We Can and Will Force Christians to Act Against Their Faith

Werbung:
We have a lot of California implants here .... trying to infiltrate Texas government. Texas is clearly in the cross hairs of this regime i.e. Holder suing only Texas over the voter ID law, aka repeal of the Voters Right Act of 1965 ....

Pray for Texas ..... their communist tentacles are are long and far reaching ....

Calif. wasn't always ultra liberal either.

But Texas isn't the only one being sued. Holder is out for blood in the red southern states, ignoring how the Supremes just ruled.
 
Calif. wasn't always ultra liberal either.

But Texas isn't the only one being sued. Holder is out for blood in the red southern states, ignoring how the Supremes just ruled.
I know California has not always been that away .... Reagan's amnesty KO'ed California .... thus is the plan for national amnesty ... if it worked in California it will work nationwide.

And, yes ... Holder has proven time after time he is out for anyone be it micro or macro that is a patriot!
 
I know California has not always been that away .... Reagan's amnesty KO'ed California ....

You don't understand California. Long before hi-tech, California's wealth was mostly in agriculture. We have always had an imigrant population. Some of our oldest and richest land owners have Spanish surnames, and half our cities have Spanish names. You should read some old census records to understand.
 
You don't understand California. Long before hi-tech, California's wealth was mostly in agriculture. We have always had an imigrant population. Some of our oldest and richest land owners have Spanish surnames, and half our cities have Spanish names. You should read some old census records to understand.
There is a difference assimilating immigrants and illegals .....
 
Cali grew its liberal enclaves very well so that sheer numbers overwhelmed. Not unlike NY and now VA. By sq mile all threeare conservative.
 
Cali grew its liberal enclaves very well so that sheer numbers overwhelmed. Not unlike NY and now VA. By sq mile all threeare conservative.
I know that California was a reliable red state for decades and decades. All that instantly changed in 1986 when Reagan passed amnesty and California became the communist cesspool it is today ... politically speaking of course.
 
Three questions come up:

1. What business does the state have telling any photographer, or any other independent business person with whom they may or may not contract to do business?
2. What does the Obama "regime" have to do with a state supreme court decision?
3. Who in the Obama "regime" ever said, "We Can and Will Force Christians to Act Against Their Faith"?
 
Three questions come up:

1. What business does the state have telling any photographer, or any other independent business person with whom they may or may not contract to do business?
2. What does the Obama "regime" have to do with a state supreme court decision?
3. Who in the Obama "regime" ever said, "We Can and Will Force Christians to Act Against Their Faith"?
I can't find the link but, I think it was Obama's Iranian born communist senior White House Adviser Valerie Jarrett
 
My memory isn't as sharp as it once was, so I may be wrong about this. My recollection is that the Feds used the Commerce Clause to assume power over businesses in the area of civil rights. I'm guessing that civil rights apply to gays and lesbians, and thus the Feds believe they can dictate to businesses like the one in this article.

I think it was the US Supreme Court case of McKlung vs. Katzenbach that set that standard. However, there appears to be 2 issues in this case that would prohibit Federal interference. The 1st is obvious, that being the Bill of Rights, and the Freedom of Religion. May a clause take precedence over a stated RIGHT? I think not! The 2nd issue is that when the Commerce Clause was used in that court case, the ruling indicated that it only applied to businesses that engaged in interstate commerce. The interpretation included restaurants that buy food from other States. One wonders, however, if this photographer can be legitimately assessed as being involved in interstate commerce?? Does he service customers out of state? If he doesn't, does the fact that his camera or lights were purchased out of state justify the claim that he's engaged in interstate commerce? If he buys all of his equipment in state, performs all of his work in state, do the Feds still have justification under the Commerce Clause just because some equipment may have been manufactured out of state?

Isn't this the most outrageous justification for Federal usurpation of powers??? Isn't it even more despicable, that a clearly-stated Constitutional RIGHT like Freedom of Religion can be cast aside in preference for a damned CLAUSE that was wrongly interpreted in the first place???
 
Isn't it even more despicable, that a clearly-stated Constitutional RIGHT like Freedom of Religion can be cast aside in preference for a damned CLAUSE that was wrongly interpreted in the first place???

You mean like the meaning of "separation of church and state"? A lot of people still think that is in the constitution.

There are two bakeries in Oregon and one in Colorado that are on the hot seat for refusing to supply wedding cakes to gay couples.
 
You mean like the meaning of "separation of church and state"? A lot of people still think that is in the constitution.

There are two bakeries in Oregon and one in Colorado that are on the hot seat for refusing to supply wedding cakes to gay couples.
Communist Goals # 26 and 27

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
 
Werbung:
I can't find the link but, I think it was Obama's Iranian born communist senior White House Adviser Valerie Jarrett
1. What business does the state have telling any photographer, or any other independent business person with whom they may or may not contract to do business?
I think we probably agree that the answer is, "none."
2. What does the Obama "regime" have to do with a state supreme court decision?

Still wondering about that one.

3. Who in the Obama "regime" ever said, "We Can and Will Force Christians to Act Against Their Faith"?

Keep looking. I'd be interested in that link.
 
Back
Top