Where does anyone get off requiring a free citizen to get permission to exercise a right? Who has legitimate moral authority to impose prior restraints on rights that, depending on your beliefs, are either “endowed by our Creator” or inherent to the condition of being human? [More]If photo IDs disenfranchise minority voters as "progressives" claim, why doesn't the same requirement disenfranchise them from their right to keep and bear arms?
2 comments:
Leftists are people of principle. They embrace whatever principle serves them in the moment, and then discard it the instant that it becomes inconvenient for them.
I smell the usual conspircy to avoid precedent here.
My memory may be faulty, but I see to remember (an entirely worthy) federal lawsuit by some Amish dude claiming denial of constitutional rights over this very issue was making its way to SCOTUS. Then suddenly, the dude withdrew his suit… probably because he was promised that the state would correct the problem. And what you see here is the state correcting its problem in precisely the way tyrant states do — they carved out a narrow exception for this guy and anybody who unavoidably resembles him closely enough, while retaining the onerous civil rights violation for everybody else.
So yeah, this charade should not be allowed to occur.
Post a Comment