Then look at what's over at TeaParty.Org: you'll find the usual pablum. Guns, gays, God.
Heh, I like talking about Guns, Gays and God too. Let's talk about all of them within the context of The Constitution, which is what the Tea Party was supposed to be about. In short:
Guns. What part of "shall not be infringed" didn't you bother to read? That one's simple. And yes, this means that under The Bill of Rights there should be no Brady Law nor any bar on a convicted felon who has served his time buying or owning a weapon! I know what the current law says and I understand the reasoning behind it. But you can't square it with the clear language in the Second Amendment. Our entire system of criminal justice rests on the premise that if you are convicted of a crime and serve the time for it, your debt to society is paid. If said convicted criminal is still dangerous to society (and thus shouldn't have a right to self-defense) why are we letting him out so he can victimize other people? Sentences should reflect this; you should not be released until you are no longer a danger to society – period. Prison is often debated as to whether it's about rehabilitation or punishment – I argue it is neither, it is and should be about removing those who harm others from society until they are no longer a threat to others.
Gays. What part of "what you do in your bedroom is none of my damn business" didn't you bother with? You can find that in the 4th Amendment as well as elsewhere. In terms of public space what is your private sexual preference and life doing in the public space in the first place? 200 years ago we called such people perverts and stuck them in the stocks. You want to address this problem? It's simple: That's a gay (or straight) person's private life and its none of anyone else's damn business what two or more consenting adults do behind a closed door on private property.
God. What part of the Establishment Clause didn't you bother to read? "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" You want prayer in the schools? Not unless I can lead a prayer to Allah should I so choose; it is not Constitutional to favor one religion over another. Therefore, you either keep it all out or you keep none of it out, and my preference is to keep all of it out, although I'll settle for none – either position is Constitutional. No other position is, and that's the beginning and end of it. The same applies to any other publicly-run and funded space. What people do on their own private property with regard to how they worship is none of your damn business.
Join us on our
Share this page with your friends
on your favorite social network: