New Jersey Governor can’t explain why he is above the Bill of Rights




That’s above my pay grade.


Way to go Jersey. Dumb fuck Dimm. Thinks he can shit on the Constitution just because he says so.


Great interview from Tucker. Funny how the MSM is okay with governors who are actively abusing their powers.

How was closing public parks abuse?
What powers are unconstitutional?


I don't know maybe the part dictating how people can worship what people can and can not buy in a store...

Public health concerns supersede the right to gather in worship.
In times of crisis, Government has regulated what you can buy in a store. There was strict rationing during WWII

Why do Conservatives have such a shaky understand our Constitution?

Do you really think Government doesn’t have the power to regulate gatherings during a public health crisis?
 
Some dude was arrested for playing catch with his son in a park. Then they realized he was a former cop and apologized.

That’s called fascism.

No, not fascism, but certainly a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection clause.

Regardless of what one may think the legal status of playing in a park with one's son is, it must be the same for everyone. Giving this guy different treatment because he's a former cop is blatantly unconstitutional.
 



That’s above my pay grade.


Way to go Jersey. Dumb fuck Dimm. Thinks he can shit on the Constitution just because he says so.


Great interview from Tucker. Funny how the MSM is okay with governors who are actively abusing their powers.

How was closing public parks abuse?
What powers are unconstitutional?


I don't know maybe the part dictating how people can worship what people can and can not buy in a store...

Public health concerns supersede the right to gather in worship.
In times of crisis, Government has regulated what you can buy in a store. There was strict rationing during WWII

Why do Conservatives have such a shaky understand our Constitution?

Do you really think Government doesn’t have the power to regulate gatherings during a public health crisis?


The government can only impose such restrictions using the least invasive method, and only for a compelling interest.

The church that brought everyone to a parking lot and kept everyone in their cars was following the spirit if not the letter of the social distancing guidelines, and was still interfered with.
 
Public health concerns supersede the right to gather in worship.

Do you really think Government doesn’t have the power to regulate gatherings during a public health crisis?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So where is this “public health” exception stated? I certainly do not see it in the First Amendment itself. Is it stated somewhere else in the Constitution? If so, where?

Where, in the Constitution, is government authorized to seize powers which the Constitution explicitly forbids government from seizing?


In times of crisis, Government has regulated what you can buy in a store. There was strict rationing during WWII

Because certain products were scarce, and needed for the war effort. Not because government presumed to think that it knew better than the people, what items are “essential” and what are not, what we need to buy and what we do not.


Why do Conservatives have such a shaky understand [sic] our Constitution?

EveryoneLaughingAtYou.png
 
Public health concerns supersede the right to gather in worship.

Do you really think Government doesn’t have the power to regulate gatherings during a public health crisis?


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So where is this “public health” exception stated? I certainly do not see it in the First Amendment itself. Is it stated somewhere else in the Constitution? If so, where?

Where, in the Constitution, is government authorized to seize powers which the Constitution explicitly forbids government from seizing?


In times of crisis, Government has regulated what you can buy in a store. There was strict rationing during WWII

Because certain products were scarce, and needed for the war effort. Not because government presumed to think that it knew better than the people, what items are “essential” and what are not, what we need to buy and what we do not.


Why do Conservatives have such a shaky understand [sic] our Constitution?

View attachment 324517

The right to practice your religion has always been secondary to public laws and protections.

There have been religions that claim smoking marijuana or taking halucigenic drugs is part of their religion.
The Catholic Church could not drink alter wine during prohibition
Ever see conservative outrage over Sharia Laws?
 
Because certain products were scarce, and needed for the war effort. Not because government presumed to think that it knew better than the people, what items are “essential” and what are not, what we need to buy and what we do not.


During WWII, Government not only regulated what you could buy, but what could be produced and what prices could be charged
 
Public health concerns supersede the right to gather in worship.

Do you really think Government doesn’t have the power to regulate gatherings during a public health crisis?


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So where is this “public health” exception stated? I certainly do not see it in the First Amendment itself. Is it stated somewhere else in the Constitution? If so, where?

Where, in the Constitution, is government authorized to seize powers which the Constitution explicitly forbids government from seizing?


In times of crisis, Government has regulated what you can buy in a store. There was strict rationing during WWII

Because certain products were scarce, and needed for the war effort. Not because government presumed to think that it knew better than the people, what items are “essential” and what are not, what we need to buy and what we do not.


Why do Conservatives have such a shaky understand [sic] our Constitution?

View attachment 324517

The right to practice your religion has always been secondary to public laws and protections.

There have been religions that claim smoking marijuana or taking halucigenic drugs is part of their religion.
The Catholic Church could not drink alter wine during prohibition
Ever see conservative outrage over Sharia Laws?

I miss the WINNER reps.
 
The right to practice your religion has always been secondary to public laws and protections.

The Constitution is the highest law in this nation. It takes precedence over all lesser public laws and protections. Nothing in it is secondary to anything less than it. Nothing.

Really?
Then do you believe freedom of religion allows you to implement Sharia Law?

That because it is the first amendment, Sharia Law should take precedence over our other laws?
 
Tucker is on live in case he has Victor Hansen Davis or another guest discuss the unconstitutional behavior of governors.


What is unconstitutional about protecting public safety?

Have conservatives gone mad?
 
The Constitution is the highest law in this nation. It takes precedence over all lesser public laws and protections. Nothing in it is secondary to anything less than it. Nothing.
Really?
Then do you believe freedom of religion allows you to implement Sharia Law?

That because it is the first amendment, Sharia Law should take precedence over our other laws?

Even for you, this is a remarkably absurd line of argument.

To implement Sharia law would be to violate the religious freedoms of everyone subject to it. It would, in effect, be establishing Islam as a state religion. Obviously, that cannot honestly be supported by any rational reading of the First Amendment.

  Neither can your premise be supported, that the First Amendment would support establishing Sharia law as higher than the Constitution. The Constitution is explicit about itself being the highest law, and nothing in it supports establishing any other law above it.
 
What is unconstitutional about protecting public safety?

When “protecting public safety” is used as an excuse to blatantly violate rights and principles that are explicitly established in the Constitution, then how can that not be unconstitutional. That's the very definition of unconstitutional, to violate the Constitution itself, no matter what excuse is given for doing so.
 
What is unconstitutional about protecting public safety?

When “protecting public safety” is used as an excuse to blatantly violate rights and principles that are explicitly established in the Constitution, then how can that not be unconstitutional. That's the very definition of unconstitutional, to violate the Constitution itself, no matter what excuse is given for doing so.
What rights would that be?

The laws of the land supersede any religious laws. When there is a conflict, the laws of society take precedence

Religion is not being picked on here. All large gatherings are banned
 
I can’t believe Carlson would ask such a stupid question and think he was being coy.

He stated unconstitutionally as a given. Government setting public health requirements has always been a function of Government

I can’t have an open sewer on my lawn?
I HAVE MY RIGHTS!

We should just start calling Lil Tuck "Steve" :D

 
I like how he wasn't a scientist for one question but then right for the science on th net question.

This asshole right here proves why politicians are absolutely GD worthless...yes men...cocksuckers...to the person.

'Leaders'. Our nations leaders deserve to be thrown in a volcano.

Love your post. Spot on.

Some dude was arrested for playing catch with his son in a park. Then they realized he was a former cop and apologized.

That’s called fascism.

You also can’t arrest Jews worshipping in a synagogue. That is what we avoid here. If you disagree, there are plenty of dictatorships to choose from.
That's called cronyism.
 
What rights would that be?

The laws of the land supersede any religious laws. When there is a conflict, the laws of society take precedence

And in the hierarchy of the laws of society, the Constitution is the highest law, in this nation. When any lesser law is in conflict with it, it is the Constitution which legitimately takes precedence.


Religion is not being picked on here. All large gatherings are banned

The right to peaceably assemble, regardless of the purpose of that assembly, is explicitly affirmed in the First Amendment.

It is flatly unconstitutional and illegal to ban all large gatherings. Government does not have the authority to do so. The Constitution explicitly denies this authority.
 
What rights would that be?

The laws of the land supersede any religious laws. When there is a conflict, the laws of society take precedence

And in the hierarchy of the laws of society, the Constitution is the highest law, in this nation. When any lesser law is in conflict with it, it is the Constitution which legitimately takes precedence.


Religion is not being picked on here. All large gatherings are banned

The right to peaceably assemble, regardless of the purpose of that assembly, is explicitly affirmed in the First Amendment.

It is flatly unconstitutional and illegal to ban all large gatherings. Government does not have the authority to do so. The Constitution explicitly denies this authority.

No it isn’t.
Peaceable assemblies are always limited.
In this case, all assemblies are being banned in the interest of public safety. No religion is being singled out.
 
Nothing in the Constitution prohibits the state from protecting public safety

Tuck does not know what he is blabbing about


The dumb ass said protecting and defending the Constitution was above his pay grade. His oath of office says different. Sweden did none of this draconian crap and have about the same number of deaths per million citizens as we do.

.

That's because, according to scientists in Israel who've been plotting the infection paths of this virus, lockdowns don't make any discernible change.
 

Forum List

Back
Top