I had to bite my tongue, and swallow hard, to admit it, but (like the title of this post says:) I'm about to agree with a Liberal position on gun control!!! I was unaware of Congressional efforts to hinder the blocking of sales of some assault weapons to people with criminal records, or who have been determined as potentially dangerous terrorists, even if they have not yet broken any laws. It appears that if this is true, the motivation is pure Congressional greed, regardless of which party we are talking about, and the N.R.A. may be the lobbying culprit! I am not a knee-jerk defender of the N.R.A., but I am a strong defender of the second amendment to the Constitution. When defense of one threatens the other, it's regrettably time to choose your position.
If Corporate Greed has motivated the N.R.A. to pay what amounts to bribery in Congressional campaign contributions, to ensure that there are no laws passed restricting the sale of automatic weapons to criminals, and potential terrorists, then we must put those Congressman on notice that they are serving their final term, in Congress.
Also, this Politically Correct anathema to placing people on profile lists, because of their beliefs (while dangerous because Liberals would love to put conservative Christians on some kind of restrictive list, I'm sure) may be regrettably necessary, even if it violates Constitutional restrictions. There are ways to amend the Constitution, and it may be necessary to do so, carefully, with the legal mandate that only specific issues are to be addressed at any Convention for that purpose. Again Liberals can not be trusted to not use any Convention as a free-for-all effort to rid themselves of "distasteful" articles that truly protect our freedoms, though liberals can't see it. Liberals are overly uncomfortable with freedom, in general, and must be watched carefully, anyway.
Muslim extremism may have forced the issue of allowing the F.B.I. to profile potential terror suspects in order to disallow their free access to certain freedoms. This is a regrettably unconstitutional treatment of citizens (who clearly have no right to be here, in the first place), but if their religion continues to be pre-eminent to our laws (we owe no allegiance to their concept of "Sharia Law") then they force us to restrict their freedoms, or terminate their citizenship, and deport them to countries that condone "Sharia Law" practices. This may be distasteful to swallow, but we must recognize that America's freedoms are not absolute. We do not have the freedom to kill someone else simply because they disagree with us! If Muslims will not abide with this premise for living here (the definition of the word "abide", is "live", after all) then their "right" to live here should be revoked, and they should be deported, if they support these murderers in any way!
I do not like taking this position, but I feel it may be necessary to protect our own freedoms. We do not give the recent Muslim immigrants license to overrule our freedoms, with their own "Sharia Law", which not only allows for our murder, but mandates it, because we are the "dreaded infidels". If their concept of "infidels" mandates our murder, simply because we disagree with them, why do we open our doors to them, to allow them to live in our country???
No comments:
Post a Comment