I believe some of the people here need to review this document, so I thought I would post it so you might better understand what this country is about.
It ensures citizens can speak freely, practice faith, own arms, and have fair legal treatment, shaping national identity and empowering people against government power, not each other.
8 Likes
Agreed.
4 Likes
… ratified on this day in 1791; December 15. 
6 Likes
Timing is everything, isn’t it?
2 Likes
Our Constitution was written by our forefathers to limit the power of the Federal Government, it’s not a suggestion. If people feel that the Constitution is outdated there is a process to rectify that and it’s through an amendment.
2 Likes
The idea that both the Republican and Democratic parties “trample” or undermine the Bill of Rights is a perspective often found in political commentary and public debate. Critics from across the political spectrum argue that actions taken by both parties, whether through legislation, executive orders, or judicial appointments, can be seen as eroding constitutional rights, though the specific examples cited and the rights in question often differ significantly between partisan viewpoints. When the actual truth is we are not holding either of them accountable for their actions, either side gives their side a pass, and we the people all lose.
The perception of a party “trampling” the Bill of Rights is largely dependent on an individual’s specific interpretation of constitutional law and which rights they prioritize. Both parties assert that their actions are in the interest of the American people and the Constitution, while simultaneously accusing the other party of undermining fundamental freedoms. This needs to stop; we, the people, need to hold our whole government accountable for their combined action, or we, the people, will all be the losers.
5 Likes
I agree with this statement completely. Our Constitution binds the actions of the ENTIRE government, regardless of the party in the majority.
P.S.: That’s twice in one day I have agreed with something you posted. That almost never happens. Kinda freaking me out a little.
7 Likes
I totally understand this reaction. This is what happens when I am not busy fending off the Cabal. Their insanity takes a lot of time of mine to try to tackle alone.
When I have time to express my opinions and not be in defense of their bullshiat they perpetrate on me.
2 Likes
Agreed. The freedom of speech part ONLY applies to government action against your speech.
Also social media isn’t a public platform, it’s private, and has terms that users had to agree to when they signed up. Only chance you really have at public speech online is to host your own server (usually your own dedicated server), otherwise you’re still bound by AUP (acceptable usage policy).
So yea, doesn’t have anything to do against not facing social or economical repercussion for speech.
3 Likes
This is exactly correct. But one must keep in mind it is not for the people on the website to monitor speech but for that of the governing body of said website. If they desire to squash the freedoms we all enjoy in America, it is their right to do so. Keep in mind that doing so might label them much like so many others in this medium. I just wish for a fair and unbiased place to make the points about the government as a whole, like any true patriot would do.
2 Likes