RSS

When is Law irrelevant?

02 Dec

Going after the contraception mandate but also the requirement on employers to provide coverage, by a Virginia-based Christian university, the SCOTUS politician judges, threw out the case.  These fine upstanding men and ah hum… women, decided that Americans, all Americans, should just shut up obey their orders, and sit down.  They would not even hear the case.

When there is no law, what do the People do with these blights on their society?  Do they obey, or do they throw them into the scrap bin of history?  Do they keep paying their exorbitant salaries and provide for their luxurious lifestyles, or do they seize their properties and pensions, and cast them aside?  Do they even let them seek their ObamaCare and unemployment checks?

The U.S. Constitution was drafted in every way, and understood by all, that Government (our Government in particular) was prohibited from attaching any laws restricting the freedom of religions.

(More on this later)

Expect the Tyrants to do the same with the Hobby Lobby lawsuit that will be coming up next.   

In the meanwhile, just shut up, sit down, and obey your masters.

Advertisements
 
11 Comments

Posted by on December 2, 2013 in Uncategorized

 

11 responses to “When is Law irrelevant?

  1. rogerunited

    December 2, 2013 at 1:57 pm

    Religion is a foundation of culture, and like cultures, religions can’t coexist without one dominating the others. Atheism, otherwise known as Secular Humanism, is the dominant religion in the US. You have the freedom to practice your religion as long as it doesn’t conflict with the dominant ideology.

     
    • The Soffitrat

      December 2, 2013 at 3:10 pm

      I agree with you, that it is a foundation of culture, and that it can’t (on it’s own) coexist without (trying) to dominate the others. But was that not the reason we established our system to protect the smaller units, rather than let them run roughshod over one another? As in the case of the Danbury Baptists and his ‘wall of separation’ between government and religion. His intent was to insulate the religions from a government that would inevitably take sides. Now, with this Government (of Politicians), we find ourselves again faced with interference on the scale you mention. i.e.- Our masters.

      http://www.beliefnet.com/resourcelib/docs/117/Letter_from_Thomas_Jefferson_to_the_Danbury_Baptists_1.html

       
  2. Janus

    December 3, 2013 at 1:56 pm

    When should we disobey the law or take it into our own hands? Scenarios such as when following a law violates higher Christian principles (if we are Christian), when the law becomes arbitrary and selectively enforced (increasingly the case), or when the law no longer serves the purpose of protecting our rights and providing order (also increasingly common) would merit a willful abandonment of the law and its institutions.

    In the case of forcing Christian organizations to provide contraception and coverage for abortions or other actions that violate one’s religious beliefs, a law must be disobeyed if a Christian wants to consider himself a Christian, whether that law is stricken down or not. I hope that the Catholics and other Christians show some mettle here.

    Roger says that the official government religion is now Secular Humanism, and he’s right. Christians, along with the growing number of other religious groups, are now the minority (if not in numbers, then in power). Any of these religions, whether protected by the Bill of Rights or not, must uphold their beliefs, even if they are punished for it, and even if it contributes to chaos. (And it will contribute to chaos the more of a hodge-podge the ethnic/religious situation becomes.)

     
    • Dannyboy53Dannyboy53

      December 3, 2013 at 3:06 pm

      Janus, my wife and i have had this discussion many times. What is the “trigger” for change, for We the People to demand it stop now? As you no doubt are aware our Founders had this to say in our Declaration of Independence…

      “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

      Have we reached the “long train of abuses” stage yet? I think we did some time ago. What is the next step? Many people will do nothing until it is too late, some will take a stand but it will be on an individual basis and so, possibly a futile waste of life. I don’t think this action ALONE is the answer to our dilemma.

      Follow the Founders example? That’s an easy solution for me to pound out on these keys but not so easily done! The Framers left us a glaringly obvious example of what to do.

      Metaphorically speaking of course, I feel we must go back to Philadelphia and start over.

       
      • The Soffitrat

        December 3, 2013 at 9:33 pm

        I agree, Danny. But who (among us) is as enlightened as our founding fathers were? How many scoundrels will sit at the table with us? When drafting a new beginning, we must be extremely cautious as to making too dire or radical the changes. But that digresses us back to the word, ‘Prudence’.

         
      • Janus

        December 3, 2013 at 11:45 pm

        Follow the founders example, yes, and it is difficult to tell when, as you say. But if we hold true to our principals, the hubris of the other side will eventually paint the way very clearly and we will know without doubt when the time has come to stand and be men.

         
        • The Soffitrat

          December 3, 2013 at 11:54 pm

          I agree. I have to agree.

           
        • Dannyboy53Dannyboy53

          December 3, 2013 at 11:56 pm

          I agree with you sir! When that time comes…may God help us please.

           
    • The Soffitrat

      December 3, 2013 at 9:35 pm

      I agree with Roger, when he states that our ‘official’ religion is Secular Humanism. That is a reality that will have to be changed.

       
      • Dannyboy53Dannyboy53

        December 4, 2013 at 12:01 am

        Well ‘rat, as Janus says “if we hold true to our principals”, all else should fall in place…eventually! To consider all that must be done is almost overwhelming. Surely our Framers thought so at one time or another.

         
        • The Soffitrat

          December 4, 2013 at 8:35 am

          Yes. They did.

           

What are you thinking?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: