Multiple Arrests Of Liberal Activists In North Carolina Breed More Protests & Other Teabag Buggery

xfire

New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
Multiple Arrests Of Liberal Activists In North Carolina Breed More Protests & Other Teabag Buggery

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/0...lina-you-read-that-right-breed-more-protests/

Raging grannies, student groups, professors, internationally known physicians, historians, members of the NAACP, all are coming together to protest at the General Assembly of North Carolina and to place themselves at risk of arrest. Acts of civil disobedience have swept Raleigh, the state capital, and are planned to recur well into the future. Blame it all on the Tea Party.

Four months ago, Tea Party candidates took over the state government–both chambers of the General Assembly, as well as the governorship. Together, the newly elected office holders have been hellbent on eviscerating every social program they can get their hands on in the name of doing “the people’s business.” Among the proposals that have been introduced are a $200 million cut to state universities, shortening early voting, totally eliminating both Sunday voting and same-day voters’ registration, easing environmental restrictions on fracking, cutting benefits to the unemployed (already signed into law), refusing federal dollars for Medicaid expansion for the poor, and–oh, yeah–establishing an official state religion.

Some of the “people” take exception to the idea that these actions are a proper expression of the people’s will. Those are the ones showing up with their signs to be arrested at the state capital. They are the ones who intend to continue showing up at the state legislature on “Moral Mondays,” an effort that has already brought about 50 arrests. According to News Observer, the protesters don’t think that the legislators are going to suddenly listen to them. Instead, they “hope to persuade others to rise up with them and raise their voices to a future that might bring a political shift in 2014.”

This past Monday, twenty-two members of the NAACP were arrested including the president of North Carolina’s chapter, Rev. William Barber and his 20 year-old ***, several professors from Duke University and the University of North Carolina, and internationally known physician and professor, Charles Van Der Horst. Reverend Barber described efforts at a dialogue with the legislators and the governor:

“They’ve turned a deaf ear to that. We want them to look the people in the eye – the people who won’t get Medicaid, the ******** who won’t get early ********* education – and tell them what they’re doing.

“We say, ‘If your policy is so good, then look those people in the eye and tell them why you’re doing what you’re doing.’ ”

The NAACP plans to fan out across the state and educate citizens about the impact of the proposed bills. They have also turned an eye toward raising money and recruiting candidates to run in 2014. Barber continued:

“It takes time for people to understand what’s really happening to them and what the issues are. We call this the avalanche effect, what’s going on there, and we don’t want people to experience this avalanche without knowing what’s coming. What they’re doing is regressive, extreme and race-based.”

The concerns are being expressed in many different voices, in many different ways. Dr. Van Der Horst, a pioneer in AIDS research and preventative medicine, spent a night in jail bonding with other protesters. He objected to the way the Tea Party politicians represent themselves–for instance, on abortion–saying :

“These people don’t believe in the sanctity of life. They believe in protecting their own wealth and their own power.”

History professor William Chafe, who was also jailed, worries that this legislature is going to destroy the history to which he has devoted his life:

“We thought it was important to stand up and be heard. We hope that as respected historians, who some would call eminent, we can reach out to others and stir them to speak out.”

Vicki Ryder, 71, of the”Raging Grannies” activist group, isn’t thinking about the past; she’s worried about the future. Also arrested, she had this to say:

“One of our sayings is ‘Stay in Trouble’ and that’s what we intend to do because we have to fight against anything that threatens the future of our grandchildren.”

One of the biggest surprises is that this confluence of raised consciousness and loud liberal voices is happening in North Carolina. Not that the South is a stranger to civil disobedience, of course. Black churches and leaders like Martin Luther King blazed the trail toward a more enlightened society in the 60s, but student and academic voices at the time came from places recognized as liberal bastions–places like UC Berkeley and University of Michigan, for example.

What’s happening in North Carolina–and that it’s happening in North Carolina–may be the greatest sign of hope this country has seen in a long, long time. If there is a groundswell there, one just might be building that’s powerful enough to sweep the entire nation.
 
Re: Multiple Arrests Of Liberal Activists In North Carolina Breed More Protests & Other Teabag Bugg

Democrats have controlled the legislature and senate for most of the past 100 years. We haven't had many republican governors and only 3 during my lifetime. What this boils down to is the democratic establishment feeling butthurt after losing control. North Carolina is a very unpredictable state in terms of elections. We elect one conservative senator and will elect a liberal senator. (Jesse Helms, John Edwards) Governor McCrory hasn't been in office 6 months (he is not a Tea Party candidate as the article states) and dems have done nothing but bitch and complain since he took the oath. The cuts to the state university system was necessary and if it could have been avoided it would have but spending and taxation is out of control in NC. Nothing the democratic controlled house and senate have done has worked and sometimes dire circumstances require drastic measures.

McCrory was a fantastic mayor of Charlotte and the economy boomed while he was mayor. The democrats are shaking in their boots that he is actually going to show up the past two governors and actually improve our economy and bring jobs into the state (yes they are that petty). They are just going to have to deal with it.. They had their time and it didn't work. Tough ****.
 
Re: Multiple Arrests Of Liberal Activists In North Carolina Breed More Protests & Other Teabag Bugg

One other thing.. if they think this is an indication of some sort of tide changing in North Carolina they have it half right. The only tide that has changed is that NC finally has a republican house , senate and governor which was unthinkable 10 years ago.
 

larss

I'm watching some specialist videos
Re: Multiple Arrests Of Liberal Activists In North Carolina Breed More Protests & Other Teabag Bugg

Doesn't establishing a state religion go against the 1st amendment?

Wiki said:
Establishment of religion

Main article: Establishment Clause
Originally, the First Amendment applied only to the federal government, and some states continued official state religions after ratification. Massachusetts, for example, was officially Congregationalist until the 1830s.[9]
In 1947, the U.S. Supreme Court decision Everson v. Board of Education incorporated the Establishment Clause (i.e., made it apply against the states). In the majority decision, Justice Hugo Black wrote,
The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion to another ... in the words of Jefferson, the [First Amendment] clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and State' ... That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach."[10]
In the Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet (1994),[11] Justice David Souter, writing for the majority, concluded that "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion."[12] In a series of cases in the first decade of the 2000s—Van Orden v. Perry (2005), McCreary County v. ACLU (2005), and Salazar v. Buono (2010)— the Court considered the issue of religious monuments on federal lands without reaching a majority reasoning on the subject
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First...States_Constitution#Establishment_of_religion
 
Re: Multiple Arrests Of Liberal Activists In North Carolina Breed More Protests & Other Teabag Bugg

Doesn't establishing a state religion go against the 1st amendment?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First...States_Constitution#Establishment_of_religion

There are numerous declarations and laws in various states that fly in the face of the constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court will look the other way when they consider the law to be a barometer of the legislators at the time. This is more symbolic than anything and lawmakers do these sort of things because they can and they feel confident that the SCOTUS will not react.

If a full tilt challenge were brought then it would be knocked down. But it would take a lot of litigation and lawmakers know this. The SCOTUS will most always step in when they feel that a state has tried to thumb their nose at them by passing legislation after they have made a landmark decision.
 

Philbert

Banned
Re: Multiple Arrests Of Liberal Activists In North Carolina Breed More Protests & Other Teabag Bugg

There are numerous declarations and laws in various states that fly in the face of the constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court will look the other way when they consider the law to be a barometer of the legislators at the time. This is more symbolic than anything and lawmakers do these sort of things because they can and they feel confident that the SCOTUS will not react.

If a full tilt challenge were brought then it would be knocked down. But it would take a lot of litigation and lawmakers know this. The SCOTUS will most always step in when they feel that a state has tried to thumb their nose at them by passing legislation after they have made a landmark decision.

No one is actually trying to enact legislation at the state level, but it is a symbolic move. Christians don't seem to get that most everyone, even the majority of Christians, don't want to actually live a Christian lifestyle. I mean... Virgin Birth? A Messiah who was "here", but decided to come back another time and REALLY clean up this mess....but later on, not now . Please...
As for those stalwart Christians in NC, ...
"While a resolution that would have cleared the way for an official state religion in North Carolina was quickly pulled from consideration by the state’s Republican Speaker of the House, a new poll indicates that a large number of Americans would like their own home state —along with the entire nation—to make Christianity the official religion of their state and country.

An Omnibus Poll, sponsored by YouGov.com and the Huffington Post, reveals just how far from the nation’s roots we have traveled on the subject of separating church and state and retaining the nation’s neutrality when it comes to how Americans chose to practice their respective religions.

According to the survey, 34 percent of Americans would favor making Christianity their official state religion while less than half (47 percent) oppose the concept. Thirty-two percent of those polled indicated that they would also favor a constitutional amendment that would make Christianity the official religion of the United States with just over half (52 percent) opposing the notion.
Keeping in mind that the reason most goombahs claim it's not legal is the prohibition at the FEDERAL level of establishment of an endorsed Religion...states are not prohibited in the US Constitution from establishing Zoroasterism or whatever as official. That is another set of rulings and legislation, it's not in the Constitution.
It's a moot point...
 

Philbert

Banned
Re: Multiple Arrests Of Liberal Activists In North Carolina Breed More Protests & Other Teabag Bugg

No one is actually trying to enact legislation at the state level, but it is a symbolic move. Christians don't seem to get that most everyone, even the majority of Christians, don't want to actually live a Christian lifestyle. I mean... Virgin Birth? A Messiah who was "here", but decided to come back another time and REALLY clean up this mess....but later on, not now . Please...
As for those stalwart Christians in NC, ...
"While a resolution that would have cleared the way for an official state religion in North Carolina was quickly pulled from consideration by the state’s Republican Speaker of the House, a new poll indicates that a large number of Americans would like their own home state —along with the entire nation—to make Christianity the official religion of their state and country.

An Omnibus Poll, sponsored by YouGov.com and the Huffington Post, reveals just how far from the nation’s roots we have traveled on the subject of separating church and state and retaining the nation’s neutrality when it comes to how Americans chose to practice their respective religions.

According to the survey, 34 percent of Americans would favor making Christianity their official state religion while less than half (47 percent) oppose the concept. Thirty-two percent of those polled indicated that they would also favor a constitutional amendment that would make Christianity the official religion of the United States with just over half (52 percent) opposing the notion.
Keeping in mind that the reason most goombahs claim it's not legal is the prohibition at the FEDERAL level of establishment of an endorsed Religion...states are not prohibited in the US Constitution from establishing Zoroasterism or whatever as official. That is another set of rulings and legislation, it's not in the Constitution.
It's a moot point...
I get that the SCOTUS deemed it applied, although not actually specifically delineated. 1947 is a long ways from 1776...and it is not deemed by many to be written in stone.
Although I hope no one tries to ***** the issue, I will support massive rebellion against the Christian Extremists that make up a big part of the Democrat and Republican parties.
And the Lefist Extremist Secular NeoReligious are my least favorite hypocrites of all...**** monkeys will have a field day when it hits the fan.

Save your ammo!
 
Re: Multiple Arrests Of Liberal Activists In North Carolina Breed More Protests & Other Teabag Bugg

I get that the SCOTUS deemed it applied, although not actually specifically delineated. 1947 is a long ways from 1776...and it is not deemed by many to be written in stone.
Although I hope no one tries to ***** the issue, I will support massive rebellion against the Christian Extremists that make up a big part of the Democrat and Republican parties.
And the Lefist Extremist Secular NeoReligious are my least favorite hypocrites of all...**** monkeys will have a field day when it hits the fan.

Save your ammo!

There are some standards that you have to meet to challenge a law in the Supreme Court. First the litigant(s) have to show that they were harmed by the law. Like I said, the SCOTUS doesn't like to determine the constitutionality unless either a state supreme court hands down a ruling that they deem unconstitutional or it can be shown that people are harmed and should hear and rule on the case.There are laws still on the books that are blatantly unconstitutional that the SCOTUS doesn't even bother with. Texas still has a sodomy law that could be enforced although the Supreme Court has ruled such laws unconstitutional.
 

Philbert

Banned
Re: Multiple Arrests Of Liberal Activists In North Carolina Breed More Protests & Other Teabag Bugg

The great JM on the subject... would he be a great FOs poster!

We do have a pretty good idea as to how James Madison, considered to be the “****** of the U.S. Constitution”, felt about this.

In an 1822 letter to Edward Livingston, Madison wrote:

“Notwithstanding the general progress made within the two last centuries in favour of this branch of liberty, and the full establishment of it in some parts of our country, there remains in others a strong bias towards the old error, that without some sort of alliance or coalition between Government and Religion neither can be duly supported. Such, indeed, is the tendency to such a coalition, and such its corrupting influence on both the parties, that the danger cannot be too carefully guarded against. And in a Government of opinion like ours, the only effectual guard must be found in the soundness and stability of the general opinion on the subject. Every new and successful example, therefore, of a perfect separation between the ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance; and I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity the less they are mixed together. It was the belief of all sects at one time that the establishment of Religion by law was right and necessary; that the true religion ought to be established in exclusion of every other; and that the only question to be decided was, which was the true religion. The example of Holland proved that a toleration of sects dissenting from the established sect was safe, and even useful. The example of the colonies, now States, which rejected religious establishments altogether, proved that all sects might be safely and even advantageously put on a footing of equal and entire freedom; and a continuance of their example since the Declaration of Independence has shown that its success in Colonies was not to be ascribed to their connection with the parent country. If a further confirmation of the truth could be wanted, it is to be found in the examples furnished by the States, which had abolished their religious establishments. I cannot speak particularly of any of the cases excepting that of Virginia, where it is impossible to deny that religion prevails with more zeal and a more exemplary priesthood than it ever did when established and patronized by public authority. We are teaching the world the great truth, that Governments do better without kings and nobles than with them. The merit will be doubled by the other lesson: that Religion flourishes in greater purity without, than with, the aid of Government.”

Wow.
The parameters of the subject have been defined...
 
Re: Multiple Arrests Of Liberal Activists In North Carolina Breed More Protests & Other Teabag Bugg

The great JM on the subject... would he be a great FOs poster!

We do have a pretty good idea as to how James Madison, considered to be the “****** of the U.S. Constitution”, felt about this.

In an 1822 letter to Edward Livingston, Madison wrote:

“Notwithstanding the general progress made within the two last centuries in favour of this branch of liberty, and the full establishment of it in some parts of our country, there remains in others a strong bias towards the old error, that without some sort of alliance or coalition between Government and Religion neither can be duly supported. Such, indeed, is the tendency to such a coalition, and such its corrupting influence on both the parties, that the danger cannot be too carefully guarded against. And in a Government of opinion like ours, the only effectual guard must be found in the soundness and stability of the general opinion on the subject. Every new and successful example, therefore, of a perfect separation between the ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance; and I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity the less they are mixed together. It was the belief of all sects at one time that the establishment of Religion by law was right and necessary; that the true religion ought to be established in exclusion of every other; and that the only question to be decided was, which was the true religion. The example of Holland proved that a toleration of sects dissenting from the established sect was safe, and even useful. The example of the colonies, now States, which rejected religious establishments altogether, proved that all sects might be safely and even advantageously put on a footing of equal and entire freedom; and a continuance of their example since the Declaration of Independence has shown that its success in Colonies was not to be ascribed to their connection with the parent country. If a further confirmation of the truth could be wanted, it is to be found in the examples furnished by the States, which had abolished their religious establishments. I cannot speak particularly of any of the cases excepting that of Virginia, where it is impossible to deny that religion prevails with more zeal and a more exemplary priesthood than it ever did when established and patronized by public authority. We are teaching the world the great truth, that Governments do better without kings and nobles than with them. The merit will be doubled by the other lesson: that Religion flourishes in greater purity without, than with, the aid of Government.”

Wow.
The parameters of the subject have been defined...

Bullshit! the framers never could have foreseen Jediism. His opinion did not take in the changing society of a 21st century America!

:cool:
 

Mayhem

Banned
Re: Multiple Arrests Of Liberal Activists In North Carolina Breed More Protests & Other Teabag Bugg

The great JM on the subject... would he be a great FOs poster!

We do have a pretty good idea as to how James Madison, considered to be the “****** of the U.S. Constitution”, felt about this.

In an 1822 letter to Edward Livingston, Madison wrote:

“Notwithstanding the general progress made within the two last centuries in favour of this branch of liberty, and the full establishment of it in some parts of our country, there remains in others a strong bias towards the old error, that without some sort of alliance or coalition between Government and Religion neither can be duly supported. Such, indeed, is the tendency to such a coalition, and such its corrupting influence on both the parties, that the danger cannot be too carefully guarded against. And in a Government of opinion like ours, the only effectual guard must be found in the soundness and stability of the general opinion on the subject. Every new and successful example, therefore, of a perfect separation between the ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance; and I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity the less they are mixed together. It was the belief of all sects at one time that the establishment of Religion by law was right and necessary; that the true religion ought to be established in exclusion of every other; and that the only question to be decided was, which was the true religion. The example of Holland proved that a toleration of sects dissenting from the established sect was safe, and even useful. The example of the colonies, now States, which rejected religious establishments altogether, proved that all sects might be safely and even advantageously put on a footing of equal and entire freedom; and a continuance of their example since the Declaration of Independence has shown that its success in Colonies was not to be ascribed to their connection with the parent country. If a further confirmation of the truth could be wanted, it is to be found in the examples furnished by the States, which had abolished their religious establishments. I cannot speak particularly of any of the cases excepting that of Virginia, where it is impossible to deny that religion prevails with more zeal and a more exemplary priesthood than it ever did when established and patronized by public authority. We are teaching the world the great truth, that Governments do better without kings and nobles than with them. The merit will be doubled by the other lesson: that Religion flourishes in greater purity without, than with, the aid of Government.”

Wow.
The parameters of the subject have been defined...

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Philbert again.

Always good to hear from the Founding Fathers.
 

Philbert

Banned
Re: Multiple Arrests Of Liberal Activists In North Carolina Breed More Protests & Other Teabag Bugg

There are some standards that you have to meet to challenge a law in the Supreme Court. First the litigant(s) have to show that they were harmed by the law. Like I said, the SCOTUS doesn't like to determine the constitutionality unless either a state supreme court hands down a ruling that they deem unconstitutional or it can be shown that people are harmed and should hear and rule on the case.There are laws still on the books that are blatantly unconstitutional that the SCOTUS doesn't even bother with. Texas still has a sodomy law that could be enforced although the Supreme Court has ruled such laws unconstitutional.

The Constitution is still open to timely interpretation, and the SCOTUS is always a scary group at any given time.
As the repugnant institution of slavery (thank you religious sensibility) illustrated, taking more than a hundred years to be expunged from American Society, so has Religious Intolerance and soon to be expunged special privilege (affirmative action AKA You Get Stuff I Can't Have Under The Law). While the SCOTUS seems to move left and right like a tilt-a-whirl, so far it hasn't derailed.
Perspective will judge the system, given enough passage of time, but so far so good.

Notwithstanding Otrama feeling he has the great wisdom required to chastise the SCOTUS, they seem to be functioning as intended.
(Which I cannot say about him as President.)
 

larss

I'm watching some specialist videos
Re: Multiple Arrests Of Liberal Activists In North Carolina Breed More Protests & Other Teabag Bugg

The Constitution is still open to timely interpretation, and the SCOTUS is always a scary group at any given time.

Except, of course, the 2nd amendment. Which is set in stone. People have the right to wear T-Shirts.
 
Re: Multiple Arrests Of Liberal Activists In North Carolina Breed More Protests & Other Teabag Bugg

very interesting
 
Top