A federal court ruled Wednesday that Congress can continue to open its sessions each day with a prayer, and upheld the House’s ability to pick and choose who’s allowed to lead the prayer. U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, a Bush appointee who sits in Washington, D.C., rejected a challenge by Daniel Barker, co-president of Freedom From Religion Foundation, who said he was not permitted to give an opening invocation, even though other guest chaplains have been permitted. Judge Collyer said House rules didn’t permit him to lead the prayer because he had left his faith. Judge Collyer also said an opening prayer has been a tradition in this country for more than two centuries, and the Supreme Court has ruled it doesn’t violate the Establishment Clause. “To decide that Mr. Barker was discriminated against and should be permitted to address the House would be to disregard the Supreme Court precedent that permits legislative prayer,” Judge Collyer wrote in her opinion on Wednesday. Mr. Barker said her ruling was tainted by personal bias against nonreligious people. “The judge’s acquiescence in this inequity sends a crystal clear message that our government, founded upon our entirely secular Constitution, may discriminate with impunity against atheists and freethinkers,” he said. But House Speaker Paul D. Ryan applauded the ruling. “Since the first session of the Continental Congress, our nation’s legislature has opened with a prayer to God. Today, that tradition was upheld and the freedom to exercise religion was vindicated,” said Mr. Ryan, Wisconsin Republican. He added the return of Majority Whip Rep. Steve Scalise, Louisiana Republican, who was shot earlier this year by a left wing zealot, reminded Congress of the power of prayer.
Indeed.. This ruling was spot on, and with precedent from the Supreme Court. This idiot from FFRF got slapped down, and rightfully so. This is a small, yet important, victory for religious freedom, and for freedom of speech. As we’ve documented on numerous occasions here at The Daily Buzz… The whole notion of a “separation of church and state” is bs. There is no such thing. That phrase originated in a letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to the members of a church where he raised the idea in a philosophical sense. That’s it. Nowhere in our founding legal documents (i.e. The U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, etc.) is that phrase found. Our founders intended freedom OF religion; NOT freedom FROM religion. Kudos to Judge Collyer for her spot-on analysis, and excellent ruling!
The Republican-controlled House on Tuesday approved a bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy — a measure backed by the Trump White House but still facing long odds in the Senate. The measure passed 237 to 189. “So often we get caught up in the policies of this issue and we forget that these are babies, for goodness sake,” Alabama Republican Rep. Martha Roby said in a speech on the House floor. “They feel pain and we need to protect them.” The measure faced strong opposition from abortion-rights lawmakers. “When abortion is banned, it does not go away,” Oregon Democratic Rep. Suzanne Bonamici said on the floor before the vote. “It drives women to unsafe back alleys and to dangerous self-induced abortion.” The White House said Monday that it “strongly supports” the efforts to “secure critical pro-life protections” and that the bill provides children with the “stronger protections” they deserve. “The bill, if enacted into law, would help to facilitate the culture of life to which our Nation aspires,” the White House also said in a statement. “Additionally, the bill would promote a science-based approach to unborn life, as recent advancements have revealed that the physical structures necessary to experience pain are developed within 20 weeks of fertilization.” The measure, if enacted into law, would allow the procedure after 20 weeks in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother and would not penalize women. However, it would criminalize other abortions after 20 weeks and punish abortion providers with a maximum five-year jail sentence. The landmark 1973 Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade protects women’s right to have an abortion. However, more than a dozen states now ban them after 20 weeks. “It’s science: unborn babies feel pain by at least 20 weeks. Late, dismemberment abortions are too extreme for America. #TheyFeelPain,” bill sponsor Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., tweeted ahead of the vote Monday. Franks’ bill enjoyed the support of fellow conservatives in the GOP conference and from the influential Susan B. Anthony List pro-life group. However, the bill needs the unlikely support of at least eight Democrats to pass in the narrowly GOP-controlled Senate. South Carolina GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham has companion legislation that could be introduced as early as Tuesday..
For the benefit of those who are new to The Daily Buzz… We tend to avoid the issue of abortion. But, from time to time, we post stories like this which are potentially significant. Unless the Supreme Court decides to over-rule itself (which is possible, but highly unlikely), abortions will continue to be legal in the United States. But, that doesn’t mean there is an absolute right to have them on demand all they way up to, and including, so-called “partial birth abortions.” And, this legislation seems to be a smart, science-based, common-sense approach to slightly regulate, and discourage, late-term abortions. This legislation by no means is banning abortions, as Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR) suggested. But, that’s the kind of over-the-top, deceitful grandstanding we’ve come to expect from the radical left who have no interest in facts. They’re just pandering to their liberal base, NOW, and Planned Parenthood. Typical…
Lawmakers on Tuesday debated the merits of a Republican-backed bill that would make it easier for individuals to buy gun silencers. Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., introduced the measure in the Sportsmen’s Heritage and Recreational Enhancement Act, the Hill reported. The provision calls for a less extensive and instant background check. Duncan’s bill is reportedly dubbed the Hearing Protection Act. The debate was reportedly delayed after the shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., in June in a park in Arlington, Va. Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., reportedly said it seems that sportsmen “have to choose between damaging their hearing and being able to hunt, shoot, target practice.” Democrats said the bill is dangerous, and would make it more difficult to determine where shots are being fired in an active-shooter situation. “We should not make it easier for anyone to obtain these weapons of war,” Rep. Jimmy Gomez, D-Calif., said, according to the report.
What a moron.. I’ve been in war, and I was never issued a suppressor! This bill is eminently reasonable, and we support it 100%. Despite what you may see on tv, suppressors are rarely used in criminal activity. And, unless you live in the people’s republic of fascist California, you can readily get these things already. This just makes the process easier, and less bureaucratic. That’s all. Anyway, to read the rest of this article, click on the text above.