im a little disturbed by the 1st amendment right about now

[garrettwombat]

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.

lets read that again

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.


what if congress isnt the one making the law???

and as i thought further upon it....



where does it protect free speech????
it says it protects us from congress passing a law...

but it doesnt necessarily grant us free speech...


is this why our government can trample on free speech??? because it doesnt exist???

please someone, show me where i am granted free speech.

[gaazn]

i guess that would allow "executive orders"

[nate895]

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.

lets read that again

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.


what if congress isnt the one making the law???

and as i thought further upon it....



where does it protect free speech????
it says it protects us from congress passing a law...

but it doesnt necessarily grant us free speech...


is this why our government can trample on free speech??? because it doesnt exist???

please someone, show me where i am granted free speech.

The Constitution only applies to the Federal Government, but your state I'm almost 100% certain also has it in their bill of rights.

[nate895]

i guess that would allow "executive orders"

No, the Constitution doesn't grant the President the power to do such a thing. The bill of rights states mere truisms.

[LibertyEagle]

Government does not grant our rights. Our right come from our creator. You own your rights.

You need to understand this clearly, because this is a huge difference between the UN Charter and the US Constitution. If you allow the government to say THEY grant you your rights, then you are agreeing that THEY have the power to remove them from you.

[Aldanga]

Only Congress is given the authority to make laws in the Constitution. The Executive is supposed to enforce the laws. The Executive can't make the laws.

I believe the States Constitutions must not contradict the Union's Constitutions. Is that correct?

[Cleaner44]

No, the Constitution doesn't grant the President the power to do such a thing. The bill of rights states mere truisms.

+1776

[Chester Copperpot]

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.

lets read that again

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.


what if congress isnt the one making the law???

and as i thought further upon it....



where does it protect free speech????
it says it protects us from congress passing a law...

but it doesnt necessarily grant us free speech...


is this why our government can trample on free speech??? because it doesnt exist???

please someone, show me where i am granted free speech.

The bill of rights Grants no laws.. But these are your inalienable rights: Life, Liberty, and pursuit of Happiness. The bill of rights protects your rights by keeping the govt from infringing on them

[Richandler]

Yah the big problem with the most people who interpret the consitution is that they think that if it doesn't say it's prohibited then that means it's fair game. Of course bare in mind there are lists of what they can do and an amendment that says they cannot do anything besides what's on that list. But Americans don't follow their constitution.

[Wyurm]

The constitution is set so that if it denies congress the ability to do something, that constitutes a denial for any other government body. In other words, your rights are something you are born with and nobody has a right to take them away. So, as long as the government is controlled by the Constitution, all your rights are secure. If a different governing body takes over, or the US government abandons the Constitution, then your rights are under attack, see the 2nd amendment for instructions on how to proceed.

[gaazn]

the constitution doesn't allow the president to do a lot of things. but lately, the executive branch hasn't honored the constitution. they are slowly killing it right before our eyes. due to patriot act, any day the government can label a group a terrorist and take away their right to peaceably assemble. who knows, one day the government might label a religion a terrorist religion (maybe like branch davidians).

[FreeTraveler]

The other Amendments simply describe our rights. The only Amendment that protects our rights is the Second.

[literatim]

That is why the idea of separation of church and state is bogus.