Friday, April 8, 2016

Mississippi HB 1523 Protects Peoples Rights from Government Over Reach and Does Not Discriminate

[c]Zorek Richards

 

The ONLY thing HB 1523 does is underscore what is already in the First Amendment. I agree the law should NOT have to exist, but First Amendment rights are eroding away in the name of people who want rights trumping people who also want rights. 


Can everyone in the US have the rights they want? No. Giving a person the right to kill someone as a form of expression would be bad and, clearly,. evil.

So on this case should LGBT rights trump religious rights? Not if you read what has special protections under the first amendment: press, speech & religion.

But the First Amendment addressed protection of the people from the government did it not? Absolutely. Hence, the government should not get involved or be a mediator or even a coach when it comes to the conflict between LGBT and religion. Instead, BOTH sides needs to agree to disagree and quit trying to beat the hell out of each other in the name of "rights."

What HB1523 did was simply underscore that the government should NOT be putting any restrictions via LAWS and SCOTUS rulings which hinder the freedom of the people. Now, under that argument does a person have a right to discriminate? Yes. "Discriminate" by definition simply means to differentiate differences between subjects. I am not under obligation to endorse or promote things I disagree with and neither is anyone else. LGBT crowd is not under any obligation to promote any religion and neither am I under obligation to promote LGBT.

The wisdom of the First Amendment was that it basically states that the people need to work it out themselves....which utilizes that free speech protection. When the government gets involved like they have been doing more and more and steps in and makes laws..or SCOTUS rulings....they have NOT fixed a problem. They have ONLY made it illegal. The problem is still there. The Fed ends discussion and then becomes the tyrant by prosecuting dissent. HB1523's effort is to circumvent that from happening...and, as I stated, simply underscores what is already in the First Amendment.

Mississippi's  RFRA from a couple years ago, simply said it was to "provide that the state SHALL NOT substantially burden a person's right to exercise of religion" It too simply underscored First Amendment protections by saying it would not get involved. 1523 was more specific in light of SCOTUS rulings since then..........but the end result of both was the same.

The extremist from the liberal left will holler the most against the law, first,  from pure ignorance and lack of understanding (along with never having read the bill, and second from WANTING the government to legislate morality for them but with a catch: THEY have to be the ones who can define morality. In essence, they do what they don't want a theocratic government to do. I don't want them OR a theocracy to do it period.

I realize there are some out there, but I myself have not ever been to a church that condemns anyone for being gay. The ones i know do not agree or promote the lifestyle choice, but neither do they condemn a person. Even Jesus didn't come to condemn so I'm not even going to begin to do something Jesus didn't advocate.

We are all sinners born in a fallen world. Sin is all around us. We cannot escape it by simply condemning it. But we also don't create morality by legislating it or making it illegal. It's a condition of the heart which is something "laws" have not ever been able to change....and I mean NEVER!

In summary my agenda is that both sides should have rights via the Constitution. If your position is that LGBT trumps religious rights. I will never agree with that.

------------------------------------------
MEME REPORT:
USA DOESN'T HAVE A HEALTH CARE SYSTEM