In Case You've Wondered

My blog is where my wandering thoughts are interspersed with stuff I made up. So, if while reading you find yourself confused about the context, don't feel alone. I get confused, too.

If you're here for the stories, I started another blog:

One other thing: sometimes I write words you refuse to use in front of children, or polite company, unless you have a flat tire, or hit your thumb with a hammer.

I don't use them to offend; I use them to embellish.

Wednesday, October 9, 2013

So, What's Right and What's Wrong?

In the Constitution, Article 1, section 9 and clause 3 states:  No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

What is a Bill of Attainder? It's the removal of all rights for a serious crime. Otherwise, if a legislature decides an individual, or group of people are guilty of a crime they consider serious, they have no right for a trial and their property is seized. To add insult to injury, the offender could be criminally punished, with no recourse for defense.

What is a serious crime? In the U.S., it's called a felony.

So, what am I trying to get across? Certain religious groups, and individuals object to the Affordable Healthcare law for various reasons, but do so in an effort to protect their privacy, private property and, in some situations, are morally guided to object to a law that allows medical procedures they consider heinous and against their faith. Their initial method to avoid taking part in the insurance program is refusing to sign up, which means they'll be fined for not buying the insurance. If they make any effort to avoid paying the fine, they'll be committing a felony for tax evasion.

In theory, every individual accused of a crime has the right of a trial by jury. For the I.R.S. to process the sheer amount of paperwork required to punish the huge amount of people that possibly could say "enough is enough" and tell them where to go, more people would need to be hired and more ammunition would need to be bought.

Both have happened. Next could very well be the willingness by the government to just ignore the law and pass Bills of Attainder on those they consider a threat to their political maneuvers. If you haven't noticed, the I.R.S, already applies penalties without regard to rights. I'm sure the decisions could be fought, but since it's the government, you have to ask permission to sue and the courts are unfriendly to those that don't bow to their self-imposed imperial position. Also, it's hard to find an attorney willing to defend you, since everything you own is impounded, you can't collect a paycheck and you're soon to be on the street, if not in jail.

"...As James Madison wrote in, Federalist Number 44, "Bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and laws impairing the obligations of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation. ... The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. They have seen with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative interferences, in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands of enterprising and influential speculators, and snares to the more-industrious and less-informed part of the community...."

It sure is a shame all those people that created the United States shed their blood, lost their families and watched their homes burnt to the ground may have done so in vain. They left a damn good set of instructions for future generations. Unfortunately, current member of our government choose to ignore them If you don't believe this, read how the I.R.S. gave the White House private information without any regard to law, rights or decency.  If you can find justification for this, you're not a citizen and it's best you leave.

No comments:

Post a Comment