• Download The WRNN Mobile App

    Download our mobile app for iPhone, Android or Blackberry so you can always have us with you!

Listen Live

LOCAL NEWS

More

Dave's Blog

More

6/17/2015

There's a lot of talk these days about the 1st Amendment.    There's a lot in there.     It talks about the Freedom of the Press.    It talks about the establishment of religion which has been interpreted as the 'separation of church and state'.    And then there's the freedom of speech.        It says 'congress shall make no law" that abridges your freedom of speech.   That's an important part of the sentence that some people seem to forget when complaining that someone else is infringing on their right to say whatever it is they want to say.

Go ahead...this is 'Murica...you can say what you want without fear of reprisal from the government.   It says so in the Constitution.    But keep in mind, the private sector is another story.    I have the right to say what I want to whomever I choose, but my employer can tell me that what I chose to say is a bad reflection on them and therefore I'm a liability to their business, so we have to cut ties.    That's their right (especially in a right to work state).     In recent days, we've seen many people lose their jobs after posting on social media about topics like same-sex marriage or Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner.     They had the right to speak their mind, but their employers have to look out for their reputation and bottom lines.    Congress didn't tell their employers to fire them...they decided on their own (or bowed to public pressure)...so quit crying about your 1st amendment rights being trampled.

Pam Geller is making a lot of noise lately about those Moooslims.   She says she can have a 'draw Mohammed' contest anywhere she wants to...it's her right....and if it happens to upset some Muslims, then so be it.     Well, it led to gunfire and 2 gunmen being killed.     The gunmen didn't have the right to respond in the way they did, but what did Ms Geller think was going to happen?     You yell 'fire' in a movie theatre, people will stampede.    You taunt radical Islam and someone might just open fire, putting innocent lives at danger...which is exactly what she did.   What's she gonna do next?     Have a pig roast on the steps of the Simon Weisenthal Center?

But does the governmen really NOT have any laws that abridge our freedom of speech?     In the last example, we've seen people arrested for that 'fire in a movie theatre' scenario.    What about 'hate speech'?     Hate crimes go to the Federal level and hate speech is right along with it.     How about threatening someone (assalut) or threatening the life of someone, like the President.    Go ahead...see how fast the Secret Service would be at your front door if you did that.    And now that everyone's online, there are lawys against cyber-bullying and cyber-terrorism.      

So even though the 1st amendment says 'Congress shall make no laws" about your freedom of speech...they already have.     And just because someone reacts to what you have to say with a pink slip or a punch in the nose...they're not Congress...so they can react however they want...which also might have consequences.         

Liz's Blog

More

Whether you get married by a Justice of the Peace or a priest or you just go to city hall... whether you have a reception, go on a honeymoon or get a bite for lunch afterwards... any way you cut it... you are married with a marriage license that's recognized in every state.

 

Civil Unions and Domestic Partnerships stop short of allowing same sex couples marriage rights and it's not recognized across statelines. All they want are equal rights when it comes to marriage rights.  

 

Call it something else.  "Wife" and "husband" should be reserved for heterosexual marriages.  "Partner" was working all these years for homosexual partners.  "Marriage" for heterosexual couples and "Civil Unions" for homosexual couples.  

 

Just change the parameters of a Civil Union, and the problem would be solved.  End of story.

 

It's not about religion.  It's about rights.  It's not about moral decay.  It's about two people that love each other.  

 

Today's Supreme Court case is about two women who are in love and raising a family together... three kids!  They want to protect their family.  That's far from moral decay.

 

Whom am I to judge who one loves and why?  I'm not perfect at it either... neither are half the married couples in this great nation.

TOP STORIES

  • Ed Sheeran: Music industry lacks imagination

    Ed Sheeran was the most played artist on Spotify in 2014. With Apple set to launch its own music streaming service, CNN sat down with the 24-year-old singer to talk about the music industry. Watch the full episode of Talk Asia here.

  • Judge and burglary suspect have rare moment in court

    A Miami-Dade judge and a man charged with burglary had a rare, heartfelt moment in court. CNN affiliate WSVN has the details.

  • Bodycam: Man pulls BB gun on cops

    A grand jury ruled that an officer's use of deadly force was justified after a suspect pulled out a BB gun during an arrest. CNN affiliate KLTV reports.