Custom Construction LLC
LV Historical Assoc
Drama Kids
Southern Electric

You may want to take a second look at Firefox

 

Headline from

TheHill.com

“Vice President Biden calls on Democrats to ‘stand up and fight back’ against efforts to impose new voter identification requirements.”

Between the lines

Biden is on a tear about expanding the protection of voting rights, but it is unclear how exactly voting rights are being suppressed.

It is the contention of the Democratic Party that requiring a photo identification is an attempt to suppress the vote among “poor and minority” voters. It would seem to be an extreme insult to minority voters to imply that they are too stupid, or are otherwise incapable of, obtaining a photo ID.

Should we, therefore, in the interest of the poor and minority, be expected to eliminate all forms of identification requirements when people go to cash checks, buy liquor, get a library card, enter a casino, buy a car, get car insurance, or enter the airport? What about when attending White House functions? Does this mean that no identification is required to apply for food stamps or other government programs?

It is good to encourage voters to turn out at the polls, but if voters have to be “educated” as to the voting process itself, how could they possibly understand the issues at stake? Voting should hold more importance than to function like a fast food restaurant. The idea that we can have “drive-through” voting may be one of the reasons that voter turnout is actually falling in the United States. It is no longer a privilege and a responsibility as it should be.

And one of the requirements rightly should be that voters register and obtain identification that, at least in Texas, is issued free.

If people can get to the polls, it stands to reason that they can somehow get their proper identification. Requiring identification is hardly an “assault on our core values” as the Democrats claim.

Headline from

WashingtonExaminer.com

“Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich resigned under pressure after gay rights activists demanded that he step down or recant his support of traditional marriage laws. ...”

Between the Lines

Eich, of course, refused to back down and deny his deeply held religious conviction that marriage should be between one man and one woman. While Eich was never accused of discrimination, it was recently revealed that, six year ago, he donated $1,000 to support California’s Proposition 8 in support of traditional marriage.

Eich said his personal beliefs should not affect his employment, because people could still support or vote as they believe and that one’s political and religious speech should be protected. This used to be the case, but is apparently not so today.

Although Proposition 8 passed, the courts later ruled it unconstitutional. The majority in California (and elsewhere) did approve of traditional marriage, but that does not matter to the radical activists.

If you are still using Mozilla Firefox as your web browser, you might want to reconsider. I switched last week to Safari -- not in protest of gay rights or “marriage equality” -- but in protest of a company that does not believe in the First Amendment and free speech.

 
 
Heavenly Touch Massage Therapy
Drama Kids
Triple R DC Experts