On Friday, the United States Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of Gay marriage …
A decision that should have been made by individual states was determined by the SCOTUS. Nine unelected individuals in black robes made social law and ruled in favor of Gay marriage with a 5-4 decision.
Personally, I could care less what one does in the confines of their relationships when it comes to whether one is gay or heterosexual, but please spare me the nonsense that “Love” won. Spare me the BS. What does love have to do with a pice of paper? There are plenty of individuals who are in relationships outside of wedlock who are not Gay who love each other. Anyone who thinks they need a piece of paper issued by a State to say they they have love in their relationship knows nothing what love is and only has an agenda. Note what was said above, the State issues the marriage license, not the federal government so please tell me where the SCOTUS even has standing to rule on this issue. Exactly what ever happened to the State’s 10th Amendment rights? Case in point, who do you get a marriage license from and what are the rules and guidelines that they are issued under, the federal government or the State you reside in?
The Politico has 10 key quotes from the Supreme Court’s gay marriage decision. All Americans, especially those who are today celebrating this SCOTUS ruling, because if you celebrate a ruling that has nothing to do with the Constitution, you don’t get to complain when a ruling goes against you for the same reason.
“If you are among the many Americans—of whatever sexual orientation—who favor expanding same-sex marriage, by all means celebrate today’s decision. Celebrate the achievement of a desired goal. Celebrate the opportunity for a new expression of commitment to a partner. Celebrate the availability of new benefits. But do not celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it.” – Chief Justice John Roberts, in his dissent.
So in other words, the very document that is the basis of the United States means nothing anymore and all that matters is how people feel, including individuals on the Supreme Court who have a social agenda.
eBay to Ban Sale of Confederate Flag Merchandise … Really, They Missed A Lot and They Seemed to Have Forgot to Remove the 2008 Hillary Clinton Campaign Buttons
This is what the slippery slope of censorship looks like … Its one thing for a State not to fly it at the Capitol, but now comes the purge of all things with the Confederate flag.
The hypocrisy of Hillary Clinton and the Confederate Flag …
It would appear that eBay has jumped on the band wagon to ban the sale of Confederate flag merchandise. According to eBay spokesperson Johnna Hoff, “We have decided to prohibit Confederate flags, and many items containing this image, because we believe it has become a contemporary symbol of divisiveness and racism.” REALLY? Because as of this morning, a simple search on eBay of “Confederate flag” brought up over 10 pages, 50 items on each page, of Confederate flag merchandise. So what is next, pretending like Civil War never took place and the scrubbing of Southern history?
I personally think slavery was one of our darkest hours in the United States and this existence of racism and bigotry is reprehensible; however, I find the exploitation of a heinous crime disgusting as well. This country has made great strides from the days of slavery, more so than many other countries where it continues today. I am not a fan of the Confederate flag, I am not from the South, I am more of a “Don’t Tread on Me” flag fan. But how long will it be before that symbol offends people? Hell, we have people in this country that are offended by the American flag, Old Glory.
How About this One?
Even Hillary Clinton chimed in on South Carolina’s removal of the Confederate flag from the Capitol building, but maybe Hillary would like to discuss her 2008 Hillary Clinton campaign buttons with the Confederate flag on them complete with Stars and Bars. By the way, that button is for sale on eBay. Oh, but that’s different, that was 8 years ago, what difference does it make. Right? In the video below Hillary Clinton said, “recognizing it as a symbol of our nation’s racist past, that has no place in our present or our future.” Did she feel that way when Bill Clinton signed a Law Honoring Confederacy in Arkansas Flag? Then comes Hillary’s anti-free speech comment, “It shouldn’t fly there, it shouldn’t fly anywhere.” Sorry folks, as long as people are allowed to burn the American flag as an example of free speech, flying a Confederate flag has to be allowed as well. You don’t get to allow one and not the other.
Hillary Clinton Says she appreciates the removal of Confederate Flag, but what about her campaign buttons?
eBay will ban the sale of Confederate flag merchandise, the auction site announced Tuesday, in a decision that follows in the steps of major retailers like Walmart and Sears.
“We have decided to prohibit Confederate flags, and many items containing this image, because we believe it has become a contemporary symbol of divisiveness and racism,” eBay spokesperson Johnna Hoff said in an email to CNN. “This decision is consistent with our long-standing policy that prohibits items that promote or glorify hatred, violence and racial intolerance.”
Hoff added that the company continually monitors and evaluates its 800 million products on its site to ensure that they are “consistent with our core purpose.”
The company’s decision mirrors that of Walmart and Sears, which have also removed Confederate flag products from their stores.
The controversial flag has come under intense scrutiny following a racially motivated mass shooting in Charleston, South Carolina, that left nine African-Americans dead in a historic church. On Monday, South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley also called on the Confederate flag to be taken down from the state’s capitol grounds.
A Question to the Gun Grabbing Liberals … Why Do Gunmen Target Churches And Schools, Not NRA Meetings?
Breitbart asks as very good question, Why Do Gunmen Target Churches And Schools, Not NRA Meetings?
In the wake of the deadly shootings at the historic Emanuel American Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, SC where 9 innocent black church members, including Rev. Clementa C. Pinckney, were murdered at the hands of a racist, hate-filled individual Dylann Roof, some liberal Democrats like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were quick to politicize the heinous crime and call for grabbing, rather than mourn and honor the victims. However, Breitbart.com ask and interesting and provocative question following this murder of innocents, who’s only crime was to worship and be a Bible study.
Breitbart asks … Why Do Gunmen Target Churches And Schools, Not NRA Meetings? The short answer is, because they would be dead before they were able to pull the gun out of their pocket. So the next time a gun grabbing liberal spouts off about ending violence with gun grabbing rhetoric remember one thing, as Breitbart opines, an “unarmed people are vulnerable people, and criminal predators prey upon them.” There is a reason why criminals attack schools, churches and movie theatres, they are gun free zones and the people with evil intent know that and exploit it.
In the wake of the heinous attack on Charleston’s Emanuel American Methodist Episcopal Church, Democrats’ ritual calls for more gun control have louder than usual, and a mainstream media’s focus on the threat of “mass shootings” has been kicked up a notch.
The question none of the Democrats or media outlets have asked is why gunmen, historically speaking, attack churches and school but bypass NRA meetings?
Why do they target Fort Hood twice within a five years period while opening fire in Walmart remains unpopular?
To ask the questions is to answer them. Law-abiding citizens are largely prohibited from possessing guns for self-defense in churches and schools around the country, but they may be heavily and openly armed at an NRA meeting. Likewise, soldiers are then mandated to be unarmed on stateside military bases while law-abiding shoppers at Walmart can and frequently do carry guns to protect themselves and their families.
In the end, when you take the guns away from the law-abiding citizens guess who are the only ones who have them?
ANOTHER DRAW MOHAMMED ART CONTEST COMING TO NEW HAMPSHIRE LATER THIS SUMMER …
60 year old former US Marine Jerry Delemus has announced that he plans to host a “Draw Muhammad” art contest later this Summer in August in the Granite state. Delemus stated that images of the Muslim Prophet Muhammad are prohibited in Islam, but DeLemus claimed that in light of groups who would kill citizens expressing their freedom of speech, protecting the constitutional rights is more important. Note to all, there is a reason why New Hampshire’s State motto is, “Love Free Or Die”.
A New Hampshire man wants to defy an Islamic prohibition on depicting the prophet Muhammad in pictures and plans to host a “Draw Muhammad” art contest in August.
Jerry Delemus, a 60-year-old former Marine, says the freedom of expression guaranteed by the First Amendment trumps any religion’s limitations on such expression, “If we back away from our freedom as citizens a little bit at a time, the next thing you know, we don’t have any freedoms left,” DeLemus explained to the CBS affiliate WGME.
DeLemus said he hasn’t heard from the local Islamic community, but residents in the area aren’t sure the event is a good idea. Eric Adema said, “I don’t understand the point of inciting violence, it’s just going to cause more problems.”
A venue has yet to be determined, but DeLemus says the contest will likely take place in August. He says he recognizes there are risks inherent in hosting such an event, but adds that he plans on having plenty of security on hand.
“I’m not worried about taking a risk,” he said. “It’s more important to defend our way of life in this country, our constitutional rights, for everybody,” he said.
Asked about his feelings about insulting the faith of Muslims who are not extremists, DeLemus cited citizens’ rights to freedom of speech.
“If they’re offended, welcome to America,” he said, pointing to the idea of citizens disagreeing while still accepting each others’ constitutional rights.
The MSM reports this as an affront to Islam rather than what it truly is, standing up for free speech. One would think the media would understand matters of free speech. Sadly, the MSM and clueless folks like local resident above, Eric Adema, who stated, “I don’t understand the point of inciting violence, it’s just going to cause more problems.” Really? I guess the Founding Fathers should have just cowered down to the British with that little taxation without representation thing because they were just causing trouble. To not exercise your freedoms and liberties for fear of insane, radical religious reprisal just might be considered borderline Un-America. How many people have fought and died for out religious freedoms, only to have radicals in one religion threaten to kill if you dare draw a picture.
WHAT PART ABOUT FREEDOM OF SPEECH TRUMPS ALL BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE NO FREE SPEECH, YOU HAVE NO FREEDOM.
Carol Bowne Stabbed to Death by Ex-Boyfriend Michael Eitel in New Jersey While Waiting for Gun Permit (VIDEO)
THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN GOVERNMENTS RESTRICT THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS … NEW JERSEY WOMAN STABBED TO DEATH BY EX WHILE WAITING FOR GUN PERMIT.
39 year old Carol Bowne, a New Jersey hairdresser, feared for her life and the threat of domestic violence from her ex-boyfriend, 45 year old Michael Eitel. Carol Bowne sought to protect herself by getting a restraining order, installed security cameras and an alarm system to her home and began the long process of obtaining a handgun. Carol Brown was stabbed multiple times by Eitel in the driveway of her home Wednesday night in the 100 block of Patton Avenue in Berlin Township. Bowne was transported to Virtua Hospital in Berlin where she was pronounced dead a short time later. Michael Eitel was charged with her murder. Eitel, a convicted felon, is a fugitive and being sought by a U.S. Marshals Service.
This didn’t have to happen. Thanks to New Jersey’s restrictive gun laws, Carol Browne is dead. As reported at the Washington Free Beacon, Unlike most states, New Jersey’s restrictive gun laws require a permit to purchase a handgun of which the permit process can take several months to complete. Carol Browne could not simply buy a gun for her protection, the very equalizer of a petite female hairdresser against a crazed ex-boyfriend, convicted felon. Obviously, a retraining order means nothing, security cameras and an alarm system did nothing to protect Brown and the police cannot be everywhere at all times to protect people. Do ypu know what would have given Carol Brown a fighting chance … A Sig Sauer P238 ESP, a Rugar SR22, or a Rugar SR40.
When Carol Bowne felt the threat of domestic violence, the petite hairdresser took steps to protect herself.
The Berlin Township woman got a restraining order against a former boyfriend, installed security cameras and an alarm system to her home and began the months-long process of obtaining a handgun, friends said.
But it wasn’t enough.
Bowne, 39, was stabbed to death in the driveway of her Patton Avenue home on Wednesday night.
Her former boyfriend, 45-year-old Michael Eitel, was charged with her murder. Eitel, a convicted felon, was a fugitive Thursday, being sought by a U.S. Marshals Service task force.
NJ Woman Killed By Ex-Boyfriend While Awaiting Gun Permit Approval – News Brief
VIDEO – Western Journalism
UPDATE I: Suspect in Murder of Carol Browne Found Dead.
Like a typical coward who would take the life of a defenseless woman, Michael Eitel committed suicide rather than facing the punishment for his heinous crime. Good riddance.
Officials say the suspect wanted for allegedly stabbing his ex-girlfriend to death in Berlin Township, New Jersey has been found dead.
45-year-old Michael Eitel was found dead around 1:30 p.m. Saturday in the garage of a home on the unit block of Holly Drive in West Berlin.
He took his own life
PC ALERT: HOW IS IT THAT AMERICAN COLLEGES WHEN FROM BASTIONS OF FREE SPEECH AND THOUGHT TO PC SPEECH AND NO THOUGHT?
Comedian Jerry Seinfeld appeared on ‘The Herd’ with Colin Cowherd when he made a rather remarkable and honest comment. Seinfeld said that comedians have told him to not do comedy at college campuses because they are so politically correct now. He went on to say tat colleges students throw out words like “sexist” and “racist” without knowing what those words actually mean.
When did America become so easily offended? Political correctness is not only ruining comedy, its ruining America.
However, before Jerry Seinfeld is given a medal for anti-PC speech, isn’t he the same individual who canceled on a Donald Trump Foundation event that benefited the St. Jude’s Children’s Research Hospital because Trump questioned whether Obama was born in America? Hey Jerry, why so serious?
Comedian Jerry Seinfeld appeared on ESPNU and ESPN Radio’s “The Herd with Colin Cowherd” on Thursday and spoke on how other comedians have told him to not do comedy at college campuses because they are so politically correct now.
According to Seinfeld, people do not even know what they are talking about when they throw out terms such as “racist” or “sexist” and this has made its way into colleges, making them too politically correct to do comedy.
“I don’t play colleges but I hear a lot of people tell me, ‘Don’t go near colleges, they’re so pc.’ My daughter’s 14. My wife says to her, ‘Well, you know, in the next couple of years, I think maybe you’re going to want to hang around the city more on the weekends so you can see boys.’ You know, my daughter says, ‘That’s sexist.’ They just want to use these words. ‘That’s racist. That’s sexist. That’s prejudice.’ They don’t even know what they’re talking about.”
Vince Vaughn on the Second Amendement and the Right to Bear Arms …”We Have the Right to Bear arms to Resist the Supreme Power of a Corrupt and Abusive Government.”
If you loved Vince Vaughn in The Wedding Crashers, The Internship and Dodge Ball, you are going to really like his comments on the Second Amendment and guns …
In a GQ UK edition interview, actor Vince Vaughn spoke out in favor of the US Constitution Second Amendment and our Right to bear Arms. The actor nailed it saying, the right to bear arms is not about duck hunting, “we have the right to bear arms to resist the supreme power of a corrupt and abusive government.” BINGO!!! Vaughn also went on to discuss the crime and mass shootings that occur in gun free zones where people do not have a the ability to defend themselves. I cant wait for the liberal MSM to turn on Vaughn
If you can dodge liberal critics on the Second Amendment, you can dodge a ball
On the American right to own a gun:
“I support people having a gun in public full stop, not just in your home. We don’t have the right to bear arms because of burglars; we have the right to bear arms to resist the supreme power of a corrupt and abusive government. It’s not about duck hunting; it’s about the ability of the individual. It’s the same reason we have freedom of speech. It’s well known that the greatest defense against an intruder is the sound of a gun hammer being pulled back. All these gun shootings that have gone down in America since 1950, only one or maybe two have happened in non-gun-free zones. Take mass shootings. They’ve only happened in places that don’t allow guns. These people are sick in the head and are going to kill innocent people. They are looking to slaughter defenseless human beings. They do not want confrontation. In all of our schools it is illegal to have guns on campus, so again and again these guys go and shoot up these f***ing schools because they know there are no guns there. They are monsters killing six-year-olds.”
On whether guns should be allowed in schools:
“Of course. You think the politicians that run my country and your country don’t have guns in the schools their kids go to? They do. And we should be allowed the same rights. Banning guns is like banning forks in an attempt to stop making people fat. Taking away guns, taking away drugs, the booze, it won’t rid the world of criminality.”
EXIT QUESTION: Will Vince Vaughn ever get another Hollywood movie after these comments? Other than those directed and produced by
Former Marine Jon Ritzheimer Plans Freedom of Speech Rally with ‘Draw Muhammad’ Contest at Same Phoenix Mosque Texas Terrorist Shooters Attended
FREEDOM OF SPEECH RALLY PLANNED FOR TONIGHT AT PHOENIX MOSQUE WHERE THE TWO TEXAS SHOOTING TERRORIST ATTENDED …
Jon Ritzheimer, a former US Marine, has planned a Freedom of Speech Rally and a Draw Mohammed contest Friday night out side of the Phoenix, AZ mosque, Islamic Community Center of Phoenix, that was attended by the two ISIS sympathizer gunmen who were killed last month by police in Texas. Ritzheimer said, “I want this to be about pushing out the truth about Islam,” and makes no pretense for his opinion of Islam as he wears a t-shirt saying F*CK ISLAM. The rally is planned for 6:30 PM. Jon Ritzheimer stated, “I think the whole thing, the cartoon contest especially, I think it’s stupid and ridiculous, but it’s what needs to take place in order to expose the true colors of Islam.”
A former U.S. Marine is planning a “Draw Muhammad” contest at a free speech rally planned for Friday at a Phoenix mosque.
The “Freedom of Speech Rally,” organized by Jon Ritzheimer, comes nearly one month after police killed two gunmen, who were suspected Islamic State sympathizers, during an attack outside a similar contest in Garland, Texas, a local NBC affiliate reported.
Friday’s event is to be held outside the Islamic Community Center of Phoenix, the same mosque that Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi attended several years before their attack in Garland. Mosque leaders said the men never expressed extremist or violent views before.
Mr. Ritzheimer has held two anti-Islam protests in Phoenix since the Texas shootings, telling NBC that he’s using provocative methods to draw attention to a religion he believes is inherently violent.
FACEBOOK: Freedom of Speech Rally Round II.
According to Vocativ, Ritzheimer says his contest is an exercise in free speech and is being held, in part, to respond to the “liberals” who criticized those gathered in Texas with Geller instead of criticizing the two Islamic men who walked up to a cartoon contest and opened fire.
He put it this way:
This is not about race or any other side agenda that the Liberals are making it out to be. This is purely 100% a Freedom of Speech Rally. Stand Tall and show that we can PEACEFULLY protest our rights that are under attack. That is the sole cause for this Rally and Islam wants to silence us.
Ritzheimer is also asking all attendees to exercise their Second Amendment rights and bring firearms in case the expression of a First Amendment right “comes under the much anticipated attack.”
What is stunning from Anderson Copper is two things, note to Mr. Cooper … Shariah law is Islamic law. Also, for a gay man to support Shariah Law and Islam is quite astonishing as he would be one of the first to be killed. One would think that a real journalist and member of the media would do an investigative piece into this mosque and what they might be teaching that would inspire two of their members to try and kill others for drawing a pic of Mohammed. One would think, but that is not the case for the liberal MSM.
UPDATE I: Video ahead of the event. Too bad the media was bias saying that they individuals inside are peaceful. Hmm, the two Texas shooters who attended this mosque were hardly peaceful.
Uber-Leftist Bill Maher Defends Free Speech … “This is America, Do We Not Have the Right to Draw Whatever We Want?” (VIDEO)
FREE SPEECH MAKES STRANGE BED FELLOWS … UBER-LEFTIST BILL MAHER COMES TO THE DEFENSE OF PAM GELLAR.
Like him or hate him, agree with him or not, Bill Maher is 100% consistent and correct when t comes to radical Islam and their assault on our rights like freedom of speech. On his latest HBO show, ‘Real Time‘ with Bill Maher, he takes on the recent shooting in Garland, TX where two radical Islamist jihadist were shot dead by a Garland police officer as they tried to attack the “draw the Prophet Mohammad’ event.
Bill Maher starts out by saying, “this is America, do we not have the right to draw whatever we want?” Maher is 100% correct. Maher also mentioned the writers group, PEN, that recently gave Charlie Hebdo an award for courage. However, over 200 writers, including Garry Tradeau of Doonesbury comic fame, objected to the giving of the award, of which Maher thought was pretty crazy. I would have to agree, imagine a media that condemns other media for practicing free speech only because certain elitists in the media think their brand of free speech is the only allowed free speech? Does that not reek of censorship?
Maher reads Tradeau’s writings, “By punching downward, by attacking a powerless, disenfranchised minority with crude, vulgar drawings closer to graffiti than cartoons, Charlie wandered into the realm of hate speech, which in France is only illegal if it directly incites violence. Well, voila—the 7 million copies that were published following the killings did exactly that, triggering violent protests across the Muslim world. Then Bill Maher came out with the money line that all need to take a long hard look at. Maher says, “so this assumes that we just have to accept that Muslims are unable to control themselves the way we would ask everyone else in the world. To me that’s bigotry. That’s the soft bigotry of low expectations.” Maher further opines, “We don’t ask anyone else in the world
MAHER GOT THAT RIGHT.
Then we are presented with typical stupidity and asinine comment that represents today’s PC liberalism of squishiness from MSNBC’s Alex Wagne who says ,”isn’t the whole point of free speech not to judge people based on what people say”? What turnip truck did this lib fall off of? But like a typical liberal, you cant offend and judge people. Panelist Will Cain would slap her down saying, “no that is definitely not the role of free speech, you judge, you just don’t censor”. I thought for one second Cain was going to use the old SNL line from the classic Dan Aykroyd and Jane Curtin Point-Counterpoint skit, “
Jane Alex, you ignorant slut”.
Cain then went on to make a point that should be a wake up call to all of the media as he said, “You don’t just have a right to free speech, when someone’s position is, if you offend me, I will kill you, it becomes virtuous for you to offend that person. You need to offend that person. You need to shock that person out of that horrible position.” AMEN BROTHER!!! But instead, the cowardly MSM shrinks when it is their head on the line.
Maher brought up Charlie Hebdo and said he’s a little disturbed by the whole “soft bigotry of low expectations” when it comes to that magazine’s critics assuming that “Muslims aren’t able to control themselves.”
MSNBC’s Alex Wagner asked, “Isn’t the whole point of free speech not to judge people?” Cain shot back that when people threaten to kill just for expressing opinions, “it becomes virtuous to offend that person… [and] you need to shock them out of their horrible position.”
Former Rhode Island governor Lincoln Chafee said, “You’re talking about hatred!” Maher found that a little mind-boggling in a conversation about people who kill for free speech. He said everyone should be on the side of Muslims who just want to live their lives and don’t draw attention to people mocking their faith.
Wagner and Cain threw down over the appropriateness of the Charlie Hebdo award, with Wagner arguing that journalists who travel the world and put themselves in danger are “practicing courageous acts” moreso than cartoonists.
Juan Williams Says Pam Geller “Engaged in Gratuitous Offensive Behavior That Led to the Deaths of Two People” (VIDEO)
WHY DOES JUAN WILLIAMS HATE FREE SPEECH … JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF LIBERAL STUPIDITY.
When free speech in the United States protects pornography, art that places a Crucifix of Jesus Chris in urine and the burning of the America flag, Mohammad is fair game as well. Sorry Juan William, you don’t get to say I am for free speech, but …
In the United States of America, there are no rules put on “free speech’ as afforded by the US Constitution unless you yell “fire” or “bomb”. But that is not the case anymore for liberals and the likes of Juan Williams. Listen to Williams below say that he is all for free speech and then tell us just the opposite and say that he is against it when it comes to the rights of Pam Gellar and the Draw the Prophet Mohammad cartoon contest. Williams says in the VIDEO below, “because she engaged in gratuitous offensive behavior that led to the deaths of two people”. Okay’ let’s stop here. Yes her actions did lead to the deaths of two people, they there two radical Islamist jihadists, Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi. Both of these radical Muslims have been killed and we wont have to worry about them anymore. Pam Gellar should be given a medal for smoking these two out.
Then Williams goes on to say, Gellar wasn’t about writing a book like Salman Rushdie or she wasn’t about Charlie Hebdo engaging in satire, but instead she did this as a provocative act to offend people. REALLY, YOU FOOL? Juan, are you really this stupid? You would really make the distinction and defend drawing a cartoon because it was satire versus used to be provocative? Lets just come out and say and and not mince worse, Juan Williams is a typical liberal ass-hat who only likes free speech that he agrees with.Satire is meant to be proactive you idiot! To radical Islam, they make no differentiation. So when you are in-front of a black cloaked jihadist with a knife in his hand about to cut your head off, making the excuse that your cartoon was done for satire will make no difference. As for Salman Rushdie and Satanic Versus, he knew exactly what he was doing and poked the hornets nest. But because Pamela Gellar is a conservative, anything she does is hated by the LEFT and they will make excuses.
If you have ever wondered whether Juan Williams was just a liberal who was misguided and there was some hope for, think again. The law of the land is the United States Constitution, not Shariah law, at least for now.
Hey Juan, what about the freedom of speech for radical Imam Anjem Choudary saying that Pamela Geller should be put to death? Are you in favor of that being protected free speech as well?