60 Big-Name Businesses Join Coalition Against Missouri 'Religious Liberty' Bill

Talking Points Memo ^ | 04/13/2016 | Summer Ballentine

[virgil]

These companies should not be allowed to subvert our laws and system of govt. It’s time for it to stop. The hypocrisy of the left is sickening.

[Captain Compassion]

These businesses are not subverting our laws. There are merely making stupid corporate decisions. By taking political positions they are pissing off some customers.

[Cyberman]

they need double heaping helpings of Government smack down

Jawohl, Comrade!

[Cyberman]

Large Wealthy corporations are now exerting undue influence

Down with the capitalist parasites! Power to the People! Feel the Bern!!

[DiogenesLamp]

We’ll see how that goes when the Muslims take over.

I've been urging everyone to promote confrontation between liberals and Muslims over homosexuality.

Muslims will not back down, and Liberals are afraid to confront them.

Slinky's rules for radicals! Make Liberals live up to their own rules!

We should constantly point out what sort of Hypocrites they are for failing to confront the Muslims. If we can get the two groups fighting each other, we will either get rid of some liberals, or we will get rid of some Muslims, perhaps both.

What would be perfect is if we could get them to annihilate each other.

[DiogenesLamp]

You would come across as smarter if you would actually contemplate the point to which you are replying.

This entire issue of a left party and a right party revolves around the issue of who will control the government. Remove government power from the equation and it's just a big social club with no real purpose for existing.

Yes, the fight between left and right is over who will wield the power of government.

[ilovesarah2012]

I’m looking forward to it. A no-lose proposition.

[Steamburg]

“The states need to pass a law punishing any company doing business in countries where homosexuality is illegal.”

---

Either that’s sarcasm or the inverse should apply in deference to the Religious freedom of Muslims among us.

[urtax$@work]

thanks Amendment 10. I have been thinking the flipped life we have in the US these days, but could not cite law saying such. We the people can discriminate against anyone or refuse to associate with anyone , its GOVERNMENT that can’t .

[ameribbean expat]

“Every leftist I know says it would be a GOOD thing if Monsanto and Nestle were kept out of state.”

That’s a very good and very overlooked point.

[Amendment10]

"We the people can discriminate against anyone or refuse to associate with anyone , its GOVERNMENT that can’t ."

On a related issue, please consider the following BIG problem with federal civil rights laws imo.

First, noting that the Bill of Rights (BoR) was drafted and ratified by the Founding States, not the feds, the states had originally decided the states did not have to respect the rights expressly protected by the BoR. The states required only the feds to respect constitutionally enumerated rights.

But when the states ratified the 14th Amendment (14A), that amendment ratified under very questionable circumstances, the states also obligated themselves to respect all the personal rights that they amend the Constitution to expressly protect. (Note that the federal government has no constitutional authority to ratify proposed amendments to the Constitution.)

Regarding 14A, note that the states gave the power to legislatively strengthen all constitutionally enumerated rights to Congress (Section 5). Also note that the voting rights amendments for example, 15, 19, 24 and 26, explicitly give the feds the power to protect these rights.

So whereas the states had originally drafted the 1st Amendment to expressly prohibit Congress from making laws which addressed religious expression and speech, 14A arguably gave Congress the power to make laws related to these issues which reasonably strengthen these rights.

But there is now a problem …

Note that the congressional record shows that John Bingham, the main author of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, had clarified that the 14th Amendment applies only those rights to the states which the states have amended the Constitution to expressly protect.

“Mr. Speaker, this House may safely follow the example of the makers of the Constitution and the builders of the Republic, by passing laws for enforcing all the privileges and immunities of the United States as guaranteed by the amended Constitution and expressly enumerated in the Constitution [emphasis added].” —John Bingham, Congressional Globe, House of Representatives, 42nd Congress, 1st Session. (See lower half of third column.)

That being indicated, the problem is that there are many federal civil rights laws which are not based on constitutionally enumerated protections. Race and sex anti-discrimination federal laws that don’t deal with the 14th and 19th voting rights amendments, for example, are unconstitutional imo.

To be blunt, the corrupt feds for many decades have been making unconstitutional civil rights laws, probably to win votes from low-information citizens imo, such citizens not understanding that the feds have no constitutional authority to make such laws.