When did having a personal opinion become a crime

This Florida teacher is currently facing possible termination from a PUBLIC high school for comments he made regarding his belief that gay marriage is an abomination....When did it become it a crime to have an opinion?

This teacher is a teacher-of-the-year winner and have a 100% clean record. His opinion has not been uttered in the classroom, he made a comment on HIS Facebook page. Just because someone doesn't agree with this teachers opinion (myself) doesn't mean that his First Amendment rights can be violated.

It seems like people are forgetting that the First Amendment covers all speech, regardless of what people think of the statements. It amazes me that this is even a possibility, the school system has no right to fire him. This is a publicly funded institution and for them to take a stand against freedom of thought is absolutely appalling.

Whats next? I believe in owning a gun so I get fired? I don't like polygamist so I get fired? I believe in God I get fired? People need to see how dangerous this way of thinking is. This is not a question of whether or not his opinion is correct, its an issue of the government being able to DECIDE what is right. Unreal

College campuses and gun owners

Today I read this opinion article on Boston.com. I really wanted to right a response to it, so here I go.

The idea that fully licensed gun owners cannot conceal and carry on campuses is completely ridiculous. This is the same argument pro and anti gun people have had since the begining. How is a rule like people cannot carry a weapon on campus going to stop those that are willing to shoot people? It's not because they do not care. If someone is willing to shoot another person for no reason they certainly don't care about breaking this rule.

As for those kids who drink too much and then go waving a weapon around then that's a problem. However there is already a precedent for that, arrest them, charge them and remove their permit to carry. I mean the rule is already in place to deal with that issue. Gun owners do not want their permit to be removed and will not go waving it around like crazies.

This guy is saying lets just prevent those who are licensed from carrying, how does that teach you anything? When you get a permit you accept certain rules, you mess that up you go to jail,I do not see the issue.

The bigger problem in this whole thing is getting people to follow the rules, that's easy just enforce the already standing laws. If a person waves a gun, gun and person go downtown. This is why you have all these crazy things happening at colleges, apparently they operate outside the law. The college campuses have a responsibility to enforce the rules.

I don't understand why its different if you are under 21 and get caught drinking on campus vs off campus. Sure the campus has rules and they should be followed, but if a kid break the law report him/her thats pretty easy.

Many people will say this is a black and white outlook, well yes it is its called the law. Kids will continue to drink, I certainly did despite being at a military school where I would get demerits and extra duty. But if they are dumb/unlucky enough to get caught well thats the way the cookie crumbles.

Gun owners aren't the issue, law breakers are. Proceed accordingly.

Damn you Patriot Act

I found this map while on the Cato Institute website. The Cato Institute is " a public policy research organization — a think tank — dedicated to the principles of individual liberty, limited government, free markets and peace. Its scholars and analysts conduct independent, nonpartisan research on a wide range of policy issues." In other words a libertarian think tank.

Check out this map right after 2001 and look at the spike in questionable and constitutionally appalling police activity. We have laws for a reason, but the USA PATRIOT ACT makes it seem like the ends justify the means. They don't!

This map really blew my mind!

Thats funny I thought there was something called FREEDOM OF RELIGION?

San Fransisco YOU FUCKING SUCK!!!

In what mixed up country do you think that you have the right to even vote on a freedom of religion question?? FREEDOM of religion!

You self righteous pieces of shit don't have a right to have a say in the private religious and health practices of law abiding US citizens

Very rarely do I support Massachusetts legislation, but thank God this got beat down before it even made it into the legislature here

Breaking news!!

Breaking news! Congressional leaders have agreed to a four year extension of the USA PATRIOT ACT

NO GOOD AT ALL! This piece of legislation has ZERO regard for private liberties in the United States!

Please call/write your senators and tell them to repeal this legislation!!!

Why don't we just elect a bunch of monkeys....at least we can pay them in Bananas

Government Shutdown....

This is a topic that I have been struggling with for the past couple weeks. I knew I wanted to say something about it, but I wasn't sure exactly how I felt.

Let me outline what will happen if the government shuts down (at least so far as I can figure)

-All non essential workers will be furloughed and sent home until the government restarts.

They will keep their jobs, but will not be paid

-Non essential versus essential will be determined by the individual agencies following some "guidelines" from the feds

-Essential jobs will continue

Essential jobs include Air traffic controllers, airport security, military and defense, mail

-Non essential jobs will include but not be limited to

Trash men in DC (how is sanitation not essential?), administrative jobs, national parks, passport processing, tax return processing etc.

All of these things I can look at and say ok. Not that I agree with them, but in principle i could see those as essential vs non essential (except trash collection) There were two points that I would like to point out that I cannot fathom or accept as the right way to to things

-Congress will continue to get paid

-other essential jobs, including military families, will not get paid

Those two points are unimaginable to me. The people whose job it is to set a budget didn't do their job and got us into this mess in the first place. Those people will continue to get paid, but those who are doing their job correctly will not get paid? I live paycheck to paycheck, as do many Americans, but those would be the people losing their pay?

Well fuck you congress. Fuck you house of Representatives, fuck you White House. The fact that you cannot pull your heads out of your parties asses and put together a budget is pathetic. This is part of your job, your fucking job! Do your job! Anyone who says bring on the shutdown your are a fucking tool. Thats peoples livelihoods! Thats your Armed service going into harms way and not even getting the shitty pay they did before! Thats your neighbors, your friends and your family so grow up you child

Democrats grow a set of balls. The country is trillions of dollars in debt, you will not get everything you want. Spending needs to be cut, which means programs will be cut. To have so much of my paycheck taken away is ridiculous. I make the money if I want to help people I will.

Republicans there is something called separation of church and state, I would appreciate it if you fucking listened to it. Ideological problems should not be holding up anything. Planned Parenthood is a fabulous organization that helps treat thousands of men and woman across the country who cannot afford the current health care system. Pregnancies are legal, get over it. You want to change that? Your allowed to try, but your concern now is putting forth a budget, not regulating a womans body.

Tea Partiers you are the worst group of asshats I have ever seen. Don't try and call yourselves Patriots, Minutemen, especially don't say you are small government. Compromise doesn't equate to weakness. You can have your ideals fine, but this is the United States of America, not the Tea Party express. You represent your constituents, but they are only a portion of the US. It;s your responsibility to put forth a workable budget, not one that caters to your every want. You aren't libertarians so don't call yourself one. You aren't pro Constitution so don't call yourself that. You are bunch of whiny bitches who want to take their ball and go home because someone wants to play different rules at kick ball.

Sex with one daughter and he gets custody??

This is a news story about a 12 year old dutch girl who gave birth. Although a little sick nothing hugely groundbreaking there, until you read they think it may the father. The father who already did two years for sexual assault on another one of his daughters. The father who won custody from the mother of the little girl. Wait what?? He spend time in prison for sexually assaulting his daughter and then they award him custody of another. Thats like you kid getting eaten by a tiger but you saying hey lets give the tiger another chance and send in your next oldest kid. What?

If you break into someones house, you can't call the cops on them

I love this story. In fact its probably one of the great comedies of this generation. In what far away world do you get off calling the police on the owner of the house you just broke into?

I am sorry that you seem to think that law enforcement should prevent him from taking any means necessary to assure that his home is properly guarded.

This is one of the major things wrong with the world today. He broke into another guys house, you don't get to then call the cops because you are afraid he may have a gun. You break in you take the chance you jackass

More to come later....

Really South Dakota...really?!

Are you serious?

The above article is about a bill about to go through the South Dakota house that would make it legal for a family member to kill a doctor who performs an abortion. And they are going to include that in the mercy killing law??

I am not arguing the merits of pro life vs. pro choice in this post (that one can be later). This is a matter of a state trying to make something illegal that they do not have a constitutional right to make legal.

I have two major problems with this legislation (and a host of other problems)

First off Abortion is legal. Under federal mandate, and upheld time and again by the US Supreme Court, abortion is legal. I don't give a damn what your opinion on abortion is, at this moment abortion is legal. It's not a new law, its a law that has been in effect for a while now. As a state South Dakota doesn't have the legal right to make abortion a crime. I mean South Dakota isn't a country, its a state that must follow federal law.

Second off you are going to include this in a mercy killing law? You are going to lump murdering innocent doctors that are doing a legal procedure on adult woman in with someone that kills a gunman in a crowd to protect the public? It's not like abortion doctors ride into town and give all the woman abortions. This is a LEGAL procedure that a woman must seek out and elects to do.

Who the hell do you think you are South Dakota? Let me remind you who you are, you are one of the states in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! I am all for states rights, but this is not a matter of states rights. You are trying to put people in danger by authorizing state run killings of abortion doctors. I'm sorry I thought this was America, not some crazy system where the state thinks they have the rights to kill us citizens that pose no threat to public health or safety. ]

This isn't even addressing all of the other issues that were mentioned in the article, the reading of a pro-life script before anyone is eligible for an abortion, or the fact that planned parenthood has to fly in doctors to one clinic in all of South Dakota. This is just the law point of view.

Washington needs to get off its ass now and slap South Dakota in the head. You don't have the right South Dakota. Your state has twice voted down banning abortion and you are just trying to find a way to discourage abortion. One you are going against the people the voted for you and two you are authorizing hits on law abiding citizens. Instead of worrying about all this foreign shit and Egypt and other countries issues this is what Washington needs to look at. The rights of the US citizen and South Dakota 's police state move to put out hits on US Citizens.

Go fuck yourself South Dakota.

I am sorry Arnold....but fuck California

Alright I am getting really fucken sick of San Francisco. Stop trying to protect people from themselves. You have no right to do it! San Fransisco has so far tried to ban toys from Happy Meals and now some people in the city want to ban the right of a parent to get a circumcision

Now this post is not to debate the pros and cons of circumcision. Nor is it to debate McDonald's corporate responsibility (although dude it has to do with parents buying McDonald's not them offering toys). This is about the rights of a people. Your a fucken town San Fransisco! Stay out of private citizens lives! If people want to have a toy with their happy meal you have zero right to deny them that! Stop trying to protect people from themselves and start trying to balance the budget and make sure children are getting the proper education. Stop wasting peoples time!

A better blog post is to follow, this just got me going

What is a libertarian part duex

So I was looking at the Libertarian website this morning and decided to post their platform...I think these ideals just make sense.

Libertarian platform

Sure it may be a right, but personally you suck

I was reading this story on CNN today and it got me thinking. It is absolutely the Boy Scouts of America's right as an organization to not allow gays to be in it. Just like they should be allowed to exclude any other person because its a private organization. That being said what does that prove?

As a former Boy Scout who was very active throughout my time it sickens me that the BSA is going to take this stand. You are required to get 3 separate citizenship badges in Boy Scouts in order to rise in rank. How is it being a good citizen to hate someone because they are gay? If anything they should be encouraging people from every aspect to join. The more variety that is allowed in Boy Scouts the more the scouts will learn.

And its not a matter of someone teaching "gay" thought either. No BSA leader should be bringing in their personal views to try and change the way a kid thinks. You are there to teach them how to be a good person and how to camp. If you hate black, do it on your own time. If you hump goats, do it on your own time. Continue the rule that you must have at least two adults at all time. It's not like gay's are going to rape boys more than straights, its the rape part thats the issue not the penis loving part. Don't allow rapists, do your background check and let gays in. Where is the issue?

The point is for kids to have fun and learn there things. As long as that happens I don't see why someone being gay should prevent them from helping kids.

This is not a political post, but more of a social post. I think the BSA should be allowed to exclude gays, I just don't think they should.

Want to go for a drive? Careful they are watching!

A recent news story caught my attention as an amazing affront to the US Constitution and freedom in general.

In 9 western states now law enforcement can place a gps tracking system on your car without a warrant or any type of court order. Say what? This is America, we have the clever thing called freedom. If I want to drive around in the desert where drugs are being grown (example from the news story) that is allowed! Driving past them, looking at the drugs, is not a crime. So why does the US Government have the right to track my car? Its not their business where I go. Nor is it there right to know.

Now I know the popular thing to say to things like this "Well if you haven't done anything wrong than you don't have to worry" That's not the way it works. I am a free citizen to go and do what I choose,so long as I am within the law. However if I just happen to have a friend who is a drug dealer or something that means that a GPS tracker could implicate me in drugs or something? No its up to the state to prove I am guilty, not up to me to prove I am innocent.

This, to me, seems like one of the worst decisions in legal history. Whats next? Tracking devices on phones, shoes, in our heads? Yes its a big jump from GPS in the car to GPS in our heads, but its not out of the realm of possibility. Are we going to have to carry around a little national ID card with a GPS chip in it "for our own protection"?

You know what give me my right to bear arms, my right to go where I want, and I will take care of myself. I don't need your help government, thanks for asking.

Scott Brown/Sarah Palin/Current Events

I am not a huge Scott Brown supporter (neither am I against him on everything though) I am not even a fan of Massachusetts, I think this state sucks. But Sarah Palin shut the fuck up. Don't talk about Massachusetts, your from Alaska, talk about that. Don't tell me what the people of Massachusetts want, obviously the majority wanted Scott Brown. Thats how democracy works. You failed to win vice president then decided that the end of your run in Alaska wasn't worth it so just shut the fuck up.

That being said I wanted to do a shout out of topics in the news recently that I have read about which fascinate me.

First up Jimmy Carter in North Korea to free a US citizen from the DPRK. Now I have always been of the mindset that, if a country holds a US citizen hostage then we take action, but not if we break another countries law. This guy broke the law of North Korea, guy deserves to be in a N. Korea jail. Do I think his sentence was fair, no I don't, but that DPRK law. So why are we sending in people to negotiate for his release, a guy breaks our laws in our country and I hope we don't let him out.

The UN peace keeping forces and how much they suck. So how do 400 people get raped when a UN peace keeping force is down the road? They use the excuse well we didn't know. What do you mean you didn't know? You were warned of a large force in that area, you know that these types of forces have a history of rape. Put 1 and 1 together people. I am not a huge fan of the UN (love the idea, meh with the reality) but if you are there to do a job then do the job right.

Mothers/Fathers killing their babies. So when did it become a mental health issue to be annoyed with your baby. Like the fact that you don't want to have a baby, or that you are annoyed with it doesn't give you the right to kill it. There is the person in Europe (I think Britain but im not sure.) who killed 8 of her babies because she didnt want to have them or ask for contraception. I'm sorry to any mental health person who thinks this is a mental health issue, but these people are shit. I think they should be taken out back and shot like the dogs they are. You don't kill a baby, that's just off limits. Even many murders think child killers are scum.

Thats all for now. On a more personal note the wedding is in less than a month. It has been a very up and down ride to get to this point (with planning and all that fun stuff) but we are almost there. So hope to see you all at the wedding on the 25th!

illegal is illegal no mater your merits

I just read this news story about a Harvard student who was illegally in the country, but will nto be deported until his case is heard. How can that be allowed? You are here illegally, he knew he was here illegally because he was using a Mexican passport to board planes. You being someone who goes to school in Harvard doesn't give you the right to violate the laws of the United States of America. This is not a stand saying I think immigration is wrong, but if you break the law coming in then how can you be trusted not to break it again. You have already broken the law of the US pal, you are here illegally...key word illegal. Call it undocumented if you want, but if I have to follow the US laws then you do too.

This isn't about open borders either (although I personally think open borders is ridiculous) this is about violating law. The law is one the books and he violated that. He should have to pay the price just the same as any one else.

10-15 with the option of life

Really?

Look I hate rapists and child molesters just as much as the next guy. But you can't just keep adding time to their sentences. If this is an issue then make the original sentencing harsher. If you do the time that you were given then they should let you out. The power to extend someones sentence is ridiculous. I mean thats why we have laws, in order to assure that no one has that kind of power. If you want to give them indefinite life sentences for rape and child molestation then do it, but you cant just keep adding time, this is America we have laws ( This is a rather police state-ish move by the Supreme Court)

Immanent Domain

More on this later, but I wanted to get it down before it got lost in the day to day.
Immanent Domain

Ok so as promised lets talk a bit more about this article. Immanent domain has to be the stupidest idea I have ever heard! How is it legal for the government to take your land. I dont care how much they offer to pay for it they should require the owners permission. I mean the best way I can think of it is that it would be like them coming to me and saying that they needed my house in Maine to do something. Despite the fact that I wouldn't sell the place for any amount of money they would take it from us, the rightful owners. Despite the fact that place is on its third generation of people going up to it, they would take it. I mean can I take land from the government? Why are only they allowed to exercise this magical power of legally taking land from the rightful owners?? unreal

See this is what happens

Read this

See this is what happens when people just want to add new laws. I haven't read the law, but if Trasnocean is covered under this definition and law then the state/federal government has no right to go after them. This is the issue when laws are not updated or taken out when they are outdated. Yes i know thats a large amount of data and all that, but this is why laws and rules need to be more thought out and not just added on top of one and other

Supreme Court justice retiring....third story??

So today it was announced that Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens will be retiring at the end of this current court session. This is not a liberal or conservative view on the high court, but why is this the third story on the Boston Globe?? This is a man that has had a personal hand in shaping the way that the legal system of the United States operates. This should be the biggest story in any news paper who's audience hasn't had a deadly shooting, fire or natural disaster today.

The fact the Deval Patrick says the adults failed Phoebe Prince is not as important as this. Neither is the routine Jonathan Papelbon follows before a game.

Local news media get off your ass and cover the real news. Whoever takes Justice Stevens place WILL help shape the way laws are enforced and that should be #1 99% of the time. Period

trying people for someones suicide.

So the story of Phoebe Prince has been an interesting one to say the least. It is sad that a young girl felt the need to take her own life, but I have been having a real hard time coming to grips with the fact that they are trying others for bullying her to death. I am not even saying that that isn't why she killed herself, but I can't help but see a place for abuse of this legislation.

First off what is bullying? I tried to google the legal definition in Massachusetts, but couldn't find any so this will have to do.
"A person is bullied when he or she is exposed, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more other persons, and he or she has difficulty defending himself or herself."

Let me put out a scenario for you right. Lets say that your teenage son doesn't get along with your neighbors teenage son. They go to the same school, but are fine there, its only when they are at home that its a problem. They like to call each other names and bluster about like young adults (boys) are prone to do.
Now lets say that the neighbor boy kills himself. Lets ASSUME for this scenario it was unrelated to what your son is doing. Obviously there is no way to prove that, but for a second lets assume. Now his family could say well your son bullied my son and now my son is dead therefore its your fault. Well in this assumption we know that this isn't the case.

Obviously thats just a thing that could happen, but in there is one very important factor...THERE IS NO WAY TO PROVE IT. Bullying doesn't equal suicide. And its not even considered negligence or anything like that. Maybe in this case it doesn't apply, but the thought needs to be put forth before it becomes a law. What about the first person who isn't nice to someone, but isn't the cause of their suicide...what about them?

By making legislation against bullying they are saying that its never ok to do anything that anyone doesn't like. Can you say the beginning of the end????...I can