Constitution Being Shredded in Nevada

Seems the government of Henderson, Nevada – as represented by its police – believe the function under the system in Egypt, Syria, & Iran.

American Constitution means nothing to them – they will arrest you for not allowing them to commandeer your private home so they can spy on a domestic violence matter.

BNOTE the idiot cops don’t know enough to go to the place where the couple is arguing, or the wife, knife in hand, is threatening to castrate hubby – that is domestic violence… right?  Immediate threat to life is domestic violence … isn’t it?  So the cops are going to watch until the threat has been carried out and there is a body on the floor.

A recent lawsuit claims that their Third Amendment rights were violated on July 10, 2011, when police officers commandeered their homes and arrested two family members for “obstruction.”

This seems to be the situation:  

Police had gone to the 300 block of Evening Side Avenue, near Horizon Ridge Parkway and the Las Vegas Beltway, for an alleged domestic violence incident at Phillip White Jr.’s home… White was believed to have barricaded himself and a child inside his home at 363 Evening Side. SWAT officers closed all entrances and exits to the neighborhood. The standoff lasted hours. Police began to call people in their homes.

So there’s a child and parent in the house… and the cops think they can occupy a neighbors home in order to gain a ‘tactical advantage’ against the occupant of the” house where alleged domestic abuse is occurring.

WHAT WERE THEY PLANNING?  To have a sniper take a shot at the child, or the parent?  Or maybe just riddle the house with bullets and let everyone inside die?  What type of tactical advantage do you gain from being outside the problem area – the house was sealed off … where is the advantage of commandeering a neighbor’s home and arresting them?

This is how you treat the homeowner whose house you are stealing the use of: ”As plaintiff Anthony Mitchell stood in shock, the officers aimed their weapons at Anthony Mitchell and shouted obscenities at him and ordered him to lie down on the floor.” 

Invade a home, curse at the owner and order them onto the floor – with the full knowledge they have done nothing more that be home when you invaded – that is how the Henderson, Nevada  police believe America is run – and they have apparently been supported by the town government.  If they were supported, the cops would be out on the asses and an official apology would have been issued at least as soon as the town prosecutors were notified of the arrest… ideally before.

“Confused and terrified, plaintiff Anthony Mitchell remained curled on the floor of his living room, with his hands over his face, and made no movement. …” and then, the police “fired multiple “pepperball” rounds at plaintiff as he lay defenseless on the floor of his living room.”

THE MOST HARM TO THE MOST PEOPLE

NOW INVOLVES OPENINGLY VIOLATING

THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION

WILL ANYTHING BE DONE?

REMEMBER!

HENDERSON NEVADA

IS DEFENDING ITS RIGHT

TO SPIT ON THE CONSTITUTION

IT WOULD APPEAR,

THE STATE OF NEVADA

!!!!! SUPPORTS HENDERSON !!!!!

GOES WITHOUT SAYING

-- BUT I’LL SAY IT ANYWAY --

GOVERNOR Brian Edward Sandoval IS A REPUBLICAN

THE MOST HARM TO THE MOST PEOPLE

THE GOP WAY OF LIFE

Defense of Marriage Act = illegal

OK, finally … after the dishonesty of 1996, and Clinton’s failure of spine as reflected in his signing of DOMA, rather than issuing a VETO!

If these DOMA characters really wanted to “defend marriage”, they would have declared marriage a religious function and  declared the terms “marriage, married” and any related terms, as they appear in Federal Law,to now refer to Civil Unions Licensed by the States.

A marriage would hence forth be a ceremony officiated over by a religious figure and subject to the laws of the religious institution officiating (Hence, Catholics could not get divorced, Jews would require Rabbinical ‘Get’, etc).

They would also make it clear that Religious marriages are fully subject to religious tribunals, and are outside the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts.  Qualification for any State decreed, or provided, benefits would be available to those joined through Civil Unions, or any Religious marriages, providing they are licensed.  Thus, one can ‘marry’ without filing for a license – but they would have no Federal legal standing.

Failure to adhere to a Religious judgment would be deemed a ‘breech of contract’ and prosecuted in Civil Court by either the religious institution, or respective parties.  Civil Divorce Laws do NOT apply in religious marriages … and cannot be applied in any civil action.

The DOMA people will therefore get what they claim they seek, a declaration that marriage is a Divine Act.

Of course, because the DOMA people are hypocrites and have only harm as their goal, they will reject this.

Saint Paul’s Joke establishes here is no Biblical basis for the rejection of Gay Unions – but there is a clear and explicit basis to reject bi-sexual activities or any act of deception (“passing” or being “in the closet”).

Saint Paul’s Joke also establishes – chapter and verse – that the average Christian violates Romans 2:26 and therefore violates the basis for their religious salvation.

But DOMA people are happy with going to Hell – they just want to take everyone else with them.

Anti-Allah … Anti-Mohammed

In Nigeria we find the typical anti-Allah, anti-Islam, organization.  It is called Boko Haram, and claims to represent Islam  … but represents militants who are immoral and deliberately violate the Koran.

Recently, they organized a suicidal Church bombing.  But attacks on Christians are only authorized AFTER Isa returns.  And then, only against evil Christians.

Suicide is forbidden… self-sacrifice is acceptable.  the difference is basic, in suicide you knowingly go into a situation with the intent to die.  You also, as in the Nigeria instance, or the attack on the World Trade Center, seek to murder innocents – which is also forbidden.

Evil leaders, priests, who are supposed to enforce the Koran’s teachings show their anti-Islam posture by making up rhetorical justifications for violations.

As we see in SAINT PAUL’S JOKE, Rome is due to be destroyed, within the next generation.  The Book of Revelation – some translations – identify the Church of Rome as the Church of Satan.  An Irish Monk, 1000 years ago, predicted all the Popes, including the next & last one – Petros – who will oversee Rome’s demise in a period of tribulation.  Will he finally be wrong?

If he is not, then it follows that the Islamic prophecy is to be fulfilled then – without the aid of these evil people, who will fall with the rest of the evil ones … and that their families and supporters with them.

Of course, those who do not believe in religion – like the Islamic Militants who has dem9onstrated their disdain for the Koran – shall ignore the warning.  It is, in the end, SAINT PAUL’S JOKE.  What is written vs what is practiced in the name of that which was never written, or intended.

The Church dies, the militants die, they all fail the final judgment.  Or, there is no judgment and they are doing what is allowed – because there is no deity to set the rules.  So, there is no reason for us.

THE MOST HARM TO THE MOST PEOPLE  

Abortion -- Most Harm group Grows

Abortion Fight Complicates Debate on Health Care, a September 29, 2009 Tomes article by DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK shows "The Most Harm to the Most People" advocates are growing in number. That bodes ill for America's future as a world power.

The issue here is abortion, but it affects everything associated with growing a population which is strong and health. Consider this quoted summary:
"Abortion opponents in both the House and the Senate are seeking to block the millions of middle- and lower-income people who might receive federal insurance subsidies to help them buy health coverage from using the money on plans that cover abortion."

And now consider the projected outcome:
"Abortion-rights supporters say such a restriction would all but eliminate from the marketplace private plans that cover the procedure, pushing women who have such coverage to give it up. Nearly half of those with employer-sponsored health plans now have policies that cover abortion, according to a study by the Kaiser Family Foundation."

Half of the free market choice the Republicans say they want ... would vanish. And for what? So a woman can die from a tubal pregnancy? Or so that fetus and mother can die because the baby is not viable, but if carried to term would kill the mother?

How about this? A woman wants an abortion because she knows the family cannot afford the baby (rubber broke, diaphragm shifted, that pill evidenced its 1% failure rate) and they were responsibly using birth control. SO! Because of an accident, or product defect, the family is to be saddled with an estimated quarter million dollar expense.

Who pays for the kid? By definition, they are too poor. OH Right, we give tax breaks to the rich, so the burden shifts to the middle class and poor. An estimated 1 million abortions a year (which, is actually reflecting a steady decline relative to population growth, and since ROE both an actual real number and percentage decrease in abortions).

Given social service costs and other costs ... the deficit will grow by a quarter TRILLION DOLLARS ... just to cover those kids ... THINK ABOUT IT! Extra Schools, welfare, special assistance for kids with medical and mental birth defects (the very ones that would be aborted) and YOU and your kids get to pay for them -- for the rest of their lives.

That's how the most harm doctrine works. Take an issue that seems harmless -- and appear to be interjecting morality -- and the net affect is to harm countless numbers over decades ... with no real benefit.

OK. Some are going to yell the morality bit. Question!
1. Is morality a decision for the individual, upon which their personal salvation depends? Or,
2. Is morality something which society determines for the individual and for which they have no personal responsibility?

The moral argument -- society imposed prevention of "sin" -- argues that there is no personal responsibility. The argument becomes, Society did not prevent it; therefore it was not deemed a moral question or responsibility; and therefore those who failed to make the law are moral culpable -- not I.

Think in terms of stealing ... is the individual responsible before or after the act? Think in terms of murder (when birth rights have been achieved by birth process -- as biblically dictated). Do we stop the individual (outlaw guns, imprison anyone with a gun, knife or other weapon which could kill) before the fact -- or wait for the action?

If abortion is murder, as abortion opponents claim, then those involved should be tried and sentenced as premeditated murders. Since they do not enact laws to that effect, they are admitting they are liars about the reality of the action. Again, biblically, the birth right begins at emergence of a limb from the womb -- abortion was well known in biblical times, but there are absolutely no laws related to it. Though there is a law dealing with violence against a pregnant woman that results in miscarriage (effectively an induced abortion).

The Most Harm To the Most People. proponents are growing