• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Contempt of Congress

MrMrdevincamus

Voice Of The Martyrs Supporter
I've seen the political arena gradually become more bizarre over the years. It is Schizophrenic, being driven unseen voices. This could not have happened before the age of the Internet and the iphone. You have no idea who wrote a statement on Facebook. Is it an enemy or a fellow citizen?

I agree. Facebook is heavily trending towards a radical liberal agenda and even banning those who have non approved speech and ideas.
 

Ellen Brown

Well-Known Member
I agree. Facebook is heavily trending towards a radical liberal agenda and even banning those who have non approved speech and ideas.

If you are talking about the likes of Alex Jones, I think that he and a few others will eventually kill free speech, due to his excesses. If you purport to be a Christian that sort of speech should be repulsive.
 

MrMrdevincamus

Voice Of The Martyrs Supporter
If you are talking about the likes of Alex Jones, I think that he and a few others will eventually kill free speech, due to his excesses. If you purport to be a Christian that sort of speech should be repulsive.


I understand and respect your comment. That said it doesn't matter what I think of Alex Jones, his right of free speech should not be infringed. As a Christian and an artist I struggle with allowing or condoning some repulsive things* (see notes), Christ in a tank of urine comes to mind. Freedom of speech is not a right for an individual, or certain individuals or groups of individuals. It's a guaranteed right for all and its mandatory for the survival of a free society. That said I have to admit I too have a line that personally I do not cross, such as exploiting children for the sake of art or anything else for that matter. You mentioned Alex Jones, yes he offends many, but should he be censored out of existence? No he shouldn't. Because the bigger question is who gets to be the Judge? What is wrong for some is right for others! Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, and hundreds of modern dictators would say they are the exclusive judge of what may or may not be said (and what color your excreta must be). When we start down that slippery slope of censoring, the dictatorships and evil are waiting at the bottom of the slide! So in my opinion as long as what the person is saying is legal speech (no yelling FIRE in a crowed theater!), the right of free speech must be upheld! Let them have their march let them have their lectures, Utube vids etc. Truth will sort itself out. The suppression of any right is far more vile than the words that are being suppressed.

notes; (warning to the sensitive the following link may be disturbing to Christians)

http://creativetimereports.org/2015/01/30/free-speech-****-christ-charlie-hebdo-andres-serrano/
 

Ellen Brown

Well-Known Member
I understand and respect your comment. That said it doesn't matter what I think of Alex Jones, his right of free speech should not be infringed. As a Christian and an artist I struggle with allowing or condoning some repulsive things* (see notes), Christ in a tank of urine comes to mind. Freedom of speech is not a right for an individual, or certain individuals or groups of individuals. It's a guaranteed right for all and its mandatory for the survival of a free society. That said I have to admit I too have a line that personally I do not cross, such as exploiting children for the sake of art or anything else for that matter. You mentioned Alex Jones, yes he offends many, but should he be censored out of existence? No he shouldn't. Because the bigger question is who gets to be the Judge? What is wrong for some is right for others! Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, and hundreds of modern dictators would say they are the exclusive judge of what may or may not be said (and what color your excreta must be). When we start down that slippery slope of censoring, the dictatorships and evil are waiting at the bottom of the slide! So in my opinion as long as what the person is saying is legal speech (no yelling FIRE in a crowed theater!), the right of free speech must be upheld! Let them have their march let them have their lectures, Utube vids etc. Truth will sort itself out. The suppression of any right is far more vile than the words that are being suppressed.

notes; (warning to the sensitive the following link may be disturbing to Christians)

http://creativetimereports.org/2015/01/30/free-speech-****-christ-charlie-hebdo-andres-serrano/

Your comments are inarguable. Yet in the hopefully "Short Term" people like he and Trump are doing so much damage and causing so much pain. Many are so easily led yet the mores of a decent society keep them in check from acting on their loathsome inner thoughts. Then someone like Trump comes along, who seems to have no moral compass at all... I fear that in frustration, "Free Speech" may well be modified, and that will open the floodgates for evil to go to excesses.

Facebook's actions against hate speech will inevitably be challenged in court, and I worry about the outcome.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
We should probably get the obligatory bad jokes out of the way right up front. As in: “Contempt of Congress: It’s not just a crime, it’s a national attitude!” Or, “Contempt of Congress? Who ISN’T guilty of that?”
Contempt of Congress - The Statute and the Inherent Contempt Power


Will Congress hold Barr in contempt?

Apparently being in Contempt of Congress amounts to very little.

contempt-congress.jpg
I think it was important to do this as a matter of record, but nothing much will be done.

What bothers me more is that we now have a president and an attorney general who really don't much believe in the "rule of law" that the Constitution establishes, so it begs what else may be done? The Executive Branch is to enforce the laws, so there's plenty of danger maybe yet to come if they decide they won't enforce what Congress passes or what the courts decide. This is far more dangerous that what some seem to just to ignore.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
I think it was important to do this as a matter of record, but nothing much will be done.

What bothers me more is that we now have a president and an attorney general who really don't much believe in the "rule of law" that the Constitution establishes, so it begs what else may be done? The Executive Branch is to enforce the laws, so there's plenty of danger maybe yet to come if they decide they won't enforce what Congress passes or what the courts decide. This is far more dangerous that what some seem to just to ignore.

Now that we are on this path to polarization, I can only see it ending badly.
 

james dixon

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
AH HAH! You know a few Russians ? You must be investigated immediate!

I have never met a Russian & I am not sure why I stated it.

All levity aside, if you want real haters of democracy you would find them on Campus or in the PAC's I mentioned.

I am not looking for haters. Hate is not a word in the Lord's vocabulary and it is not a feeling I have ever experienced.

:)-
 
Last edited:

Audie

Veteran Member
With respect due, have you been asleep for the last ten years? First, if I wanted to be a puppet I would jump on the PC 'I want to be popular too' Democratic/Marxist bandwagon like RIGHT NOW! No I have been trending towards the highly non-popular conservative way (usually Republican) for a long time! I vote on issues not the party. That is because I enjoy freedom and individuality etc, so I do not support 95% of anything socialist!!!! How can you not see that the democratic party is in the process of a radical transformation by Marxist socialists. How did it happen? Google Democratic Socialists of America to begin. The PAC supported the Taco waitress turned politician Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and was the reason she was elected. She would have been unelectable only a few years ago. Ocasio-Cortez, who is a self named socialist, defeated in a landslide victory Democratic incumbent Rep. Joe Crowley, who was a 10-term congressman that many said would be the next speaker of the house. The Justice Democrats PAC is not that unusual except that it partnered with 'Our Revolution' which is the largest Marxist front in America. Our Revolution is really three Marxist organizations : the Democratic Socialists of America, the Communist Party USA, and the Freedom Road Socialist Organization. Hmmm' sounds a bit socialist eh Dixon? Their goal is to turn the Democratic Party to the Marxist communist party, and they will do it from within. Seven other candidates have been elected by the support of these Groups. The above is a good start to vindicate my claims. I worry not about moles as you call them, I worry about those that have an agenda that you seem to be supporting. That agenda is to silence those that have a unpopular views (conservative?) or different ideas/views than themselves. Anyone can see that too is happing in an malignant fashion on the many college campuses who BAN THE FREE SPEECH! Oh most telling is the banned speech is of a conservative friendly nature. So my friend (or not) wake up.

Learn the art of the paragraph.
 
Top