Previous -7 - -6
The best way to deceive people is to mix a little common sense in with foolishness. Of course we all work toward making things more efficient, using less resources, using less energy, making our resources and energy cleaner. And we need rules to continue to reduce pollution. However, that does not mean that CO2 will cause catastrophic climate change. It does not mean the world will come to an end unless we go beyond reducing pollution to reduce CO2. Soot is a pollutant, but clear CO2 is not. This article is deceptive in trying to convince us to relinquish our energy and our freedom to tyrants, based on slogans, slams, and ridicule, without ever proving his case. It is just another attempt at politics at its cheapest. It does exactly what it condemns in others.
This article completely misrepresents the position of those justices who believe the constitution should be read literally. There is absolutely nothing in the constitution or our history that says public prayer is not included in our rights to freedom of speech and freedom of religion. So it is simply honest for justices to uphold the constitution as it was intended. If you don't agree with a prayer someone says at a meeting, you can politely wait until it is over. Just as if you disagree with the various viewpoints that are expressed at a meeting, you politely listen while the other person speaks, even if you vociferously disagree with them. That is what freedom of expression is all about. To demonize prayer as one form of speech that you will not tolerate is un-American. If offensive remarks are not to be tolerated in the public arena, why is this article allowed to be on this web site? I would rather patiently listen to someone pray for guidance from a false god than listen to manipulative, deceptive and dishonest speech. Obama's lies are much more offensive than his prayers. It often happens that we are intimidated and manipulated by those who run a meeting, without a prayer ever being said. Have you every listened to an Obama speech or press conference? Have you ever tried to disagree with sodomy lately? Of course the majority will have more speech than the minority. To ridicule that is not very enlightening? Why does the author of this article have a right to make the rules of a town rather than the majority of people who live there? The point that all those who want to substitute their own rules against free speech in place of the constitution are all Jews is not a complement to that group. They should be replaced by Jews who can be trusted to uphold the constitution. Then with both Jews and Christians upholding the constitution, the logic of this article will be shown up for the foolishness that it is.
Previous -7 - -6