Tag Archives: The Bill of Rights

Who Decides What Speech Is Acceptable?

Posted on by

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says:

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.

This (and the other Amendments in the Bill of Rights) is intended to limit the power of the government to interfere in the rights of Americans. Notice that there is nothing in this amendment regarding limiting speech that may not be true or limiting fake news. However, there is a segment of our political class that is planning to limit speech to what they approve of.

On Sunday, The Conservative Treehouse reported:

Within the recent WEF discussion, Secretary Kerry outlines how freedom of speech is a ‘threat to the global democracy‘ because the governing officials have a difficult time controlling information.  Kerry goes on to posit how the next administration, presumably in his hope Kamala Harris, will forcefully structure all the tools of government to stop Americans from using the first amendment to freely speak about issues.

Governing is too challenging, according to Kerry, when the government cannot stop people from seeking and discovering information that is against their interests.  Effective governing required compliant adherence to a singular ideology.  Against the backdrop of COVID-19 and a host of similarly related government narratives, if people are free to find alternative information and think for themselves, they become increasingly more difficult to control.  Yes, this is said quite openly.  This is the mindset of those in power.

Admittedly, John Kerry has someone lost his influence, but he represents the ideas of a possible Harris/Walz administration.

The article concludes:

There needs to be an open venue for all information. Unfortunately, when we begin to apply labels or categorization to information, there’s an opportunity for information to be manipulated – even weaponized.   We are in this situation right now.

Saul Alinsky spent decades pondering the best techniques to weaponize information and speech.  Alinsky’s intentions in the endeavor to change society by changing how language and information was used were not good. He devoted his completed rulebook book to Lucifer.

Be careful about anyone saying we need to label or categorize information in order to control or remove a certain speaker from the discussion.

You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a God-given brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.

COVID-19 and the subsequent government lies, have helped many people to see just how dangerous the modern political Marxists are. Those who proposed a “global information governance board,” are now on their heels and increasingly desperate.  Hence, “governing is now hard” according to John Kerry.

The flickering flame of liberty and freedom has been under assault for decades, we are at an inflection point.  I remain optimistic in our ability to defeat those who are trying desperately to use all the mechanics of every system to retain power, for the same reason that all abusive relationships eventually have to end.

It is up to the public to sort out the truth from the lies–it is not the business of government.

Rewriting The Constitution

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Washington Examiner posted an article citing a recent quote by President Biden.

The article reports:

President Joe Biden opened his remarks announcing a police reform executive order by remembering the victims of the Uvalde, Texas, school shooting and calling on the Senate to confirm his nominee to run the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.

“To state the obvious: I’m sick and tired of what’s going on,” Biden said. He said the Senate could help ensure existing federal gun laws are enforced by confirming Steve Dettelbach as ATF director. Biden’s previous nominee, David Chipman, was withdrawn last year amid Senate opposition.

…But the president also argued the Second Amendment had limits, saying “you couldn’t own a cannon” when it was ratified and that there were gun control measures that could be passed that would address the violence without infringing on constitutional rights.

“The Second Amendment’s not absolute,” he said.

Well, not so fast. The Second Amendment is part of The Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights consists of the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution because some of the original thirteen colonies refused to sign on to the Constitution unless the Bill of Rights was added (North Carolina was one of those colonies). The Bill of Rights was added to limit the power of government and protect the rights of Americans. The Second Amendment does not grant the right to bear arms to Americans–it prevents the government from taking away that right. Any executive order or law that limits the rights of Americans to bear arms or that creates a gun registry is unconstitutional. The Second Amendment does absolutely affirm the rights of Americans to bear arms.

Has it occurred to President Biden that the gun wasn’t the problem–a very disturbed young man who wanted to kill children was the problem. If he had not had a gun, he would have found another way. The Boston Marathon bombers used a pressure cooker. The 9/11 terrorists used box cutters and airplanes. The weapon is not the problem–the person holding it is.