Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Sylys Knackstedt's avatar

Too true. What I find fascinating is that were I to strictly adhere to my own belief that money is an evil, corrupting influence - were I to refuse having it, dealing with it - my property would be seized and I would lose my freedom. The government has established a coercive and inescapable religion - one that sanctifies money.

Expand full comment
Raven Wulfgar's avatar

I'd like to disagree with only one sentence in this post, with all due respect, of course.

"The First and Fourteenth Amendments clearly grant us Rights, and Freedoms to practice our religions."

It's patently not based in fact as, the original framers of The Constitution were writing The Bill of Rights and had intended for each amendment moving forward to guarantee protections to natural rights with which we're born. It's not intended to grant because the framers understood that any government that has the ability to grant rights can take them away.

In this, the framers of our Constitution were clear, the amendments were written as a restraint on government, a clear warning of "keep your hands to yourself lest you lose them in the process" and being that this is the supreme law of the land, the SCOTUS would have to rule as such (re: Marbury v. Madison) that any law, codified or not, that is repugnant to the Constitution is null and void.

Everything else in the article? *huge thumbs up*

Expand full comment
2 more comments...

No posts