|
Obama’s Attack on the Church – The Mark of a Tyrant |
|
By KrisAnne Hall http://www.KrisAnneHall.com
February 13, 2012
An understanding of history is the only thing that can
illuminate our understanding of religious liberty. Our ignorance of history (not to mention a
dangerous level of apathy) is allowing a tyrant to erode the liberty that
people of faith have enjoyed for over two centuries. We believe that we have moved beyond the days
of kings and serfs, yet here we are, repeating the very history our forefathers
attempted to prevent us from repeating. It is exactly the same show that was played out again and again throughout
the English history that gave us our founding documents, just different
characters. The current tyrannical King
of America is forcing the church to succumb to the rule of the sovereign in
opposition to the dictates of conscience. Repeating what occurred in 1066, in 1213, in 1628, in 1641, and in 1689. Journey with me, as we roll back the clock
and watch the parallels unfold.
In 1066 England, William I takes the throne and begins
forcing his rule over the people of England. A people, who because of the agreement of 1041 had become accustomed to participation
in their government and had established a common law they felt was fair and
just for their time. William I, however
had different ideas. He and his sons continued
to fundamentally transform England, up until Henry I took the throne. Henry is the signer of the 1100 Charter of
Liberties in which he promised to end the tyranny of his father and
brother. He made a charter with the
people to end all evil and oppressive practices as carried out by the
crown. Interestingly enough, what the
people of 1100 England felt was evil and oppressive, we might find alarmingly
familiar.
Besides promising to end the
evil inheritance taxes, and ensuring that lawmakers were subject to the laws
they made, Henry promised to abandon the practice of requiring the
ecclesiastical leaders of the Church of England to do the government’s
bidding. Henry made a promise to the
people, that first and foremost, he would declare the church free of government
interference:
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Justice Ginsburg Violates Her Oath |
|
By KrisAnne Hall http://KrisAnneHall.com
February 3, 2012
If you are wondering what causes the
destruction of America, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, may
give part of the answer to this question.
Al
Hayat TV in Egypt interviewed Justice
Ginsburg asking
her for the advice she would give Egypt in writing the Constitution for their
newly formed government. Her reply to
this question gives insight into this her thoughts and understanding of the
very Constitution she has given an oath to support and defend.
“I can’t speak as to what the Egyptian
experience should be” she said, “because I am operating under a rather old
Constitution, the United States in comparison to Egypt is a very new nation,
yet we have the oldest Constitution still in force in the world…”
Immediately, Ginsburg diminishes the value
of our Constitution because it is the “oldest Constitution”. She is completely ignoring the fact that it
is the oldest Constitution because of the very foundation and principles it
espouses. Our founders, although wise
and possibly geniuses, were not making up things as they went along, they built
a nation upon 700 years of experience with human nature, tyranny, and Liberty
in mind. Our Constitution is not over
200 years old, but in reality, its principles and practices are over 1,000
years old. And it IS its age that gives
it its credibility. It IS the tried and
tested principles and practices that make America the shining city on a hill
and the envy of the world.
But Mrs. Ginsburg’s criticism of our
Constitution doesn’t end there. When
asked by the reporter if Egypt should look to the US Constitution as an example
to form their own, her response is shocking.
“You should be aided by all the constitutional
writings that have gone on since the end of World War II, I would not look to
the US Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012.”
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Expatriation - No Citizenship, No Constitutional Rights |
|
by KrisAnne Hall - www.krisannehall.com
January 10, 2012~updated January 11, 2012
At the risk of sounding like an alarmist, again, here comes
another dangerous tool aimed at avoiding Constitutional restrictions in the
name of fighting terrorism. It is clear
that our Congressmen believe that the pesky Constitution severely limits them
in their noble efforts to keep us poor defenseless little citizens safe. Members of Congress vehemently defended their
vote for NDAA by stating that US Citizens were specifically excluded from
detention under the counterterrorism provisions. Although we know that
to be doubtful, Senators Joe Liebermann and Scott Brown along with
Representatives Charles Dent, Jason Altmire, Robert Latta and Frank Wolf are
working to make that defense irrelevant - eliminate the person’s citizenship
and he HAS no Constitutional rights – problem solved. These men have submitted for review S. 1698 and H.R. 3166,
bills that will be better known as the Enemy Expatriation Act.
Interesting how the words of our founders still come back to
haunt us. In the Letter from a Federal
Farmer 8, the author warns us that:
Men may always be too
cautious to commit alarming and glaring iniquities; but they, as well as
systems, are liable to be corrupted by slow degrees.
That is exactly what has happened. The elimination of Constitutional rights of
US Citizens are being eroded by slow degrees. Consider the following:
Immediately after 9/11, Congress
passes the Patriot Act, legislation that in part allows the FBI to conduct
warrantless searches and seize people and property without probable cause and without
judicial review.
Next we have Janet Napolitano issuing in an OFFICIAL
REPORT of the Department of Homeland Security stating that soldiers returning
from Iraq and those who oppose abortion, along with others who hold conservative
American values are the real potential terrorists.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Can We Legislate Morality? |
|
by KrisAnne Hall - www.krisannehall.com
January 9, 2012
“Can we legislate
morality?” This is a very relevant
question that deserves a serious answer. But what is really meant by this
question? The idea of “legislating
morality” often gives people the impression that we can create a moral society through the creation of laws. Fact is - we cannot. As a prosecutor I became acutely aware of the
apparently widely held view that the criminal justice system will “reform”
people. We could save ourselves a lot of
heartache and a lot of money if we just accepted the reality that the criminal
justice system, our jails, our prisons, are not designed to reform people, they
are designed to punish people for doing bad things. The punishment
is what is supposed to make people change their mind about committing future
crimes. More laws and more prisons will
not magically create a moral society.
We cannot deny, however, that all laws are based upon shared
moral values. When a society loses that
morality, we find ourselves in a situation where we are tempted to compensate
by creating more laws. This is what
causes people to put the cart before the horse and believe morality can be, or
should be legislated. We have become a
society that treats symptoms instead of diseases. This situation is no different. The symptom is an ever increasing lawless
society; the disease is an ever decreasing moral society. If we want the government to stop “legislating
morality”, we must become, once again a society of individuals that upholds our
shared moral values. We may not be able
to legislate morality, but as our founders warned, we cannot afford to lose it.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Will a Spineless Congress Allow More Obama Lawlessness? |
|
By KrisAnneHall http://www.KrisAnneHall.com
January 4, 2012
About six months ago I gave REAL reasons why Obama should be impeached. Now as part of President Obama's fundamental transformation of America, this lawless tyrant is intent upon completely overturning one of the most fundamental characteristics of our Republic; Separation of Powers. The checks and balances in the American system were instituted for the express purpose of combating the rise of a tyrannical and oppressive government.
Nonetheless, on December 31, 2011 Josh Earnest, White House deputy press secretary said, “the president will have a larger playing field. If that includes Congress, all the better," But, he added, "that's no longer a requirement." The president did not waste any time in thumbing his nose at the rule of law. Just today, the President announced the “recess appointment” for the controversial Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and three new members to the National Labor Relations board. So what is the problem? Congress is NOT IN RECESS. The President has made a complete end run of Congress and has violated his limitations in Separation of Powers. But what is the big deal about Separation of Powers?
James Madison points out in Federalist 47 that“The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” |
|
Read more...
|
|
The Inalienable Right to Life |
|
by KrisAnne Hall -www.KrisAnneHall.com
January 4, 2012
It seems to be growing increasingly popular to use the 10th
Amendment to justify carte blanche legislative authority within the
states. Even some Presidential candidates
have implied that because of the 10th Amendment, states can “pass
whatever laws they want.” Recently, others
have said that if a state wants to legalize abortion, the 10th
Amendment gives the state the power to do so. I would like to assert that some issues cannot be legislated by the states
and in particular abortion is NOT a state’s rights issue, and here’s why:
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Ignorant Judges are Lethal to Liberty |
|
By KrisAnne Hall - www.KrisAnneHall.com
December 28, 2011
It seems that every week there is some new attack on
Liberty. Last month, it was the US Navy
trying to remove Religious Liberty in the name of “Separation of Church and
State.” Last week it was our Congress,
removing the right of trial and habeas corpus from US Citizens. I attribute this to the dismal state of our
education system. We the people are so
very ignorant of not only what our Liberties are, but of their source and
value. Ask someone to tell you the five
specific protections that exist in the First Amendment and you might hear one
or two, followed by a blank stare and silence. Those that hate the fact that Liberty is an inherent possession of the
people and want Liberty to be something the government gives to the “worthy”
have really taken advantage of this gross negligence. If we do not know, if we do not understand
what our Liberties are, how do we recognize when they are under attack?
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|