Skip to comments.The Loss of Freedoms List (Vanity Post)
Posted on 01/25/2005 4:37:42 PM PST by Cornpone
click here to read article
I'm sure I could find numerous examples, especially with the increasing requirements to register or obtain permits to demonstrate publicly, but the most recent example I came across was a post I made yesterday regarding attempts to prevent school children from gathering to worship during recess.
I am sure lawful assembly had nothing to do with paying the city 250 bucks for a permit. I think it had more to do with not rioting.
Here in the State of Washington, where our nonest votes mean notheing, but fraudulent votes ride an armored truck, the legislation is trying to pass the illegality of using rain barrels on privately owned property to collect rain water for irrigation or for livestock! Unbelievable!
"Vehicle emmissions testing."
Second that! I was so thrilled to get away from that mess.
Most of these things have been started by people like the kennedy's. People that have millions of dollars spending millions of dollars to get a job that pays thousands of dollars. This is past a joke. Look at the things they have done and escaped with no punishment. I do guess ol' teddy probably thinks the presidency belonged to him but we stole it from him for a murder? that happened in his car. If
you notice, they start to steal these things by first talking about a "problem" and the problems we all face because of it and they keep talking until a lot of folks think well it won't hurt to let them do this, if any one pays attention any more, anyway. God Bfless y'all, KennyBob
That is unbelievable. In all my travels to Washington State I've never been there when it wasn't raining. I guess the proposed legislation is intended to protect the 'common good' of wasted groundwater runoff.
You bunch of whiners need to grow up. WE HAVE MORE FREEDOM THAN ANY OTHER PEOPLE IN THE WORLD!
Although it was a good and necessary thing it was nonetheless communist inspired as a means to "divide and conquer" which to this point has been overwhelmingly successful.....civil rights of blacks, ( it was just the catalyst ).....which extended to Asians, American Indians, every other minority in creation, etc.....including children, handicapped, the women's movement.....the hyphenated-American with the overall intent to keep us squabbling amongst ourselves and actually creating division isntead of bringing us together. They are knowingly and intentionally tearing us and the country apart. All of these things brought about this "diversity" stuff.
Baby carseats and making the baby be buckled in the back seat.....separating the core family.
There are others. I'll get back to you.
You are absolutely right about that. I have traveled and lived in many places around the world and there is no place more free than America. But in my eyes that is changing. Perhaps that change is good. My children don't seem to be concerned. But I am.
If you live in a red conservative state you have a lot more freedom than living in a liberal blue state. The democrat state legislature's want us to become like Europe.
Did the opponents of the gathering cite federal law? If not, then they didn't violate the first amendment of the federal constitution.
Does the first amendment of the federal constitution prohibit cities from requiring permits for rallies?
Surely it doesn't, but it is not a freedom or a right if you have to pay for it. I can see parade permits being necessary, but it is so easy to stop protests from spontaniously forming by passing permit laws. Sounds more like government making you buy your rights.
LOL! I think it started before that! At least back as far as the War Between the States. That's where the concept of unlimited national government was set in motion once and for all.
No they did not. They cited the popular pseudo-law of 'social stigmatization.' Because 85 percent of the parents in the school district allowed their children to participate in free time religious activities the other parents felt their children were being 'stigmatized' because they didn't allow them to participate. I'm not sure I understand your argument. If the constitution gives us a right I don't believe it is necessary to site a non-existent federal law to justify its contradiction. The constitution supersedes federal law as it is the foundation of our law. There can be no federal law that contradicts the constitution in my simple understanding of how we are to be governed unless a lawyer can explain it to me. Are you a lawyer?
You just stand on the tracks and you don't hear the train coming do you.
I mostly agree with your post, perhaps entirely.
Control the riots when they materialize, and leave it at that.
I just heard from my friend that a guy she knows had 20 acres here in Washington near a rural town called Roy. The guy chopped quite a few large fir trees down and some county official came out and told him that he was not allowed to cut the trees on his property.
Then he ordered him to replace them all. Also in King County which is north of where I live, land owners can only use 1/3 of their land. They cannot cut trees, clear blackberries, etc. Honestly I think we are becoming a communist society.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.