Lots of Good Stuff for the Show
Today, when I sit in for Hugh Hewitt, of course we'll be talking about the upcoming immigration cloture vote, but there's a lot of other good stuff out there.
How 'bout a few interesting juxtapositions? In a Supreme Court case handed down today, Justices Stevens, Souter and Ginsburg -- the liberals on the Supreme Court -- express their belief that a student was constitutionally entitled to hold up a sign reading "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" at a school related event. Yet, as Dianne Feinstein indicates on yesterday's "Fox News Sunday," liberals in Congress are committed to bringing back the Fairness Doctrine in an effort to squelch the dissemination of conservative viewpoints.
Also in the First Amendment stew is today's well-deserved
Supreme Court slapdown to the McCain Feingold campaign finance "reform" law. It's long been unclear to me why internet pornography is sacrosanct from regulation on First Amendment grounds when political speech 30 and 60 days before an election is fair game -- and we'll talk about it.
Finally, on cultural issues, consider this: In England, where the authorities are exquisitely sensitive to the rights of Muslims and Sikhs to wear headscarves and religious bangles, a teen girl, who is a Christian, has been banned from school for wearing a silver ring symbolizing her commitment to remaining chaste before marriage. The school's rationale? A commitment to sexual purity isn't an "integral part" of the Christian faith.
How 'bout a few interesting juxtapositions? In a Supreme Court case handed down today, Justices Stevens, Souter and Ginsburg -- the liberals on the Supreme Court -- express their belief that a student was constitutionally entitled to hold up a sign reading "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" at a school related event. Yet, as Dianne Feinstein indicates on yesterday's "Fox News Sunday," liberals in Congress are committed to bringing back the Fairness Doctrine in an effort to squelch the dissemination of conservative viewpoints.
Also in the First Amendment stew is today's well-deserved
Supreme Court slapdown to the McCain Feingold campaign finance "reform" law. It's long been unclear to me why internet pornography is sacrosanct from regulation on First Amendment grounds when political speech 30 and 60 days before an election is fair game -- and we'll talk about it.
Finally, on cultural issues, consider this: In England, where the authorities are exquisitely sensitive to the rights of Muslims and Sikhs to wear headscarves and religious bangles, a teen girl, who is a Christian, has been banned from school for wearing a silver ring symbolizing her commitment to remaining chaste before marriage. The school's rationale? A commitment to sexual purity isn't an "integral part" of the Christian faith.
posted by LadybugUSA at 10:10 AM
3 Comments:
From what I've read on the lefty blogs, a return to the "fairness doctrine" is out of the question... and they wouldn't support it (their argument - it wouldn't work).
As for the Christian schoolgirl. Some schools have strict guidelines on jewelry (students in the UK have school uniforms).
I personally have never heard of the religious practice of wearing a ring to symbolise sexual purity within the Christian faith. It all sounds like a Christian kid who flouted the school rules and then made up something to get back at the school.
Just to make you aware OSO, there are shops that sell jewelry that are for the purpose of celebrating a girl's purity. There are pieces made for boys as well. I haven't seen them myself, but a Christian station to which I give a regular listen advertises for such.
OSO, you've really got to check your sources.
1. Chastity Rings have been around since the 90's. They are a real part of the modern Christian movement. A simple google would have shown that.
2. The Fairness DOctrine is going to be a Major issue. Ms. Pelosi has stated the need for it on radio. The Supreme Court just took down a major part of the Campaign finance law. American Talk Radio, which is heavily conservative has made a real difference on the immigration law.
In my opinion, I find it unique that the Liberal point of view seems to be engaged in quieting the other point of view.
Again OSO, google "Fairness Doctrine". I think you'd be surprised at the results.
Post a Comment
<< Home