Daily Archives: January 12, 2015

The First Amendment and How It Affects Us Today
The first amendment to the bill of rights and how it pertains to 2015.

By: 2019NortonJ

See original here:
The First Amendment and How It Affects Us Today - Video

Jacqueline Smetak, Guest opinion 9:36 a.m. CST January 12, 2015

We the People of these Dis-United States are at war with ourselves. The divisions of race and class are playing out in the streets and in increasing numbers of people killed or injured in confrontations with police.

Perhaps these levels of distrust have always been there and we are only now forced to acknowledge them. Or maybe it's worse than it's been since television brought the ugliness of racism and the surrealism of the War against the War in a country most of us had never heard of into our homes half a century ago.

Played against the backdrop of the worst economic downturn in eight decades, the distrust is overwhelming another division. We're also divided along religious lines. But those battles have been fought in the courts rather than the streets.

At issue is the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

This nation was established as a secular republic. There can be no official church. People are free to worship, or not, as they please. That had not been so prior to the Revolution, but by 1789, the former British colonies had no state church and therefore the First Amendment simply stated what already was. However, it wouldn't be until 1925 (Gitlow v. New York) that the First Amendment was applied to the states, and not until 1947 (Everson v. Board of Education) that the separation of church and state was ruled absolute.

And here is the problem. A significant number of Christians believe that spreading the Gospel is an essential aspect of their faith. These people tend to be conservative and fundamentalist. The more activist believe that salvation must be universal, that Christians must not just spread the word, but must remake the world as they want it to be.

Their role in politics has been substantial, alternating between high profile and working behind the scenes. Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014) brought them to the forefront again. It also highlighted a curious aspect of conservative beliefs. These people are convinced that not only must they not engage in sinful behavior, but they must actively prevent sin in others. We see this in their response to the expansion of LGBT rights and in their efforts to ban abortion and limit access to contraception.

That we know. What we haven't noticed is that an executive order (2001) establishing the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives allowed religious organizations to use public money to impose their religion on others. The executive order was grounded in two things: the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (1993) and the "Thousand Points of Light" speech that George W. H. Bush delivered in 1988.

The Restoration Act provided for exemptions from otherwise generally applicable laws if those laws imposed an undue burden on religious practices. Bush's speech promoted the idea that private charities could better provide for the poor than could the government. The order did ensure that people seeking help could not be discriminated against. The order, however, forgot employees.

View post:
Fighting for our First Amendment rights

People were tweeting about everything from education to Ebola on Election Day. (AP Photo/Richard Drew, File) more >

The Justice Department wants a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit by Twitter that claims the social media companys First Amendment rights were violated, The Hill reported Monday.

Twitter said it tried to publicly release information on the number of orders it gets from the government to turn over customer information, but it was blocked by the government from doing so.

The DOJ argued that the department acted on national security concerns.

The additional material that Twitter seeks to publish is information that the Government has judged is properly protected classified national security information, the disclosure of which would risk serious harm to national security, the agency wrote in a brief.

But Twitter said its rights are being violated by not being able to publish the information and announced in October that it would sue the federal government.

Read more here:
Justice Dept. wants Twitter's First Amendment lawsuit tossed