Now it looks as though the state of
Up to a point I sympathize with them. I have no problem with manger displays at Christmas in public parks, or with Chrisitan prayers at city council meetings, or with the words “Christmas”, “Merry Christmas” and “Christmas Tree” during the Christmas season. I am even okay with the permanent display of the Ten Commandments, provided it is erected and maintained with private money, and not state money,and also provided there are allowances for other religious displays as well.
But the wording of this new statute goes way too far, and seems to be meant to provoke dispute. The proponents of this measure are standing on very shaky ground, they just don’t feel it trembling under them yet. The point seems to be that the Constitution does not allow Congress to pass a law respecting an establishment of religion, but the states are under no such limitation, in that the Bill of Rights were meant precisely to protect the states from the encroachment of the Federal Government. Therefore, the states have every right to pass laws such as this.
Well, no they don’t. This dog not only don’t hunt, it has way too many ticks that should serve to suck the life force right out of it, and those ticks are called, in their entirety, the Bill Of Rights. After all, does a state or local law enforcement official have the right to come nito your home without a warrant,and search your person, and that of your family,and your property?
Can officials of the state or local government arrest you without due cause, or without a warrant, and hold you in jail indefinitely without even charging you with a crime, on mere suspicion?
Can local or state law enforcement officials beat you or starve you or otherwise torture and torment you as a legitimate means of deriving information from you, or to get you to admit to a crime?
Can local or state law enforcement officials keep you from seeing a lawyer?
Can local or state law enforcement officials, legally, put you on trial on trumped up charges, and not allow your attorneys to present contradictory evidence on your behalf?
Can the state or local government confiscate your properties for no good cause, regardless of whether or not you have been convicted of a crime?
Can the state or local government shut down and/or prosecute a local newpaper for reporting on the unjust way in which you are being unfairly targeted and penalized? Or for speaking out in any way or fashion against any of their abuses or corruption?
Can they arrest your friends, family, and neighbors, for speaking out on your behalf, or in any manner against them, on any matter?
Can the state or local government execute you in an excessively cruel, painful, degrading, and humiliating manner meant to cause excess pain and suferring?
Of course, the answer to all of these questions is, or should be, a resounding no. Yet, for some strange inexplicable reason, the proponents of this ill-advised Missouri state stature seem to think that the same limitations that exist on their authority as pertains to these and other matters, somehow does not apply to them when it comes to freedom of religion. That’s why this insane law shoud be quickly shot down, if it is ever actualy passed, and hopefully the politcal proponents of it will be sanctioned for wasting the time of the people, to say nothing of the courts.