[HisKingdomWillAbolishSinDeath]

Even if it passes, which I don’t think it will, it won’t stand a prayer in the courts. Because if it did, the 1st amendment would be dead, and so would this country’s future.

[Jim Robinson]

Famous last words: They’ll never get McCain-Feingold by the courts! It’s an obvious violation of the first amendment!!

[free_life]

Canada has a hates crime law and sexual orientation rights along with a Human Rights Commission that is already attacking Christ on behalf on homosexuality. Canada’s Constitution and Charter of Rights has the same supposed protections [freedom of speech,religion etc] as the US.

[pgkdan]

... it won’t stand a prayer in the courts

Famous last words. You sound like George Bush as he signed CFR.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Like McCain-Feingold.

[redgolum]

Campaign Finance Reform gave a death blow to the first amendment already. We are just waiting for the coup de grace.

[Old_Mil]

Even if it passes, which I don’t think it will, it won’t stand a prayer in the courts. Because if it did, the 1st amendment would be dead, and so would this country’s future.

Strangely enough I remember very similar things being said about McCain's CFR scheme when Bush signed off on it. Hopefully Bush won't sign this even if it passes. But this underscores the necessity to eliminate both Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney from contention for the White House.

Both those men would sign such a bill.

[GrandEagle]

The Constitution, including the 1st ammendment, is dead. The ruling oligarchy only refers to it when it is in their favor.

[Ol' Sparky]

Even if it passes, which I don’t think it will, it won’t stand a prayer in the courts.

The same thing was said about McCain-Feingold.

Citzens had free speech in Canada before similar legislation was passed.

Never underestimate the willingness of activist judges to do what is necessary to uphold their leftist agenda.

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

>I>Even if it passes, which I don’t think it will, it won’t stand a prayer in the courts.

Yeah, just like CFR din't stand a prayer in the courts...

[NavVet]

That’s what they said amout McBain Feinhole.

[MrLee]

I’m sure our “Christian” President will veto it. No worries........

[itsahoot]

Even if it passes, which I don’t think it will, it won’t stand a prayer in the courts.

We all said that about McCain/Feingold, as I recall.

[SauronOfMordor]

Even if it passes, which I don’t think it will, it won’t stand a prayer in the courts. Because if it did, the 1st amendment would be dead, and so would this country’s future.

Isn't that what was said about McCain/Feingold?

[epow]

Because if it did, the 1st amendment would be dead, and so would this country’s future.

Please tell me when the 1st Amendment has ever stopped a Democrat Congress or the courts from making and enforcing laws that violate the 1st Amendment.

Not only has the amendment's establishment clause been deliberately and falsely misinterpreted as a "wall of separation" between religion and government, God-hating liberals are demanding the very thing the free exercise clause was specifically designed to prevent. Namely, that Congress enact laws to prohibit the free exercise of religion. If a Christian, either clergy or laity, can't freely express his or her bible based belief that homosexual behavior is a sin and a blot on moral society, then he or she is being denied the right to freely exercise his or her religion.

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

Even if it passes, which I don’t think it will, it won’t stand a prayer in the courts. Because if it did, the 1st amendment would be dead, and so would this country’s future.

The exact same reasoning was used regarding McCain-Fiengold campaign speech limits bill. It passed. It was signed into law. And... the Supreme Court upheld it. A right to life group is now arguing in front of the Supreme Court because they ran a TV ad against Fiengold's filibuster too close to an election. Exactly what the 1st Amendment protects.

[70times7]

Even if it passes, which I don’t think it will, it won’t stand a prayer in the courts. Because if it did, the 1st amendment would be dead, and so would this country’s future.

And you actually believe an institution that, a few short months ago, would have said it is acceptable to stick a scissors into the base of a live baby's skull and suction out it's brains would have any problem with destroying free speech?

Everyone should tour the holocaust museum in DC. While it is, of course, about the Holocaust, the key issue is understanding that it can happen again. In the museum one starts on the top floor viewing the anti Jew propaganda and the historical events that gave rise to socialist power in Germany. From the top floor start that shows anti Jew newspaper articles and anti Jew children’s books the museum path spirals down, floor by floor, down and down, to the boxcars, the "beds" from the labor camps, the shaved hair, the piles of shoes and personal items. It ends at the bottom with television images, properly hidden by walls too high for youngsters to look over, of the ovens and the mass graves piled with emaciated bodies and the medical experimentation.

Some, in their folly, believe humans are inherently good and kind and that we need only legislate away those who have been taught to hate. Those who know what has been said by Him who created us understand that the human heart is desperately wicked, and if we do not guard against such atrocities they will happen again. This legislation is roughly one floor down.