05-26-2016, 04:01 PM
I am going to have to disagree with one point.
Let me explain first. A republic (which is the ONLY form of government that puts the rights of the individual first) sits on a tripod where if any one leg falls, the entire structure falls.
Those pillars are 1) free speech, 2) the right to bear arms, 3) freedom of religion.
The left leaning among us have been attacking these three things continuously since I was born, trying to bring down the republic and turn us into a democracy, which is just mob rule, and as progressives they wish to be the controlling mob, which is what progressivism is.
We have had two landmark cases recently that have shored up two of those pillars. First, our beloved Heller. Which did really nothing more than state that 2nd amendment really says what it says.
The second (and this is where we disagree) is Citizen's Unites. The actual decision states..."he First Amendment protects not just a person’s right to speak, but the act of speech itself, regardless of the speaker", whereas the dissent stated "the First Amendment protects only individual speech." Which basically says, the 1st amendment really says what it says.
This is almost more important to the republic than Heller. Regardless of your disdain of how much money is spent by whom, this case may have saved our Constitution and republic as we know it.
Let me explain first. A republic (which is the ONLY form of government that puts the rights of the individual first) sits on a tripod where if any one leg falls, the entire structure falls.
Those pillars are 1) free speech, 2) the right to bear arms, 3) freedom of religion.
The left leaning among us have been attacking these three things continuously since I was born, trying to bring down the republic and turn us into a democracy, which is just mob rule, and as progressives they wish to be the controlling mob, which is what progressivism is.
We have had two landmark cases recently that have shored up two of those pillars. First, our beloved Heller. Which did really nothing more than state that 2nd amendment really says what it says.
The second (and this is where we disagree) is Citizen's Unites. The actual decision states..."he First Amendment protects not just a person’s right to speak, but the act of speech itself, regardless of the speaker", whereas the dissent stated "the First Amendment protects only individual speech." Which basically says, the 1st amendment really says what it says.
This is almost more important to the republic than Heller. Regardless of your disdain of how much money is spent by whom, this case may have saved our Constitution and republic as we know it.
Let me explain first. A republic (which is the ONLY form of government that puts the rights of the individual first) sits on a tripod where if any one leg falls, the entire structure falls.
Those pillars are 1) free speech, 2) the right to bear arms, 3) freedom of religion.
The left leaning among us have been attacking these three things continuously since I was born, trying to bring down the republic and turn us into a democracy, which is just mob rule, and as progressives they wish to be the controlling mob, which is what progressivism is.
We have had two landmark cases recently that have shored up two of those pillars. First, our beloved Heller. Which did really nothing more than state that 2nd amendment really says what it says.
The second (and this is where we disagree) is Citizen's Unites. The actual decision states..."he First Amendment protects not just a person’s right to speak, but the act of speech itself, regardless of the speaker", whereas the dissent stated "the First Amendment protects only individual speech." Which basically says, the 1st amendment really says what it says.
This is almost more important to the republic than Heller. Regardless of your disdain of how much money is spent by whom, this case may have saved our Constitution and republic as we know it.


Search
Member List
Calendar
Red Dot Arms
Help
