’s not ready for prime time. Today, she caps off her horrible year by playing Big Pollyanna in the wake of the Flight 253. The botched bombing — foiled by a faulty detonator and brave passengers, not by homeland security bureaucrats or any preemptive measures by Intel officials — shows that the in Ja-No’s fantasy world.

Folks let's look at what the U.S. government is doing; moreover, what it is not doing, shall we? And just like the placard on President Harry Truman's desk stating, "The Buck Stops Here" it is well over time that Barack Obama actively engage in a leadership capacity. For those who think that he has, well, suffice it to say that the 'Buck' has never stopped with him – it's always Bush's fault – and it will always be someone other than him who takes the heat.

Secretary Janet Napolitano as Michelle Malkin asserts, is simply not ready for prime time. After bragging about how her DHS foiled the plot on Northwest Air's flight that nearly became a travesty of epic proportions – there was Napolitano taking credit. For what? Before the ink was even dry on the first press release she further chimes in that it was in fact, the brave passengers and flight crew that brazenly subdued the would-be bomber. (Please see press release here.)

It appears that "The Department of Homeland Security immediately put additional screening measures into place-- for all domestic and international flights- to ensure the continued safety of the traveling public. We are also working closely with federal, state and local law enforcement on additional security measures, as well as our international partners on enhanced security at airports and on flights." Oh please! This is embarrassing!

The reality of this issue folks is rather simple: If the system had worked as Janet Napolitano claims then no-how and no-way would that bomber even been admitted on the plane; moreover, if the system had worked properly this bombing suspect would never have had a visa to enter the USA.

Hat tip to Michelle Malkin for an inspiring story; also to Americans for Legal Immigration for statistical particulars.