On Obama's Gun-Control Executive Actions

It's not just insanely violent video games but prescription-drug effects: Depression, homicidal and suicidal thoughts.

What about consistency? Drones have been murdering hundreds of innocent children, pregnant women, mothers, old people. The innocent are still rotting in GITMO. The innocent children are bombed and shot in Gaza by those who stole the homes of the parents and grandparents and great grandparents of those children while the US supplies the perpetrators, the criminals, with the money and weapons and ammunition to do it. The innocent children of the West Bank are still having their homes taken away by the invaders, occupiers, who went there because they coveted the children's land. We are told that our nation is putting crippling sanctions upon the Iranian children because Iran might start a nuclear-weapons program even though there is zero proof for that ever supplied.

In the US, we suffer illegal, unconstitutional searches. We are spied upon constantly and illegally. We are told that we cannot peacefully assemble to protest for the redress of legitimate grievances while US President Barack Obama hypocritically reminds us that the people murdered in the movie theater in Aurora, Colorado also had that right denied them by the shooter. We are told that our free-speech rights are limited to utterly unconstitutional free-speech zones/pens or cages. Our peacefully assembled college students are pepper sprayed en masse. The people who caused the Great Recession are generally richer than ever while the people who didn't cause it are told they must sacrifice their children's food to pay the debts caused by the ultra-rich fraudsters still being shielded by the President. The list of illegalities, of unconstitutional acts, is long and growing. The 2nd Amendment truly was about safety, security, and the defense against tyranny, domestic or foreign.

Yes, guns were used unethically to enslave the black Africans hauled over here against their will to serve as beasts of burden deprived of their humanity. Yes, guns were used to massacre American Indians. Those acts though do not overturn the 2nd Amendment. The potential need for well-regulated militias against domestic tyranny, as contemplated by the Amendment itself, has not been nullified. The 2nd Amendment has not been amended away. If you want gun control, amend the Constitution. That's the proper way to do it. This nation has been doing things improperly for far too long.

According to Barack Obama:

There will be pundits and politicians and special interest lobbyists publicly warning of a tyrannical all-out assault on liberty; and behind the scenes, they'll do everything they can to block any commonsense reform and make sure nothing changes whatsoever.

Well, commonsense says amend the Constitution. Don't as usual just act as if it isn't there unless for the moment, it happens to suit your fellow cronies and you.

President Outlines Executive Actions for Gun Control | PBS NewsHour.


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.