Home » Posts tagged 'WIBW'
Tag Archives: WIBW
WIBW posted an article about Rev. Cynthia Meyer in Edgerton, Ks of the United Methodist Church who was asked to reign as pastor since she was a lesbian. Had this been any other organization in the Unite States it would/could be considered discrimination. It is shocking that religious organizations get so much leeway in such things.
Dale Hanson of the Huffington Post wrote:
Of course the problems with this assertion are many. First and most basic is the fact that the Supreme Court is the ultimate interpreter of federal constitutional law. This means that while the term “separation of Church and State” may never appear in the constitution itself, the Court ruling in the case of Everson v. Board of Education stated “the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect ‘a wall of separation between Church and State.
[…] Having said that, the separation of church and state is hardly the first unwritten concept that is protected by the constitution. In the 1973 case of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court established a women’s constitutional right to have an abortion despite the word abortion never appearing in the constitution. In the 2015 case of Obergefell v. Hodges the Supreme Court established that laws against same sex marriage were unconstitutional despite the word marriage never appearing in the constitution. In the 1963 case of Gideon v. Wainwright the Supreme Court established that the constitution guarantees the right to an attorney despite the words public defender never appearing in the constitution. In the 2010 case of McDonald v. Chicago the Supreme Court established that the second amendment right to bear arms included the right to bear arms for self-defense despite the words self-defense never appearing in the constitution.
It should also be noted that of the 112 Supreme Court Justices, none of them has been an atheist. In fact 92 pecent of them were Christian. What rationale would these justices have for making laws that would create a legal prejudice towards their system of beliefs, especially if the separation of Church and State is a misinterpretation?
The reality is that the constitution was never meant to be a stagnant document that was rigidly adherent to the words on the page. As Thomas Jefferson said “The constitution, on this hypothesis, is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist, and shape into any form they please.” Over the past 200 years the Supreme Court has shaped the constitution to contain a clear separation of church and state that protects every religion equally. If only those who argue against this separation could see how they benefit from it instead of inappropriately interpreting it as an attack on Christianity.
Organized religion is fine but they should not be protected by law and exempt from paying taxes. It seems like many priests get off easy when it comes to child moleststion. In the news many people, especially politicians, use religion to justify anti LBGT legislation. The county clerk in Kentucky is a strong example of religion overstepping and attempting to make religious law in the United States. CNN
Organizations do have the right to refuse service to customers in certain situations. But to discriminate against an employee or a customer based on sexual orientation based on religious beliefs sets back the country 40 years. It seems like the United States needs another civil rights movement. How can the Unoted States be stuck in a war with religious extremist and deny help to others based on civil rights when our own civil rights are lacking.
With the recent shooting in Orlando, it is apparent it is time to over haul gun control. Now, I have never shot an AR-15, but I do not understand the need for an assault rifle in civilian hands. By no means am I anti gun, but something needs to be done. This is one of those issues that spans many different areas and may require the government to spend more money to help decrease the problem. Unfortunately, they will probably raise taxes or cut funding to make up the difference.
Mother Jones and The ACLU wrote an article about “no fly list”/terror watch list = being able to buy guns. They also mention the failed legislation that was in response of the Orlando shooting. I agree that if you are on a no fly list or watch list you should not be allowed to purchase a fire arm, especially an AR-15. Granite there will be the occasions where a wrongfully accuse person is/will be put on those lists. Based on comments and reports I have seen it has taken the better part of 18-36 months to go through the red tape. Now, I do feel sorry for people going through that but I would completely understand the red tape if I went through it all be it frustrating. There is something to be said for due process even of there are 20 John Smiths or Jane Does in a 10 mile radius.
Switzerland feom Wikipedia gives an over view of how another county has a low crime rate. This system creates a lot of paperwork and red tape. I am not going to lie, I rather enjoy being able to take a fun home 15-20 minutes after I fill out paperwork. But in all reality, who does not like imidiate gratification. Maybe that’s the problem; maybe Americans need to learn to be patient and get our ducks in a row before we can go duck hunting. I for one would feel better knowing that everyone is being checked out closely. To transfer a firearm person to person you have to have strict paper work. In the United States not so much.
Maybe part of the reason is there to many people profiting off the gun violence. WIBW interviewed staff at a local gun shop in Topeka, Ks. The gunshops are not to blame for selling the guns. The United States is a capitalist country, however, when there is mass shooting, there is a big rush to buy guns and ammo. Usually, out of fear that there will be a shortage or a ban on certain items. That makes sense. But how often do you see a spike like that after a drunk driving accident or a high speed chase for cars. Maybe the bigger issue is that gun lobbyist are fear mongering and causing histaria that their guns will be taken away. None of which has ever been said or proven. Only people wanting to cause histaria have claimed that person xyz will take their guns and civil liberties. But for people that actually read the Constituition know that gun owners are protected under the second amendment. The interpretation of the amendment and finger pointing will be saved for another day.
Maybe, like Switzerland, The United States needs to employment a license to purchase a fire arm. I know that would be popular, but if you need one to opporate a car, why not a weapon? Cars are not meant to kill, but they do. Guns are meant to kill.
When you buy a car they usually want proof of insurance and a photo I.D. Why does it seem easier to buy a gun than a car? Maybe what we need is expanded background checks. What that will consist of I do not know. From what I have seen the Orlando shooter did not have a criminal record beyond being investigated and he did not have a history of mental illness. Mental health should be expanded on the background checks but it could take time to check close enough for a persons mental health. Then the question is where do draw the line on saftey and mental health. Many people with mental illness go untreated or keep it to themselves. Adding stricter back ground checks for people on the no fly list, being investigated and mental health may be a start but people still will fall through the cracks.