Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances – First Amendment, Constitution for the united States of America.
What makes the united States great?
Is it the recognized, guaranteed and protected individual God-given freedoms contained in our Constitution?
Is it the limitation of government by the Constitution?
The question presents itself differently to each individual based on his or her experience.
But, one surmises the answer would contain some part of the First Amendment with freedom of speech rating high up on the list; if, not first.
The freedom of speech citizens enjoy today may not be the same freedom of speech enjoyed tomorrow.
Many Americans don’t seem to appreciate as much as outside admirers do, that the United States is the only country in the world with a commitment to free speech enshrined in the nation’s Constitution. Many nations do not even have codified constitution of which to speak.
Which is why it is almost more egregious to the outsider than the American that such protections are under assault, not just on the streets of Berkeley or Charlottesville, but in your legislature — and soon in your Oval Office.
This afternoon, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders confirmed President Trump would “absolutely” be signing a resolution drafted by Republican and Democrat lawmakers “condemning” hatred.
“He and [Senator Tim Scott] talked about that and discussed that and agreed that that was the appropriate place to be,” Sanders said. “In terms of whether or not he’ll sign the joint resolution, absolutely, and he looks forward to doing so as soon as he receives it.”
The full motion can be read here.
As Raheem Kassam, author of the piece at Breitbart, stated, "... this is disingenuous and troublesome." But, going a bit further, this "resolution" is absolutely egregious.
While the "resolution" purports to "reject" hate groups, the only groups listed are "white nationalists, white supremacists, the Ku Klux Klan, and neo-Nazis."
There is no mention of black supremacists, the Black Panthers, Black Lives Matter, Nazis, and/or Antifa; nor, does this "resolution" address groups that seek to undermine our government or Constitution or groups espousing views anathema to our foundation of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
But, it does "urge" the President and members of his cabinet to use "all available resources to address the threats posed by those groups" – meaning white nationalists, white supremacists, the Ku Klux Klan, and neo-Nazis.
Both legislative chambers of Congress passed this resolution earlier this week.
Kassam, writing at Breitbart, stated:
The President has already disavowed these groups, including Neo Nazis and the KKK. Why are elected members, alongside the White House, wasting time virtue signaling over it?
Perhaps because it backs POTUS into a corner, especially when you consider many establishment media organizations call his former Chief Strategist Stephen K. Bannon — who has mocked and derided ethno-nationalists — a “white nationalist” or “white supremacist”. This week, ESPN even let one of its hosts off with no more than a slapped wrist for suggesting the President himself was a “white supremacist”.
So by whose definitions are we going? And what exactly does “use all available resources” mean?
The President and his cabinet ostensibly have all resources available to them. The U.S. military, trillions of dollars, three and a half years of power. To what is the President subscribing?
The big question, "by whose definitions are we going," becomes the most important since definitions change, expand and morph according to the different groups popping up out of nowhere.
This resolution "urges" Trump and his administration, to "speak out against hate groups that espouse racism, extremism, xenophobia, anti-semitism, and white supremacy...."
It then goes on to urge the president to "use all resources available ... to address the growing prevalence of those hate groups in the United States."
If that isn't enough, it urges the Attorney General to work with "the secretary of Homeland Security to investigate thoroughly all acts of violence, intimidation, and domestic terrorism by White supremacists, White nationalists, new-Nazis, the Ku Klux Klan, and associated groups in order to determine if any criminal laws have been violated and to prevent those groups from fomenting and facilitating additional violence."
Anyone reading that can see this urges the executive branch to limit speech, defined by anonymous individuals, that is "hateful" and curtail peaceable assembly by the groups listed.
Absent again from this list is black supremacists, the Black Panthers, Black Lives Matter, Nazis, and/or Antifa.
So, who will be defining what is racism, extremism, xenophobia, anti-semitism, and white supremacy?
If the government stays true to form, it will be the hate institution the Southern Poverty Law Center, with tweaks added by Congress but passed off to the executive branch.
No matter how they slice and dice it, this is a legislatively passed resolution that intends to limit the freedom of speech and the right to peaceably assemble for some groups in this republic. Moreover, Trump is eager to sign this atrocity!
Is this going to be a way to silence the alternative media, such as Breitbart, the Daily Caller, and other sites like this one, since those who pen articles could be considered a group that espouses whatever they define as racist, extremist, xenophobic, etc.?
Will this be a way to silence Christians who take a biblical view on sodomites/homosexuals and those who are opposed to homosexuality?
Will speaking the truth about homosexuality and the false transgenderism become government defined hate speech?
This is where this resolution is going – giving government the authority to define and limit speech.
The government's path to victory over eradicating the freedom of speech is to attack the flank, meaning speech some find offensive and hateful, first; then, it can expand the attack to political speech exposing the unlawful, unconstitutional acts of members of government while preventing like-minded groups to peaceably assemble.
Just as government has incrementally stepped all over the Second Amendment that clearly states, "shall not be infringed," it is working to circumvent the First Amendment's phrase of "Congress shall make no law."
Freedom of speech protects all speech, even the speech one might find offensive or hateful.
To say that freedom of speech only protects speech that one likes or with which one agrees is iniquitous.
But, looking at this resolution, it is protecting speech that government likes, which it approves, and with which it agrees – in other words, liberal, progressive, special interest group speech – while it condemns speech government finds offensive, disagreeable and disapproving.
Right now, any speech involving conservative, Christian, constitutional viewpoints are considered "hate speech" by the liberal progressive socialist communist Marxist left.
Kassam made an excellent point; the political left has abused, misused and debased so many terms that those terms have been stripped of the true meaning.
Today, a “racist” is someone who believes in legal immigration. An “extremist” is someone who doesn’t believe in mass, state-funded abortion. A “xenophobe” is someone who takes pride in their nation. An “anti-Semite” is — curiously — someone who supports the State of Israel, and “white supremacy” now occupies the Oval Office. The Overton window has shifted so far that even practicing Muslims are now decried by the most heavily quoted sources as “Islamophobes”.
Speaking of Islamophobia, why has that been left out of this resolution? Will there be — as Islamic supremacists often demand — a special case and motion for Muslims alone, to go before the President later this year? Will the White House be equally excited to sign what would effectively be a blasphemy law?
Perhaps the most insidious part of this document comes right at the end, where the President will accede to ensuring “the heads of other Federal agencies… improve the reporting of hate crimes and… emphasize the importance of the collection, and… reporting to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, of hate crime data by State and local agencies”.
One should ask what kind of crime is not committed involving hate since all crime involves some form of hate.
This republic is looking at a rapidly shifting agenda with Trump going along with that agenda. Should Trump be expected to complete his campaign promises all in a few months?
No, absolutely not.
However, it should be expected for this president to honor his oath of office.
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution for the United States of America.
If what Congress proposes is outside its authority granted by the Constitution, the President, in this case Donald Trump, has the duty to tell Congress to buzz off by not supporting their trampling of the Constitution, which includes the amendments recognizing, guaranteeing and protecting individual God-given rights.
If Congress proceeds, Trump has the authority to tell agencies not to follow an unconstitutional piece of legislation.
Citizens can no longer use "excuses" that have permeated throughout the last eight years – "we need a majority of Republicans in the House, we need a majority of Republicans in the Senate, we need to get rid of all the RINOs, we need a Republican president," et. al., ad nauseum. Republicans are a majority in the House and Senate, topped off with a Republican president.
How is that working out?
Not very well since nothing is happening.
Nothing is happening because no one elected to office is following the Constitution.
Nothing is happening because the people placed faith in other people or one man instead of God and Jesus Christ.
We the people have to accept the blame for the state of our government because we the people voted these criminals into office.
We the people need to reset our minds in order to get out of the two-party meme.
We the people need to challenge all candidates for office on their platform as it compares to the Constitution; then, reject those candidates whose platforms are at odds with it, regardless of party.
We the people need to educate ourselves on the Constitution.
And, we the people need to turn toward God and Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, and follow His laws given to us, and hold elected officials to the same.
More importantly, we the people need to stop with the excuses.
It is our own ignorance to the Constitution that allows these charlatans to hold office because we do not know the Constitution enough to hold these hacks accountable.
Instead of checking the Constitution for ourselves, we rely on so-called "experts" to tell us what is there.
Those "experts" have misled us.
It is our (speaking of the people that think God has no place in government) own rejection of God and God's law that has plummeted this republic into chaos.
The remedy is simple but not a quick one.
We the people need to educate ourselves on the Constitution, what is in it, its function, and its meaning through reading the Federalist Papers.
Publius Huldah is one of the best sources for the original intent of the Constitution.
Everyone should avail themselves of her knowledge and expertise.
We the people need to humble ourselves before God, repent and follow His Word and Laws.
Moreover, we need to hold individuals in office and those vying for office to the Constitution and God's law.
We can see what has happened because of our shortcomings.
We can also see where things are going because of it.
If we continue resting on our laurels, we will surely reap what we have sown.Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.