Archive for Thursday, December 14, 2006

Mail Call: Redefined Rights not respected

December 14, 2006

Redefined rights not respected

I read with interest the guest comment by Darrel Miller on the bored Americans' ho, hum attitude on the Bill of Rights day. It isn't that Americans don't care Mr. Miller. It's because they just don't understand their rights any more. It's hard for common sense people to understand how one person's rights can infringe upon their own rights.

How can the rights of a bunch of terrorist killers with no regard for their lives or the innocent victims they murder be more important than their right to live? How can the rights of vile protesting bunch of nuts at a soldier's funeral trump the rights of those family and friends who want to bury them in peace and dignity? How can the rights of a woman to terminate the life of an unborn child not medically necessary trump the right of the unborn child's right to live? How can the rights of a local criminal be more important than the victim's rights? When Americans see these rights defined in a sensible way, maybe they will be more tuned in like you are.

I am sure if our founding fathers could looked at the court's interpretation of their masterful document , it would be in disgust. They wrote this document so the uneducated would be able to understand its contents, as there was little formal education during their time.

We, the most educated society in the world, were not content with its simplification so we turned loose a bunch of liberal judges on it. What we ended up with was a bunch of loony decisions that will haunt society until a common sense court rules otherwise. I am sure if the framers could see what has become of their document today they would have been more definitive in its writing.

Most of the leading news media is run by people with liberal views and they are little more than tabloids sensationalizing the news for the sake of sagging sales. The job of the reporter is to write the facts in an unbiased way so the reader can decide the story's merits.

The editorialist can write what he or she thinks all day long and nobody really cares because all they are looking for is a response from the readers.

Does the right to print a story take precedent over the lives of soldiers abroad or Americans at home? Is it newsworthy to show video of an American soldier being shot by a sniper and videotaped by his killers?

Silly me, I call it stupid unpatriotic tabloid news, what say you Mr. Miller?

How could anyone decipher "Congress will make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" into "separation of church and State."

Most of the founding fathers knew only too well how churches and state in the fatherland ruled the country. It was all about persecution and state sponsored religion. The word God was never meant to be removed from schools, courts or any other place where citizens chose to speak it.

After 35 years in law enforcement I have had my fill of rights and how they serve only lawyers, judges, news media and the guilty while completely ignoring the victims.

If Mr. Miller doesn't understand why people have a blase attitude about the Bill of Rights, think of it like this: Rights are like belly buttons -- everybody's got them and nobody knows what they are there for. And that, Mr. Miller, is the "Ho Hum of it."

Commenting has been disabled for this item.