Posted on 10/03/2015 4:50:28 AM PDT by HomerBohn
The thought that some people are granted a status that allows them to supersede the rights of others should be appalling. Though the founding documents make clear that our forefathers were not egalitarians, the thought that all men were not equal under the law would have shocked and angered them. However, when we get to certain topics and situations, we find that our legal system has failed to prove adequate. And Obama's recent speech will help us to illustrate what I mean.
Breitbart reports:
As Pope Francis flew back to Rome, President Obama issued a stern warning to Christians, warning them their attempts to assert their religious liberty to oppose gay rights would fail.
"We affirm that we cherish our religious freedom and are profoundly respectful of religious traditions," he insisted during a dramatic speech at a LGTB fundraiser in New York City on Sunday night, praising the progress made on gay rights under his administration. "But we also have to say clearly that our religious freedom doesn't grant us the freedom to deny our fellow Americans their constitutional rights."
The first thing that we must notice is that though the President seems to have a "profound respect" for religious tradition, he has no intentions of defending those freedoms or traditions. I can say that by what he says next. He says that this freedom granted by our religious freedom only goes so far.
What Obama is doing is giving us double talk. First, he tells us how much he cares about something, and how important it is that we maintain this freedom. But, if it gets in the way of something someone else wishes to do, then it has gone too far. Remember, freedom of religion is a Constitutional Right.
In fact, anyone who listened in sixth grade civics class could easily refute what the President said. There is actually a place where I can take Obama and prove that what he has said is wrong. I can take him to the First Amendment which clearly refutes what he has said.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
So, where does this so-called brilliant constitutional lawyer go to back up his argument?
Breitbart reports:
"I'm sure he loves the Constitution — except for Article III," Obama said mockingly. "And maybe the Equal Protection Amendment. And 14th Amendment, generally."
As for Article III, one has to understand that the President's interpretation was not put into play until 1803. In Marbury v. Madison, a Supreme Court decided that the Article meant that the Supreme Court has the final say in interpreting the Constitution. How convenient. But, Obama's supposed hero, Abraham Lincoln rejected this and ignored the Dread Scott ruling when it came to slaves.
And the 14th Amendment simply says that all people born in America are citizens and that all citizens shall have the same protection under the law. Now, either Obama is seeking to frame this in a good light to make this a racial type issue or he is just plain ignorant to the problem at hand.
You see, no one is saying that sodomites should not be able to do the same things that others do, but that when they claim that they are marrying, they really are not. So, it is just this simple. The Supreme Court has not the right or power to pass judgement on this issue. However, even if they did, the Constitution fails to mention marriage. Being that it is not defined, the Court has chosen to define an institution opposite from what it has been defined, by everyone, for thousands of years.
This has place the sodomite above the Christian and Jew. Both groups claims that the practice of sodomy is a sin. Both condemn the practice as something worthy of death, and this idea of Law has been made arbitrary by the Church. This is why we must return to the Law of God.
The president thinks that because a clerk refuses to break state law to obey a pretended authority, we should have our rights revoked as less equal than that of the sodomite.
The Christian's right to freedom of religion has been set aside for the sexual preference of the homosexual. So much for equal rights under the law.
Bath House Barry came to America as a Foreign student to study at Occidental College. He is, indeed, an illegal president.
Kagan and Ginsberg should have followed federal law and recused themselves, then the vote would have been 4 to 3 in favor of Traditional Marriage. Justices Kagan and Ginsberg broke Federal Law, the Defense of Marriage Act.
Kagan is a shameless carpet muncher, and Ginsberg is a closet Communist.
There’s your answer.
We live now in a lawless society. The death spiral has started.
N, I don’t think you can say that about the pope.
Sodomy and infanticide are the two pillars of the Democrat platform. Remind all Dems of this fact at every opportunity.
Why did you say that?
Would you like me to post links regarding his out and out endorsement of homosexuality? Or his lack of prosecution of homosexual Vatican officials and clergy? On the contrary, he has appointed them.
Do you want me to post those links? I am tempeted, but you can do the research for yourself.
Lastly, research why the Vatican coup d'etat brought about Jorge in the first place. It was all about homosexuality, and if you don't acknowledge this, your IQ is below 50.
and Congress REFUSES to support the Constitution and do their duty under our Constitution.
Liberal Jewesses who have NO respect for God’s teachings.
It is well documented that obamma was raised and indoctrinated as a child by a flamer.
I would bet my farm that he is secretly one.
He should know first hand.
Taht pesky First Amendment is interefering with his agenda.
I wonder if this push for sodomy is part of trying to establish Sharia law in the USA?
Anymore doubts the POS is a Muslim?
Anymore doubts the POS is a Muslim?
There are some doubts that he is a Muslim but there are many times greater doubts that he is a Christian.
Look FRiend, normally I agree with your postings, particularly when it comes to Christianity.
However, your post is slanderous and I am calling you out TYVM.
Please provide proof that Pope Francis is actually engaging in homosexual activity as you wrote.
It is not my job to "do the research for yourself" especially wrt slanderous accusations like you wrote.
Thank you also, for your assessment/estimate of my IQ. /major sarc
Nor about soebarkha. I suspect he’s a catcher.
I am sorry you feel that way, but I believe it to be true.
Even if you choose to not research (which is your choice), Jorge has done EVERYTHING he can to excuse the sin of Homosexuality. Unless you are brain dead, you know this is the case.
Moreover, I still refuse to do your homework for you. Research for yourself why the previous pope resigned. Read the Italian press.
Best of luck to you. I take it that you have not accepted Jesus Christ as your personal Savior. I implore you to do that before it is too late.
I am Saved.
Dunno where you get that from.
What I question is your assertion that Pope Francis participates in homosexual behavior.
You need to show proof of this. Because if you don’t or can’t, your charge is slanderous.
I don’t question his promotion of it.
Any link I post you will shoot down.
Do your own research.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.