Skip to main content

One of the great things about The First Amendment is that political speech is protected

     It would definitely look like I am doing something wrong in posts here were it not the fact that we have a United States Constitution which is "the supreme law of the land," (see Article VI of the U.S. Constitution) in which the First Amendment (part of what is also known as the "Bill of Rights) expressly outlines basic freedoms of U.S. citizens that are not to be violated by the government. Citizens' right of "political speech" has long been understood as a bullet-proof component of First Amendment rights, and so therefore is sometimes listed in "exclusions" to behavior that can be prosecuted under penal code. The Supreme Court ruled on a case involving political speech even a year ago (in 2016) in Heffernan v. City of Patterson.
    My previous few posts here fall within the boundaries of political speech. There is nothing anyone can say to my detriment, shame, (or even incrimination) over it, as least in legal terms.
   I stand for the U.S. Constitution and people's rights such as freedom of speech. My adversaries, whom are often bullyish unbelievers with no point, usually do not. Opposed to such freedoms as what the Bill of Rights outlines, they themselves have the potential for acts of treason, as they find themselves in diametric opposition to constitutional principles and freedoms by trying to oppose me and my position in the legal battle which I have fought long and hard. They so soon and often forget that Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and the principles and freedoms set forth therein are on my side of many arguments. Argue with me on said points and you will be arguing against a position that has Constitutional authority.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Link to my new book- "The Semantolkino'hara and Its Applications"

  The book has a been long time in the works, and you can get it now on magcloud. Thanks to the many who helped.    This book is what The Glorious Scenario magazine was supposed to be. It makes a more concise statement than a multi-issue journal, though. The raw creative materials involved in the discussion have many applications and tie-ins across subject areas. The template of the semantolkino'hara will give its user acumen. The Semantolkino'hara and Its Applications: The Eschaton, Musicology, and The Name of God By David Black 122 pages, published 10/10/2014 A practical music theory and composition system became a template for understanding a union between disciplines- music history, musicology, eschatology, social science, and more. The whole effort started with a simple serial analysis of Trish Phan's "A Letter" and became a huge undertaking once the implications...
Post a Comment
Read more

Nice Dissenting Opinion on the Fairness of the Criminal Justice System

   I was recently having a conversation with someone about the possibility for unreliability and/or unfairness in the criminal justice system. I was reminded of this quote from a Supreme Court case which is from Justice Harry Blackmun's dissenting opinion. The case was Darden v. Wainwright 477 U.S. 168 (1986). Obviously he's talking about the Supreme Court level, but if this could be said about their accuracy, then how shall we communicate about fairness at the trial court level? "JUSTICE BLACKMUN, with whom JUSTICE BRENNAN, JUSTICE MARSHALL, and JUSTICE STEVENS join, dissenting. Although the Constitution guarantees a criminal defendant only "a fair trial [and] not a perfect one,"  Lutwak v. United States,   344 U. S. 604 ,  344 U. S. 619  (1953);  Bruton v. United States,   391 U. S. 123 ,  391 U. S. 135  (1968), this Court has stressed repeatedly in the decade since  Gregg v. Georgia,   428 U. S. 153  (1976), that ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is Anybody Thinking Whatsoever?

See my comments below......    Let me explain further. According to Catholic dogma/teaching, they must oppose abortion "in all forms."  See the Catholic Catechism, which clearly states in 2272  "Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life"  Therefore, Catholics CANNOT vote for Hillary Clinton. If they don't like Donald Trump they have to find an independent party they agree with and vote for that person. They would be sinning according to their own religious worldview if they actually voted for Hillary Clinton.  link to Catholic Catechism  (on abortion)    Catholics should also consider the Catholic sin of "scandal." It is a sin for them to vote for Hillary Clinton. To quote the Catholic Catechism, "Therefore, they are guilty of scandal who establish laws or social structures leading to the decline of morals and the c...
Post a Comment
Read more