Tag Law

Man Arrested for Praying Outside Planned Parenthood Facility

Allen Frederick Leave a comment

The mistake this guy made was praying to God and not Allah and he did not have his prayer rug. I wonder if the police would have arrested a Muslim for praying outside the same building.

Now in defense of the Chicago police the ordinance does say: “displaying a sign to, or engaging in oral protest, education or counseling” within 50 feet from any health care facility.” and it is quite obvious from the picture and the accompanying video that two men are seen within 50 feet of the entrance to the building. They both seem to be praying but one is definitely holding a sign. There is the sound of a woman’s voice also heard but not seen praying.

Now praying in public is not forbidden if you are Muslim in fact it must be tolerated, but if you happen to pray to GOD and not Allah then it can be considered illegal activity. Cooler heads need to prevail in this whole matter in my opinion. And for that reason I give the Chicago Police and the Planned Parenthood facility this weeks DODO bird

clipped from www.foxnews.com

Thomas More Society

Complaining witness, left, stands next to Joe Holland, middle, as he prays the rosary outside Planned Parenthood’s Near North Center in Chicago.

Joseph Holland, a 25-year-old graduate student at Northwestern University, says he was standing still praying the rosary outside a Planned Parenthood facility in downtown Chicago July 3 when police arrested him for violating the city’s new “Bubble Zone” ordinance.

The law, passed in October, states that a person cannot approach within 8 feet of another person without consent “for the purpose of passing a leaflet or handbill to, displaying a sign to, or engaging in oral protest, education or counseling” within 50 feet from any health care facility.

But Holland says he didn’t approach or interfere with anyone.

Click here to see a video of Holland praying outside the center.
Related articles by Zemanta

May I See Your Identification?

Allen Frederick 2 Comments

Random Ramblings from the Resident Raptor.

Insight for your “Journey across the Sky”

A View from the Nest www.eagleviews.org

Decent people will live in the land. People of integrity will remain in it. But wicked people will be cut off from the land and treacherous people will be torn from it. Prov 2:21-22 (GW)

Several centuries before Christ, Alexander the Great came out of Macedonia and Greece to conquer the Mediterranean world. On one of his campaigns, Alexander received a message that one of his soldiers had been continually, and seriously, misbehaving and thereby shedding a bad light on the character of all the Greek troops. And what made it even worse was that this soldier’s name was also Alexander. When the commander learned this, he sent word that he wanted to talk to the errant soldier in person. When the young man arrived at the tent of Alexander the Great, the commander asked him, “What is your name?” The reply came back, “Alexander, sir.” The commander looked him straight in the eye and said forcefully, “Soldier, either change your behavior or change your name.” This story has a lesson for each of us. When we call ourselves Americans, we are identifying with this nation and the principles upon which it was established. When we swear allegiance to the flag we stand with others to defend the Constitution of these United States of America. We are being . identified with the United States of America. Is your behavior compatible with that name and with the symbol that shows that you are an American?

Great Seal of the State of Arizona
Image via Wikipedia

Arizona is soon to enact what some say is an ill-conceived immigration enforcement act. This statute does not affect other states, nor is it enforceable across state lines. The law strictly forbids police officers to ask an individual for identification unless the officers encounter a suspect while in the course of enforcing another infraction of the state statutes. For an example; a person walking down the street of downtown Phoenix should not, and can not, be detained by police and questioned to produce identification unless that person has committed a crime. Seems to me the bill is reasonably restrictive.

Compare that to the law that requires identification when purchasing cough medicine at the local Target. Which seems to be more reasonable to you? To be asked to produce identification after being stopped for breaking a law or being asked to produce ID to buy over-the-counter cough medicine? If you answered the cough medicine then you must be a liberal democrat set on demonizing legitimate behavior in order to legitimize illegitimate behavior.

Another example would be the mandatory, random drug tests administered to commercial drivers. Isn’t this an invasion of one’s privacy also? Is there proof or suspicion that the person being tested is using an illegal substance? If there is no reasonable suspicion that they are under the influence of drugs or alcohol then why are they being required to submit to a random test? Shouldn’t people who show signs of the possibility of being under the influence have to take a random drug test? Why should someone who has never used drugs or alcohol have to be subjected to this form of interrogation? Why aren’t the picket sign carrying activists protesting this injustice? Or are only those who actually commit a crime entitled to political action?

Why must law-abiding citizens be treated like suspects when there is NO Reasonable suspicion that these citizens are doing anything illegal? Well that is the rationale being used to justify opposition to the Arizona immigration enforcement bill.

Constantly we hear the din of political activists demonizing the Arizona bill for profiling illegal aliens and yet everyday many law-abiding, natural-born, citizens are asked to produce their identification. If it is reasonable that I should have to show my photo ID to the cashier at Target to purchase over-the-counter cough medicine, then it is just as reasonable for a suspected immigrate to be asked to present ID to a police officer. I wonder what illegal aliens produce when they buy cough medicine at their local Target?

Continue reading “May I See Your Identification?” →

Supreme Court Nominee Struck Dumb on Commerce Clause

Allen Frederick 1 Comment

Kagan-35
Image by Harvard Law Record via Flickr

Another shining example of educated morons. Harvard Law is on a roll with all their graduates apparently illiterate when it comes to matters of our own Constitution. It is no wonder, the study of the Constitution is not a requirement in Harvard Law school, international law however is.

Makes sense we are turning out international lawyers who are now running our country according to the laws of third world dictatorships.

I wonder how much Federal Money goes to Harvard Law School?

Sen. Tom Coburn asked Elana Kagan a simple straightforward question: can the government, under the guise of the Commerce Clause, pass a law requiring Americans to eat three vegetables a day? The video of this exchange, which you can see
Ms. Kagan’s response is one of stupefied, stunned silence. A long awkward pause follows the question. Her reaction was so blank that it would be uncharitable to our antlered friends in the forest to describe her facial expression as that of a deer caught in the headlights.
James Madison, who, as you may recall, is the Father of the Constitution and therefore may be presumed to have more right to speak to this issue than the mind-numbed Ms. Kagan, made it clear in Federalist Paper Number 42 that the purpose of the Commerce Clause was to prevent states from imposing import and export taxes on goods shipped across their borders from neighboring states.
Merchants in the days of the founding, in order to get their goods to metropolitan centers or to shipping ports, would often have to transport them across state lines. States had taken to charging import taxes on these goods when they came into their jurisdiction and slapping export taxes on them when they left.
Madison and the Founders recognized the threat this posed to harmony among the States of the newly created Union. Said Madison, if this practice were allowed to continue, “it would nourish unceasing animosities, and not improbably terminate in serous interruptions of the public tranquillity.” So the Commerce Clause was added to prevent this pernicious practice.
Let’s be clear: the Commerce Clause, as framed by the Founders, gives Congress no authority other than to ban the imposition of import and export fees by the various States. That’s it.
The fact that Dean Kagan does not understand this is alone reason enough to disqualify her from sitting on the highest bench in the land.
It is perhaps unsurprising to find that it is possible to graduate from Harvard Law School without ever once taking a class in constitutional law. Dean Kagan made a class in international law obligatory, but a class in constitutional law is still just an elective.Read more at action.afa.net
Related articles by Zemanta

Su Casa, Mi Casa

Allen Frederick 7 Comments

Today’s Los Angeles Times had this report:

Al Gore, former Vice President of the United S...

Image via Wikipedia

Former Vice President Al Gore and his wife, Tipper, have added a Montecito-area property to their real estate holdings, reports the Montecito Journal.

The couple spent $8,875,000 on an ocean-view villa on 1.5 acres with a swimming pool, spa and fountains, a real estate source familiar with the deal confirms. The Italian-style house has six fireplaces, five bedrooms and nine bathrooms. ARTICLE SOURCE
In a speech April 28 in Iowa City President Obama made a few comments about the Arizona bill enforcing Federal law on illegal immigration. He said:
…this law that just passed in Arizona — which I think is a poorly conceived law –you can try to make it really tough on people who look like they, “might be illegal immigrants.” One of the things that the law says is local officials are allowed to ask somebody who they have a suspicion might be an illegal immigrant for their papers. But you can imagine, if you are a Hispanic American in Arizona — your great-grandparents may have been there before Arizona was even a state.
Here is the video of the whole speech, listen if you dare.

Then today Barack Obama went off the TelePrompter in his speech to a Quincy, Illinois audience about Wall Street reform. After saying that Democrats dont begrudge success thats “fairly earned,” Obama then ad-libs and reveals more about himself than he probably wanted:

Were not, were not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success thats fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point youve made enough money. But, you know, part of the American way is, you know, you can just keep on making it if youre providing a good product or providing good service. We dont want people to stop, ah, fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow our economy. Source

Check it out yourself if you do not believe me: Illinois Speech

According to our President, illegal immigrants have as much right to be here as those who actually took the time to become legal citizens, and Arizona passed a poorly conceived law, which only enforces Federal law but according to Obama enforcing any law is poorly conceived because if you remember he said the same thing about the Cambridge police when they arrested Professor Gates:

So I think I have this whole remake America thing figured out. Let’s get back to Al Gore’s new home. Apparently Al and Tipper, according to Obama, have more than enough money already therefore I think it only proper that we spread the wealth around a bit (another position of our historic President). This is what I propose:

We need to truck in 8 families of illegal immigrants, along with ladders to scale the walls, to Al and Tipper Gore’s new mansion. Since they have the right to share in America’s wealth then they should be allowed to take up residence in Al and Tipper’s many bedrooms. With 5 bedrooms and 9 bathrooms this has to be more wealth than any two people need. The Montecito Police will not be allowed to arrest these folks because they were here first according to Obama and it is because of them America exists. We might as well throw in a few native American’s as well to fill up this mansion nicely since they were here before Al Gore was and that land has to belong to one of their great great great grandfathers.

There apparently are many who share this philosophy that gate crashers and squatters have as much right to be here as the legal occupants do. So what do you say Al? Mi amigo, Su Casa Mi Casa. Si senor?

Related articles by Zemanta

Statutes of Liberty

Allen Frederick 5 Comments

Insight for your “Journey across the Sky”

A View from the Nest www.eagleviews.org

A Random Ramblings from the Resident Raptor.

So shall I keep Your law continually, Forever and ever. And I will walk at liberty, For I seek Your precepts. Psalms 119:44-45

President Barack Obama speaks to a joint sessi...

Image via Wikipedia

Today all the news programs were reporting on the eventuality of Obamacare becoming law. There were all the news anchors giving their assessments as to how many more votes were needed to pass this law, but not too many of them were addressing the underlying problem with this whole process. It is entirely unconstitutional. The manner in which the House of Representatives is going about trying to garner votes for a very unpopular bill is not permitted in the laws and statutes of our land. But this congress has proven itself to be totally lawless, and having no compunction they rush full speed ahead in shredding the very Constitution they swore to uphold. Although they have taken an oath to defend the Constitution, their daily actions betray that oath.

Once we stray from the statutes and limitations laid down by law, nothing is off limits, there is nothing to restrict our lusts for power and control. Congress is out of control. They are taking over more and more of the private economy and restricting personal freedoms by treating the Constitution as a list of suggestions rather than the law of the land it is supposed to represent.

God too laid down a foundation of statutes for which he intended his people to obey. These limitations on our freewill were statutes of liberation not domination. But when these laws are violated and disregarded then, instead of being a free people, we find ourselves enslaved to our own wants, needs and desires. We find ourselves unable to control our appetites for more and more. We find ourselves violating not one but all of these statutes repeatedly because we did not hold them up as infallible.

Each who calls himself a child of God, must hold to the statutes set forth by God so that our behaviors do not contradict our oaths of allegiance. These commandments are meant for a free people and not intended to enslave them. Our Constitution limits the reach of the federal government in order to protect the Freedoms and rights possessed by the people given to them by God. These rights do not need to be legislated nor granted, they are inherent in our natural birth, they do need to be protected however.

Once when Jacob was cooking stew, Esau came in from the field, and he was exhausted. And Esau said to Jacob, “Let me eat some of that red stew, for I am exhausted!” (Therefore his name was called Edom. ) Jacob said, “Sell me your birthright now.” Esau said, “I am about to die; of what use is a birthright to me?” Jacob said, “Swear to me now.” So he swore to him and sold his birthright to Jacob. Then Jacob gave Esau bread and lentil stew, and he ate and drank and rose and went his way. Thus Esau despised his birthright.Gen 25:29-34 (ESV)

When Obama speaks about the congress giving rights and adding to these rights, what he is really saying is that congress is eliminating our “natural rights” and replacing them with legislated permissions which must be granted by the government and by so granting they can also be regulated and controlled. Therefore you are no longer free for you have been bought with a price. These government rights are not rights at all but privileges granted under law, which of course will be regulated by the same law making body. True rights however are not regulated by any form of government but are granted freely by GOD to all equally. We have been born free, and yet so many are so quick to willingly trade their “birthrights” for a mortal of government stew, mere crumbs from the King’s table. Why beg for the stew of servitude when you can have the bountiful feast of freedom?

By rejecting the Creator who has granted to us all unalienable rights our actions subject us to rule by force and domination. By not holding God up as the source of our rights and freedoms we replace Him with edicts and dictates of men. These edicts and dictates enslave us and rob from us the freedoms granted to us by Almighty God (our natural birthrights). We therefore replace his statutes of liberty for laws of servitude.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

But those who are waiting for the Lord will have new strength; they will get wings like eagles: running, they will not be tired, and walking, they will have no weariness. Isaiah 40:31 (BBE)

Along for the journey

Related articles by Zemanta