Posted on 06/05/2020 5:08:43 AM PDT by MtnClimber
Democrats such as Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Andrew Cuomo and others who support abortion on demand should never invoke the Bible in their attacks on anyone.
SNIP
Journalists and other Democrats who have continually lied about Russian collusion, Trump being a racist, what Trump said in Charlottesville, about rubber bullets and tear gas being used to disperse a crowd, to destroy Flynn, to destroy white Christian schoolboys from Kentucky, to destroy Judge Brett Kavanaugh, and many other things the last four years in order to destroy Trump and elect Democrats should never invoke the Bible. After all the Bible says: "Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
The party that supported Bill and Hillary no matter what they said or did should never claim that they care about the Bible teachings. Maybe, they could list which of the Ten Commandments Bill Clinton obeyed. The list would be short.
Nothing that has gone on the past four years, including the violence and riots today, has anything to do with equality, racism or systemic racism. Everything has to do with getting Trump out of the White House and getting leftist Democrats in power.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Leftists, by their actions (not words) follow Lucifer.
because of the systematic sedition,
PRESIDENT TRUMP DESERVES 3 terms.
The cancer will be back after 4 more years
He deserves a break after 2 terms. He’s done enough to show courage that other politicians haven’t shown in decades. It’s now up to US to carry the ball forward.
They use the Bible as a political tool. I doubt they believe anything contained in it. The left realizes that Christians make up a large part of Trumps’ base. So, if they quote it they do so to cause confusion and try to lure Trump voters.
The party that bore false witness on Trump...
Democrats? Communists? Small difference.
Oh yee hypocrites,you generation of vipers.
A Christian cannot be a democrat; cannot vote democrat. IMO.
But I have known many such people and have counseled as such. They insist upon keeping their politics separate from their faith. Can't be done.
Democrats aren’t a party it’s a disease.
I dont recall consciously making the word connection before, but slander is nothing but bearing false witness against your neighbor.And of course libel is nothing but using technology to bear false witness against your neighbor.
That makes it all the clearer that in the Christian America of the founding era, laws against slander and libel would have been seen as biblically mandated. And thus absolutely noncontroversial.
That matters because in 1964 the Warren Court unanimously asserted that
". . . libel can claim no talismanic immunity from constitutional limitations. It must be measured by standards that satisfy the First AmendmentBut the conceit that the First Amendment said anything at all about libel was novel in US jurisprudence in 1964. The reason is well known, if its implications have been systematically overlooked - as the above quote of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan illustrates. The fact is that the the Federalists who composed and promoted the Constitution did not want to include a bill of rights in the Constitution. They were forced by the Antifederalists to agree to do so by amendment.The Federalists were thus presented with the problem of creating a bill of rights which would suppress controversy over the effect of the Constitution on the Common Law rights of the people. If all you wanted to do was tamp down controversy over rights, the very last thing you would want to do would be to try to modify those rights. And the Federalists did not do that.
What the Federalists did was to enumerate (list) rights which were recognized as existing in 1788, and which historically had been abused by tyrants. That describes the first eight amendments in the BoR. The Ninth Amendment
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the peoplewas the crucial backstop of the preceding enumerated rights. Libel is nowhere mentioned in the First Amendment - just as pornography law is not. The Ninth Amendment preserves the rights to not be libeled, in the First Amendment, and just as certainly as it preserves the right not to be assaulted with a deadly weapon (as the Second Amendment theoretically could be construed). In both 1A and 2A, enumerated rights are preceded by the word the. Indicating that the rights enumerated are exactly the same in the future as they were at the time of the passage of the BoR. There was no intended change in any rights.Claiming that 1A affects libel law is ignorant - or fraudulent. And the Warren Court went all in on it - unanimously, with enthusiastic concurrences.
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.