Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Remember when the only part of the Bill of Rights that the Left wanted to abolish was the 2nd Amendment?
Opinion: The Supreme Court is making religion an all-purpose excuse for ignoring the law – LA Times
Freedom of religion is the law. It’s not only the law, like freedom of speech, it’s one of the highest laws of the land or it ought to be. But Xiao Wang, a law professor, is complaining that it’s too easy for people who have been discriminated against on account of religion to sue for protection, a complaint that lefty law profs make about no other group in the country, including Al Qaeda terrorists in Gitmo.
“In the 2021-22 term alone, the Supreme Court decided several high-profile cases that affirmed religion’s supremacy,” Wang whines.
Imposing your religious practice on others is supremacy. The Supreme Court is not ruling that everyone has to celebrate Christmas or attend synagogue, but that the government should not interfere with those who do.
Religious freedom lawsuits are not being fought over abolishing gay marriage, but exempting religious people from participating it. That’s not religious supremacy, it’s the definition of religious freedom, which in these cases are the freedom not to participate in the state religion that Wang is dedicated to upholding.
The “law” is not a secular law, but a theology of leftist values which it seeks to impose on everyone.
“In a narrow 5-4 decision last September, the court left in place a New York state court decision requiring Yeshiva University to recognize an LGBTQ+ student group over the school’s purported religious objections,” Wang complains.
Judaism is a religion that is thousands of years old. Its “purported” objections have been set down in a bible that is one of the most widely read texts in the world.
But somehow the Bible and one of the world’s oldest religions is merely “purported”.
“One way is for Congress to amend the law to make the plaintiff’s burden more demanding, make the government’s burden easier, or exempt certain regulations (such as those governing public health) from being attacked through the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.”
Will no one rid me of this meddlesome First Amendment?
Xiao Wang should be a trifle more honest and call for Congress to get rid of the First Amendment. Only when we are all subservient to the state religion and its rainbow flags, will we all live in the gulags of the right side of history.
Secularism is the religion of the left.
Start working from your boat! Join Islam! Become a jihadi pirate and rob and kill for the Almighty!
Take shit from no one every again. Having Allah on your side is like being pals with Charles Atlas! When sand is being kicked into faces, your foot will do the kicking!
Your life will be fucking great! You’ll not only be rich, you fuck all the time and people have to accept you’re better than them. Or you slice them open with impunity. Sweet.
The title of this article is based upon a comment Muhammed reportedly made – well-known to Muslims- concerning one of his enemies, a female poet, Asma bint Marwan, who criticized Muhammed in her verses. Muhammed is recorded in the Sira (the sacralized biography of the Prophet) as having complained, “Will no one rid me of Marwan’s daughter?” One of his henchman offered to kill her, and, obtaining Muhammed’s permission, stabbed the poetess to death while she slept with her five children. Daniel knows his Islam!
No, it is based on Henry 2nd of England referring to Thomas a Becket.
No, Daniel knows his English history. The words, “Will no one rid me of this meddlesome (some translate it from the Norman French as “troublesome” or “turbulent”) priest” were spoken by Henry II in 1170 regarding Thomas a Becket, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who was proving a nuisance to the king.
the second amendment – in case the first one doesn’t work.
They have de facto abolished the entire Bill of Rights, Daniel. You name it search & seizure, right to counsel, right to privacy, due process, property, etc. SAD!