Tag Archives: liberals vs. the First Amendment

Judge Blocks NJ’s Assisted Suicide Law

See the source image

A judge has issued a restraining order against New Jersey’s shiny new assisted suicide “law,” which went into effect this month (https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/new-jersey-judge-temporarily-blocks-assisted-suicide-law-99687).

A doctor sued on the grounds that the “law” violated his religious freedom and First Amendment rights. Ya think? It only says that a doctor who won’t help a patient kill himself must refer the patient to a doctor who will. So they’re telling you what you must say, even when you believe it’s wrong. Is there a First Amendment in the house?

Democrat Gov. Phil Murphy, who enthusiastically signed the bill into “law,” said it was a hard decision for him because he’s “a lifelong, practicing Catholic.” Hey, you need to practice harder, sunshine. He and his attorney general have pledged to fight the restraining order.

After all, assisted suicide, euthanasia, abortion–these are all favorites of the Far Left death cult, most of whose members are Democrats.

After a great deal of low political chicanery in the State House, Murphy and his pals got what they wanted, and New Jersey became the seventh of eight states now permitting doctor-assisted suicide.

Until a judge let the air out of their balloon.

Hopefully the cheap tricks will be undone and the “law” overturned. Meanwhile, thank you, Judge Innes.


My Newswithviews Column, March 28 (‘Freedom–An Endangered Species’)

See the source image

It’s so much more scientific to control people rather than letting them run free. C’mon–free-range human beings? Can’t be allowed!

https://newswithviews.com/freedom-an-endangered-species/

For sure, Britain is farther down this road than we are. But Democrats drool with envy when they see some of the speech-restricting laws that Britain’s got. Oh! Wouldn’t it be just so gratifying, to force people to say things they know are total lies, and throw them into prison if they won’t!

Why do police enforce those laws? Beats me. You’d think they’d be ashamed.


The Mask Comes Off

See the source image

This week a Democrat Congressman, Ted Lieu of California (where else?), said, publicly, “I would love to be able to regulate the content of speech, but the First Amendment stops me” (https://freebeacon.com/politics/lieu-i-would-love-to-be-able-to-regulate-the-content-of-speech-but-the-first-amendment-stops-me/). This was said in the context of a Congressional hearing on the social media giants, Google and Facebook, and their censorship of conservatives.

Lieu added that “over the long run, it’s better the government does not regulate the content of speech.”

Oh, please. The government doesn’t have to do it, if Google and Facebook do it for them! Let the social media monopolies do the dirty work. They’ve been doing a a fine job of it, so far.

And before we heave a sigh of relief over the First Amendment, just imagine how this would play out with a Supreme Court packed by, say, Hillary Clinton–or any other Democrat. What do you want to bet that those judges, citing “the living Constitution” that has replaced that crummy old original, would quickly discover all sorts of “nuances” that would restrict free speech to the Far Left Crazy, to the exclusion of the rest of us? Free speech for liberals, censorship for everybody else.

Sort of like the way they do it on college campuses, these days.

If we entrust the Democrat Party with any role in governance, we’ll suffer for it. But good.


Libs Still Plotting to Jail ‘Climate Change’ Dissenters

Here we go again: libs–that is, Democrat state attorneys general (no Republicans) and other low forms of life–trying to win the “Climate Change” argument by jailing anyone who doesn’t believe in man-made Global Warming ( http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/apr/17/democratic-ags-climate-change-groups-colluded-on-p/ ).

Here we have Democrats, aka foaming-at-the-mouth communist wannabes, trying to stifle free speech. It’s the only way they can attempt to stifle free thought. If you’re not allowed to say it, why bother thinking it? You might even lose the ability to think it.

Please try to imagine the enormity of the crime they contemplate.

In any contentious, controversial issue of public concern, they propose to silence a dissenting opinion by using the legal apparatus of the state to crush it.

In what sense, other than a totally loopy one, can the First Amendment be said to have any meaning, if this is what they do?

The nearest and most deadly threat to our civil liberties is not posed by Islamic jihad fanatics. If we only had the stomach for it, we could swat them down like bugs.

The worst threat to our liberties is our public officials and our leaders. Al-Qaeda has no power to void our Bill of Rights. But as you can see from the news story above, our own home-grown Dems are out to do that very thing.

 


%d bloggers like this: