Thursday, August 27, 2009

Exercise Of Rights Now Requires Permit In Obamerica?

Since when does one, in America, need a permit to simply stand on a public sidewalk holding a little sign?

Since when do you need a permit to stand on the sidewalk holding a sign?

"So we went back to the corner because it's America, and there was no sense in arresting us the first time," Pettigrew said. "We weren't going to let them bully us into going home."

He continued, "By the end of the day, I had been arrested three times, and my pastor was arrested four times – simply because we wouldn't go away."


By dark, his group had grown to 11 men – including four who had driven from North Carolina and South Carolina to stand on the sidewalk and support the original four who had been arrested.

"By that time they had ceased arresting us, with the exception of my pastor, who was arrested late in the evening," Pettigrew said.

Curious. The cops couldn't hold them, had to let them go each time, because they had done nothing against the law. Yet they kept arresting them. Over and over again, and releasing them again. Why? They didn't do anything illegal. If they had done something illegal, then obviously they'd have been held, not released and arrested repeatedly.


So what if the sign is offensive? It's not libellous, so there's nothing the cops are allowed to do. But do it, they do.

It's a matter of the First Amendment, ie. the right to freely express oneself. It doesn't matter if some folks don't like what you say. A right is a right is a right, right?

(Unless Leftists say it isn't???)

Who told the police that a permit is necessary to enjoy one's constitutional rights?

How come the police don't require a permit of Islamic supremacists who stand around in public, on sidewalks, etc., holding signs saying, "America, you'll soon pay... the mushroom cloud is on the way", "Islam will dominate the world", etc., etc.?

It's obviously not because of the content of their speech, as the police never indicated, not that they'd be right if they did, that it was.

Or was it? Was it a case of anti-Christian police-state persecution/pro-homosexual fascism?

Like hell the police would harrass and arrest militant, extremist homosexuals standing on the same sidewalk proclaiming that Christians were bad and stuff. Oh, no... they'd protect the homosexuals, acting as bodyguards despite no indication of any threat whatsoever...

You know, via logic and realism, that the police are directed by politicians, through their suit-wearing superiors downtown. Otherwise, the police are acting on their own, and violating peoples' rights. And getting away with it, no consequences from their suit-wearing superiors, no questions from Internal Affairs.

Apparently the police can arrest you just to stop you from doing inconvenient things like exercise your rights when some folks don't like that you're doing so.

Sounds like a case for the ACLU. Oh, wait... no, they won't help Christians, as the ACLU is a hate group hellbent on persecuting Christians. It's a case for the Alliance Defence Fund (ADF).