Get Informed - Get Equipped - Get Inspired

"No people will tamely surrender their Liberties...
when knowledge is diffused and virtue is preserved"
- Sam Adams

PayPalDonateNow

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to Twitter

Art Tgiving Procl

George Washington’s Thanksgiving Proclamation of 1789 as published on the Mount Vernon Website:

Thanksgiving Proclamation of 1789 – President George Washington:

By the President of the United States of America, a Proclamation.

Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor– and whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness.

Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be– That we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks–for his kind care and protection of the People of this Country previous to their becoming a Nation–for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of his Providence which we experienced in the course and conclusion of the late war–for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty, which we have since enjoyed–for the peaceable and rational manner, in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national One now lately instituted–for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed; and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and in general for all the great and various favors which he hath been pleased to confer upon us.

and also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions– to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually–to render our national government a blessing to all the people, by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed–to protect and guide all Sovereigns and Nations (especially such as have shewn kindness unto us) and to bless them with good government, peace, and concord–To promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the encrease of science among them and us–and generally to grant unto all Mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand at the City of New York the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789.

Go: Washington

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to Twitter

Are we tired of electing unqualified people to office?  Are we tired of electing people to office and having them forget WHO they work for?  Are we tired of the government not only ignoring the Constitution but destroying it with their ignorance, apathy, and malice?  Perhaps its time we start treating these people like EMPLOYEES so they will stop acting like royalty!

With this frustration and the need for solutions in mind, I have developed the following job application that must be completed BY ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT; federal, State, County, City, School Board, and Sheriff.  If they refuse to complete the application we must withhold monetary support, endorsements, and refuse to elect them to office, no matter which party they claim loyalty.

~We have no right to complain if we refuse to take back control.~

A .pdf version of this application is available HERE     

Art Employment App         

We the People Elected Personnel Job Applicaton

THIS APPLICATION IS NOT AN EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT, but merely is intended to evaluate suitability for employment. It is the policy of We The People to provide equal employment opportunity to all qualified persons without discrimination on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, age, marital status, national origin, citizenship, disability, sexual orientation, veteran status, or any other status protected under state and federal law. It is also the policy of We The People to have the option of conducting pre-employment screening before a job offer is made. If a job offer is made, continued employment may be contingent upon proper defense of the Constitution, Rights, and Liberties of the People.  Knowledge and understanding of the US Constitution is essential for all positions at all levels.

PERSONAL INFORMATION

Name: Last: ___________________ First: _____________________ Middle: __________________________

Social Security #: _________________ Home Phone: ______________

Work Phone: ____________________

Please list below your current address and your two other most recent addresses:

Current/Street: ________________________City: __________State: ____ZIP: _______

Since (Mo/Yr): _____

Street: ________________________City: __________State: ____ZIP: ______From _____To ______

Street: ________________________City: __________State: ____ZIP: ______From _____To ______

EDUCATION

High School Attended: ________________________City/State: ________________Graduated? Yes No

_____________________________________________________________________________________Undergraduate College, Graduate School, Certification Class)

JOB QUALIFICATION:

Please answer all of the following questions. When necessary, note question number and use an extra sheet of paper to provide explanations.

  1. Yes ____No ____ Are you a natural born citizen of the United States? If the answer is “Yes,” proceed to Question #3. Answering “NO” will preclude you from certain representative offices by law.
  2. Yes ____No ____ Are you a legally naturalized citizen of the United States? Answering “NO” will preclude you from certain representative offices by law.
  3. Yes ____No ____ Do you understand who your boss is? Who?­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­__________________
  4. Yes ____No ____ Do you hold any loyalty, bond, or affection toward any foreign country or territory?
  5. Yes ____No ____ Have you ever been discharged or asked to resign from a job?  If yes, please explain:
  1. Yes ____No ____ Have you ever been convicted of or pled guilty to a felony or other crime?  If yes, please explain, (feel free to use additional sheets of paper as necessary):

Answering the following questions is required to complete this job application.  Failure to answer these questions will result in an incomplete application and will disqualify you as a candidate for the applied position.  YOU MUST answer all of the following questions. When necessary, note question number and use an extra sheets of paper to provide explanations.

  1.  Yes ____No ____ Does the Federal government have the “right” or the “authority” to take away your individual rights? Explain your answer:
  1.  Where do our individual rights come from?
  1.  What is the role of government in the lives of “free citizens?”
  1.  What will be your primary duty and obligation to the Constitutional and the people who hire you?
  1.  What was the legal compact (contract) between the 13 Independent States that created the Federal Government?
  1.  Yes ____No ____ Does the Supremacy Clause in Article VI of the US Constitution give the Federal Government and the Supreme Court the ultimate power to determine the Constitutionality of any law passed by Congress? Explain your answer:
  1.  Yes ____No ____ Do the States have the authority to limit the federal government to its Constitutional boundaries? Explain your answer:
  1.  Yes ____No ____ Would you support a federal law that defines the General Welfare Clause based on the “Original Intent of our Founders?” Explain your answer:
  1.  Why does the Bill of Rights include the 9th and 10th Amendments? Explain each and why they are both part of the US Constitution.
  1.  What does the “well-regulated militia” phrase mean in the Second Amendment?
  1.  What does “shall not be infringed” mean?
  1.  In your opinion, what are 2 current examples of the most egregious Federal overreach to Constitutional powers and what is your proposed remedy to each?
  1.  What training have you had to properly understand the US Constitution? (Law School doesn’t qualify as training for employment purposes)
  1.  Many believe the US Constitution is a living, breathing document. What is your view and why?
  1.  Describe what guides your moral compass.
  1.  Name three primary principles from the US Constitution that will guide you as our representative? Explain.
  1.  What is your understanding of “State Sovereignty?”
  1.  In your opinion what is the most important clause in the Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights?
  1.  Yes ____No ____ Would you support the repeal of the 17th Amendment? Explain your answer:
  1.  Have you read these primary source documents from our nation’s founding?

1100 Charter of Liberties____          Magna Carta ____              The Petition of Right of 1628____

The Grand Remonstrance____        Bill of Rights of 1689____   US Declaration of Independence _____

The US Constitution____         The Original Federalists Papers______   The Original Anti-Federalist Papers ______

  1.  Yes ____No ____ Do you agree to have your answers published for public review?

APPLICANT’S CERTIFICATION AGREEMENT

  1. I understand that I may submit a copy of my resume’ and that by submitting a resume’ I understand that it will be used only as supporting and additional background information. A resume is not an authorized substitute for a completed employment application.
  2. I understand that if I should choose to complete only a portion of the required employment application that the information submitted may not be enough information from which to base any determination on, and, as a result, my application may not receive full consideration for employment.
  3. I authorize the investigation of all statements contained in this application and release from all liability any persons or employers supplying such information, and I also release We The People from all liability that may result from making background investigations.
  4. I certify that the facts and information set forth in this application are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that any falsification, misrepresentation, or omission of facts on this application (or on any required documents) will be cause for denial of employment or immediate termination of employment, regardless of when or how discovered.
  5. I agree, if I am offered and accept a position, to conform to all existing and future workplace rules, regulations, policies and procedures of We The People and the Constitution of the United States.
  6. I understand and agree that We the People reserves the right to change any wage, hours of work and working conditions, in its sole discretion, at any time, as deemed necessary.
  7. I understand the employment relationship will be At Will, meaning that either party can end the employment relationship at any time, and for any reason, or no reason, through legal recall process, removal from office, or through proper elections.
  8. I understand that any employment offer is contingent upon my providing proof of identity and eligibility to work within the United States, prior to consideration of this application.
  9. I have read and reviewed the information contained in pages 1 through 3 of this employment application, and these 8 statements.

By signing this employment application I certify that I understand all of the information requested and that I have provided information that is truthful, complete and accurate.

__________________________________________ _____________________________

(Applicant Signature) (Today’s Date)

©2019 KrisAnneHall.com

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to Twitter

victor

Note from KrisAnne:  This is an entry under out guest author series by Victor Sperondeo.  Mr. Sperandeo was a 2008 inductee into the Trader Hall of Fame by Trader Magazine and has been included on Ziad Adelnour’s list of top 100 Wall Streeters.  Mr. Sperandeo was featured in the best-selling, The New Market Wizards: Conversations with America’s Top Traders, by Jack D. Schwager and Super Traders: Secrets and Successes of Wall Street’s Best and Brightest, by Alan Rubenfeld, has been profiled twice in Barron’s, The Wall Street Journal and Stocks & Commodities, and has appeared on CNBC, CNN, Fox and other networks.  I hope you enjoy this thesis as much as I do! ~ KrisAnne

Art Victor

 

It’s Impossible to Outlaw “Crazy” — The Government has a Better Chance of Curbing Being Struck by Lightning

by Victor Sperandeo

The outcry that takes place whenever a “Mass Shooting” occurs, especially in a “school”, is certainly deserved. However, politicians thinking that “laws” will curb these events is mindless and statistically impossible. Certainly, lessening these occurrences in schools is possible, and should be done. Visit any government building for effective tactics to accomplish this, as they have virtually zero incidence of shootings.

Moreover, some historical facts should be considered. The largest number of deaths both at a school and away from a school, were from a bomb, not a semi-automatic gun. Most of us remember Timothy McVeigh killing 168 (wounding 680) people in Oklahoma in 1995, but almost no one remembers the “Bath Michigan School” bombing of 1927. It killed 44 (38 elementary school children) and injured 58 other people. This was the largest mass murder of school children in US history! The bomber, Andrew Kehoe, did this because he was fired, lost an election, and had his taxes raised. He also killed himself, and his wife. Most (72%) of these mass killings end in suicides. Wouldn’t we all classify him as “crazy”?

The “free press” doesn’t use statistics to tell a historical story, but to promote an agenda such as gun confiscation. Using statistics in a misleading manner is pure propaganda. Manipulating statistics to seize free people's guns has NOTHING to do with stopping gun violence. See the article by the Daily Caller as an example “EXPOSED: Obama Advisors' Emails In Immediate Sandy Hook Aftermath Reveal Anti-Gun Agenda: 'Tap Peoples Emotions' - “Go for a vote this week asap before it fades. Tap peoples [sic] emotion. Make it simple - assault weapons.”

Furthermore, CNN published a story by Saeed Ahmed and Christina Walker on 5/18/18 called “There has been on average one school shooting every week this year.” To fabricate these “school SHOOTINGS” statistics, the writers counted a BB Gun shooting, and an accidental discharge of a gun during a safety class. These incidents and other far-reaching examples attempt to mislead the reader to think it’s a “mass shooting.”

Let’s review the real stats on “Mass Shootings” over a long period. Mother Jones has an excellent data base of mass shootings from 1982 to date: “US Mass Shootings, from 1982/August- 2019/August : Data from Mother Jones Investigation.” A “mass shooting” is an incident in which a random shooter targets people in general and where three or more people die by firearm related violence. According to this progressive left-wing organization, from August 1982 to, August 2019 (or 38 years), the total of such incidences is 114 . This comes to 3 mass shootings per year on average.

With this understanding, what are the odds of this event? Today’s population (according to the US Census Bureau) is reported to be 328,036,963 as of 1/17/19 .Let’s adjust this number for people between ages 15-64, who are most likely to be involved in a mass shooting, or 207 million people. The conservative “average population” that might commit a mass shooting from 1982-2019 an estimated (conservative)160 million per year in age group 15-64. The occurrences number a mass shooting at 0.00000002 or two one-millions of one-percent, (114 divided by 38 (years) or 3 incidences divided by 160 million). The only conclusion is that these 114 people can be deemed as having suffered from a psychosis manifested in a wild or aggressive way. Synonyms for psychosis are: mad, insane, out of one's mind, deranged, demented, not in one's right mind, crazed, lunatic, non- compos mentis, unhinged, i.e. crazy. Indeed, it is reported 72% of them committed or wanted/tried to commit suicide. In a population of people this large, certainly some very small fraction of people, suffer from psychosis, or crazy, while some are altruistic geniuses.

This statistic shows that the number is so small, you can’t legislate against it to eliminate crazy people. When you have a large population, the very few who want to do harm, “gun control laws” are impossible, as these people will always find a way to accomplish what is driving them, whether it is with guns, knives, trucks, bombs, etc.

It would be more effective to create a law against lightning deaths, as the odds of getting struck by and dying from lightning are much higher! So, in this case (20 years) 1,020 deaths divided by an average of 250,000,000 people is only 0.0000002 or two one hundred thousands of one percent. In the last 20 years, the average deaths annually from lightning numbers 51 average per year according to * The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). More people of all ages (thereby the 250,000,000 )can go outside,and can be stuck by lightning, than are likely to be a mass shooter.

Therefore, if those in government made a law that no one can be outside while it was raining, punishable by a fine or jail, far more people would be happy to comply, and the number of lightning deaths would decline. But not for mass shootings. Fines or jail don’t bother people who generally intend to commit murder, and who then are highly likely to kill themselves or die in jail.

With a population of 328+million people, no law can stop 3-11 crazy people from doing evil each year. Also note, as the population grows, mass shootings will slightly increase. This point is known by the Statists, who desire to rule over other people. Historically, as one can see, this is the true point of gun control; to rule by force without the people’s ability to fight back, and ultimately not preventing what is impossible to prevent.

If one wishes to see the proof, read Mao’s, and other dictators’ views on gun confiscation: “Every Communist must grasp the truth - Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun" (Mao). This is a slogan popular among Marxist-Leninist-Maoists.

Adolf Hitler: “The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjugated races to possess arms.”

Joseph Stalin: “Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas.”

Benito Mussolini: “First of all, the elimination of the so-called subversive elements. They were elements of disorder and subversion. On the morrow of each conflict I gave the categorical order to confiscate the largest possible number of weapons of every sort and kind.”

Vladimir Lenin: “One man with a gun can control 100 without one.”

Fidel Castro: moved against private gun ownership the second day he was in power. He sent his thugs throughout the island using the gun registry lists - compiled by the preceding Batista regime - to confiscate the people's firearms. Different tactics, same objective. A defenseless people don't give the all-wise leader any lip.

Hugo Chavez' government says the ultimate aim is to disarm all civilians. Venezuela has brought a new gun law into effect which bans the commercial sale of firearms and ammunition. 6/1/12

But Karl Marx, who actually wanted a revolution, said, “the workers must be armed and organized. The whole proletariat must be armed at once with muskets, rifles, cannon and ammunition... Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary.”

However, in contrast, George Washington believed: “A free people ought to be armed.” Indeed, the words in the 2nd Amendment: A well-regulated “militia”, (which means ALL THE PEOPLE, as permanent standing armies were not allowed See Article1, Section 8, Subclause 12 - 16: To provide for the calling forth the MILITIA to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions) being necessary to the security of a FREE STATE, the RIGHT (NOT PRIVILEGE) of the people to keep and bear arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. (Emphasis added).

With the fact that 3 people (or perhaps as a high 11) in a year, who would be certainly deemed crazy, out of 250,000 million adults today, does it seem reasonable to effectively attempt to overturn the Constitutional 2nd Amendment, or a Natural, (most would say God-given) Right? These are events that are unpredictable, but statistically inevitable. As for laws against “crazy” i.e. a psychopath - see the quote of Adolf Eichmann and see if a law would have changed his mind: “I will leap into my grave laughing because the feeling that I have five million human beings on my conscience is for me a source of extraordinary satisfaction.” This is the mindset the Government is using to take a Free People’s guns to stop a mass murderer!

*According to the NOAA, over the last 20 years, the United States averaged 51 annual lightning strike fatalities, placing it in the second position, just behind floods for deadly weather.[13][14] In the US, between 9% and 10% of those struck die,[15] for an average of 40 to 50 deaths per year (28 in 2008).[16]

 

Contact:  Victor Sperandeo (214) 969-0559

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to Twitter

Art Priv Publ

When Censorship Is OK

by KrisAnne Hall, JD

 

This may not be popular, but it is true:  One of the largest factors in the loss of #Liberty is the lack of understanding of the word "public."  The fact remains, just because I have a business where people can come in off the street & purchase my goods that does not make my business a public business.

The term "Public" as used by those who founded America was a term reserved strictly to places, products, and affairs conducted by government with the use tax dollars. Everything else is a "private" affair.

"...if once [the people] become inattentive to the public affairs, you & I, & Congress, & Assemblies, judges & governors shall all become wolves. it seems to be the law of our general nature, in spite of individual exceptions;"  Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, 1787.

Americans have been taught to believe that just because I sell donuts in a store front to people I don't know, I am engaging in a "public" affair.

Lets be clear: Public property is property purchased, maintained, and operated by the use of tax dollars. Private property is property purchased, maintained, and operated by the use of personal funds.

Now we are rapidly sliding down an extremely slippery slope where if you are doing something that is seen or heard by other people it is now a public affair.


Here is the problem with that error - Everything becomes publicly governed and NOTHING is privately owned. Your business is not your own. Your website is not your own. Your words, your life, your choices will soon belong to whomever has the most control and power over the public realm.


Now we have people claiming that just because privately owned social media platforms allows people to use their privately owned, personally funded platforms they are now somehow "public domain;" either because the people say so or the federal government says so.

  • The federal government has no delegated authority to designate a private business as public forum. When the FCC or some Federal Act, like the Communications Decency Act, attempts to force private businesses under government control by defining them as public businesses, Americans ought to recognize that as completely unconstitutional and fundamentally tyrannical (can you say communist?).


A shopping mall is NOT a public forum, it is a privately owned business. If a website, which is a privately owned and paid for internet address can be designated by the federal government as a public domain, what is to stop them from designating your home, a privately owned physical address, as a public domain? The communists actually did this in Russia.

  • People do not have free speech, press, or assembly rights on someone else’s private property. They have those rights on public property. See the definition of of public & private above.


If someone has entered into a contract or a lease agreement with a private company (such as a social media platform) the remedy is civil - between two private individuals. It is NOT a matter for government force.


Americans who claim to understand the principles of Liberty ought not cry out to government to force private property owners to surrender their private property rights to government enforcement of any message foreign and offensive to their own. Americans ought to see that as an unconstitutional taking of property rights.

Hannah Winthrop, one of our founding mothers, said this:

“How often do we see people blind to their own interests precipitately maddening on to their own destruction!” Hannah Winthrop to Mercy Otis Warren, 1773

When Americans who claim to be supporters and defenders of the Constitution conflate the terms public and private, demand freedom of speech "rights" on someone's private property, and then demand government use the power of many to force submission of a private business owner to opinions, subjects, pictures, speech, etc that they do not believe, these Americans are truly maddening on to their own destruction. They must be unaware of an axiomatic truth:


The power of the sword you give government to force your beliefs is the same power of the sword government will eventually use to persecute your beliefs.

The purpose of a just government is to secure individual rights not to establish by force one person's rights as superior to another.  This entire conversation is why I endeavor to always be, Liberty over Security, Principle over Party, and Truth over Personality.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to Twitter

Art SB64

 

Religious Liberty in Jeopardy By Mandates

Re: Florida SB 64- An Act Relating to Exemptions from School-Entry Health Requirements

By KrisAnne Hall, JD

 

Florida has long been a State that shows great respect for religious liberty. That is about to change with the passage of SB 64.  This bill would remove the right of free exercise of religion for Floridians all across the State by mandating them to engage in behavior contrary to their religious beliefs.  Floridians must prevent this unreasonable intrusion.

SB 64 threatens religious freedom by imposing mandatory vaccinations upon individuals contrary to their religious belief by removing the right to object to those vaccinations based upon religious grounds (Florida Statute 1003.22(1)).  Vaccinations have been available to Americans since the early 1800s.  Once governments began attempting to mandate vaccinations upon citizens, many people began to object.  Why would someone object if we are simply talking about eradicating disease?  

Many religious faiths hold murder to be a violation of their beliefs and hold abortion to fall into the category of murder.  Shockingly, the list of mandatory vaccinations for children include vaccinations that are derived from aborted fetal tissue.  Vaccinations for Chicken Pox, Hepatitis-A, and Rubella, are produced from aborted fetal tissue and at this time, pharmaceutical companies offer no alternatives. According to a report issued by Liberty Counsel, most physicians who oppose abortion do not realize these vaccines are produced from aborted fetal tissue.  The Rubella vaccination know as RA/27/3,  developed during the Rubella epidemic of 1964, is so named based on the fact that it is derived from aborted fetal tissue: R stands for Rubella, A stands for Abortus, 27 stands for the 27th fetus tested, and 3 stands for the 3rd tissue explant.  In layman’s terms, there were 26 abortions prior to identifying the right formula for the vaccination.  Aborted babies were sent to two scientists at the Wistar Institute by the names of Plotkin and Hayflick.  By dissecting the kidneys and lungs of these aborted babies Plotkin and Hayflick developed the  virus strain identified as WI-38 (Wistar Institute 38).  Further development of this vaccination was created in the 1970’s from a male baby at 14 weeks gestation. (HistoryOfVaccinies.org – Human Cell Strains in Vaccine Development)  The cells from these aborted babies have also been used to create many other commonly used vaccinations, two of which are the Hepatitis-A and Chicken Pox vaccinations.  With these facts we can discern that even vaccinations that may not actually contain aborted fetal tissue, were actually developed initially using the cells of aborted babies. (see Liberty Counsel report)

Not only does the Chicken Pox vaccination contain strains derived from aborted babies, it also contains monosodium glutamate (MSG), a chemical compound the FDA has identified as dangerous to infants, children, pregnant women or women of child bearing age, and people with mental or emotional disorders.  According to the Liberty Counsel report, Dr. Arthur Lavin of the Department of Pediatrics at St. Luke’s Medical Center in Cleveland, Ohio, strongly opposes the chicken pox vaccine.  Some experts believe the Chicken Pox vaccination can actually signal a more serious underlying chronic condition called “Atypical Measles.” (see Liberty Counsel report)  Although the FDA claims less than a 10% chance that serious illness and death caused by vaccinations, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (a federal government program) pays nearly $100 million per year to victims and families for vaccine related disabilities and deaths.

In addition to the dangers and use of aborted babies to create vaccines, many people simply hold sincerely religious beliefs against vaccinations in general.  One religious objection is the firmly held belief that God created the human body as a temple and that the body should not be destroyed by injecting a virus into it.  Although a few of the vaccinations containing aborted babies have alternatives that do not contain aborted baby tissue, those alternatives do contain animal bi-products.  There are many people in Florida that have firmly held convictions against ingesting any animal products into their bodies.  Mandatory vaccinations that are designed to prevent sexually transmitted diseases also create problems for those with particular religious convictions.  These parents believe sexually transmitted diseases ought to be prevented through abstinence and not injections into the body that condone sexual activity contrary to their religious beliefs.

There are less intrusive ways to deal with these issues and the courts are not inconsiderate of the rights of those with deeply held religious beliefs.  For example, Liberty Counsel won two cases in New York City where the school system attempted to mandate the Hepatitis-B vaccination on the children of two families.  These families expressed their sincerely held religious beliefs against vaccinations and the schools expelled the children of both families.  Liberty Counsel filed a federal law suit on behalf of both families and the federal court held that the children had to be readmitted to school and the school could not force the parents to vaccinate their children. 

In another case, Liberty Counsel filed a lawsuit against Arkansas’s law mandating vaccinations and denying religious exceptions.  Because of Liberty Counsel’s law suit, the Arkansas legislature promptly passed new legislations providing for exemptions for philosophical and religious objectors, as well as objectors who claim medical necessity.

We cannot allow our State level representatives to simply disregard the Religious Liberty of the people.  America’s founders fought desperately to establish a place where all could be equally free to live true to their religious beliefs without government intrusion.  The very principle of separation of church and state requires government to not infringe upon the religious beliefs of the people. 

John Witherspoon founder of America and former president of Princeton University said, “There is not a single instance in history in which civil liberty was lost, and religious liberty preserved entire.”  Senate Bill 64 is a deliberate expression of State mandates contrary to Religious Liberty through the removal the religious exemptions intentionally put in place to protect those essential rights. 

For the preservation of civil and religious liberty for all, Floridians must say NO to SB64.

Please feel free to contact the attorneys at Liberty Counsel for specific guidance, in whatever State you might live in.  https://www.lc.org/

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to Twitter