Secular Humanism is a “Religion”

Courtesy of Google Images

In A.D. 1961, the United States Supreme Court decided the case of Torcaso v Watkins.  The case hinged on the right of a man who had otherwise qualified for the office of Notary Public in “Maryland” to assume that office without first confessing (as required by the Maryland Constitution) that he believed in God. The man was an atheist and refused to falsely confess that he believed in God when, in fact, he did not.  More, he contended that the requirement for a confession of a belief in God was an unconstitutional “religious test”.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the atheist as struck down the requirement that public officers had to affirm their belief in God as a prerequisite for holding public office.

The Torcaso case is probably most famous for a footnote which declares,

“Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism and others.”

With that footnote, the Supreme Court elevated “Secular Humanism” and other atheistic philosophies to the status of “religions“.

 

Snap, Crapple, Pop! Ricin Krispies!

I don’ want no “ricin krispies”!  (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Washington Times reports,

“The FBI and U.S. Capitol police were investigating Wednesday letters addressed to Mr. Obama and to Sen. Roger Wicker, Mississippi Republican, that contained a “suspicious substance” that field-tested positive for the poison ricin. The letters were intercepted at off-site mail facilities, a Secret Service spokesman said.

“The letter to the White House arrived Tuesday. Authorities evacuated some Senate offices Wednesday as they investigated another report of a suspicious package.”

Moreover,

“With the nation on edge from deadly terrorist bombings in Boston and suspicious letters mailed to Washington officials, the White House said Wednesday it’s premature to speculate that America is under attack.

“Before we speculate, before we make connections that we don’t know exist, as the FBI has said, we need to get the facts,” said White House spokesman Jay Carney. “First things first.”

 

Mini-Seminar by Adask

Adask at the “gates” of Hell’s Canyon, Idaho

I was recently interviewed by Stephen Roberts on “Cancel the Cabal”.  During that video interview, I explored the concepts of sovereignty and the “sovereignty movement,” as well as potential applications of the 1st, 2nd and 9th Amendments, and “MOOA” (“man or other animals”) in relation to drug laws, the war on drugs, police state, big pharma, and American medicine.

The interview lasts almost two hours.  It’s too long to be an “interview,” but it might reasonably be described as a “mini-seminar”.  Most won’t have the time to listen to the entire presentation.  But it’s actually a pretty good general introduction to a number of concepts, so, if you’re inclined to listen, here’s the link:

 

Political Protest a FELONY in Presence of President

Andrew Napolitano (Photo credit: ronpaulrevolt2008)

Fox News.  Judge Andrew Napolitano.  In March, H.R. 347 was signed into law by Obama.  According to Judge Napolitano, that bill makes political free speech in the presence of the President a felony.

So far as I know, this law has not yet been applied or abused.  Even so, Judge Napolitano’s description is appalling.

video    00:03:33

https://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=7SGWH3kirzg&vq=medium

 

The Essential Struggle

Image via Wikipedia

As seen in our “Declaration of Independence,” this country started with the principles that 1) “all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights”; and 2) “that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men”.  The first principle elevated all men from the status of subjects to the status of individual sovereigns.  The second principle declared that the purpose of government was to secure each individual man’s rights of sovereignty, and reduced government from the status of master to the status of public servants.

These two principles had never before been seen in an earthly government and are the foundation for the “republican form of government” guaranteed in our federal and State constitutions as well as “American exceptionalism”.

In A.D. 1793, the Supreme Court declared in Chisholm vs Georgia that the American people were “sovereigns without subjects”.   “Sovereigns“–plural.  Not one sovereign (as in a monarchy); a multitude of sovereigns.  Given that that case was decided just four years after the adoption of the Constitution, the Supreme Court had to know what the status of the American people was.  There’s no mistake.  This nation was conceived on the idea that every man (and woman) was an individual sovereign.

 

John Bush Returns to Speak Before Austin City Council

John Bush, Freedom Fighter

Last August, John Bush–a political activist at Austin, Texas–was ejected from an Austin City Council meeting and banned from returning for one year.  Reason?  The Austin City Council didn’t like what he had to say.  Recently, the City Council terminated their ban and allowed Mr. Bush to again speak at that public forum.

Here’s his return speech.  Note that while Mr. Bush brought some notes with him, he speaks primarily from his heart and mind.  By speaking, he’s having far more effect than if he were shooting or bombing.   Judging from this video, Mr. Bush may soon be elected as a member of the City Council that previously banned him, or even as congressman.  This guy’s good.  If we can find a few more like Mr. Bush, we just might save this country from the fascists.

video   00:03:36

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrW54C5wvj8