Warning: Constant ABSPATH already defined in /home/public/wp-config.php on line 27

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/public/wp-config.php:27) in /home/public/wp-includes/feed-rss2-comments.php on line 8
Comments on: First Amendment? https://whynow.dumka.us/2012/10/07/first-amendment-2/ On-line Opinion Magazine...OK, it's a blog Wed, 10 Oct 2012 01:09:27 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3 By: Bryan https://whynow.dumka.us/2012/10/07/first-amendment-2/comment-page-1/#comment-60771 Wed, 10 Oct 2012 01:09:27 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/?p=27241#comment-60771 USCCB are acting like a subsidiary of DonoWho, who has a patent on Catholic outrage and victimhood. It is almost as if they are trying to chase people away from the Church.

They should be cleaning up their act, not complaining about other people. They have lost any assumption of moral purpose over the pervert scandals, and aren’t doing anything that people accept as credible to correct their institutional problems. Criticizing the nuns over their work with the poor certainly wasn’t the best PR move they could have made, and openly favoring the Republican Party was just as bad.

]]>
By: Steve Bates https://whynow.dumka.us/2012/10/07/first-amendment-2/comment-page-1/#comment-60767 Tue, 09 Oct 2012 12:07:21 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/?p=27241#comment-60767 The thing that has offended me the most recently is the USCCB’s howling “you’re violating my First Amendment freedom of religion!” when an Obama admin policy under the ACA requires insurance companies… which, last I looked, are not part of the Catholic Church… to offer contraception coverage. A tiny, self-obsessed tail is wagging a very large dog here.

]]>
By: Bryan https://whynow.dumka.us/2012/10/07/first-amendment-2/comment-page-1/#comment-60756 Mon, 08 Oct 2012 04:02:00 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/?p=27241#comment-60756 In reply to Badtux.

It is amazing how selective the Bill of Rights seems to be for some people, as if they only applied to people who thought like they do, and not everyone.

There are tons of case law that say they apply to everyone in the US, citizen or not, which is a result of the post-Civil War amendments and they status of former slaves. That’s why there are no “illegal immigrants” only “undocumented”. If they were charged with a crime, the full spectrum of rights would be theirs, but as an administrative violation they can be deported quickly with a minimum of paperwork or protections.

The same people who are complaining about this case would support banning books and sedition laws.

This guy’s problem is that the publicity about the film highlighted his activities that conflicted with what he had been telling the probation officers. It’s never a good idea to become famous when you’re on probation or parole.

]]>
By: Badtux https://whynow.dumka.us/2012/10/07/first-amendment-2/comment-page-1/#comment-60755 Mon, 08 Oct 2012 03:03:35 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/?p=27241#comment-60755 The funny thing is that I don’t see those same “defenders of the 1st Amendment” speaking out about the many detentions of Laura Poitras, who makes films about the impact of U.S. wars overseas that the U.S. government doesn’t want made. It seems that these “defenders of the 1st Amendment” only support the 1st Amendment when it consists of slurs against Muslims, but when it presents the Muslim side of things… [crickets].

]]>