IT'S LEGAL TO ACT LEGALLY IN VIRGINIA

"Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, a Republican, has reversed a policy barring state troopers from referring to Jesus Christ in public prayers, The Washington Post reports.

The decision returns Virginia to a previous policy in which state troopers taking part in a volunteer chaplain program may pray in accordance with their respective faiths, the newspaper quotes a governor's spokesman as saying.

"The governor does not believe the state should tell chaplains of any faith how to pray," McDonnell spokesman Tucker Marin is quoted as saying in the Post. "Religious officials of all faiths should be allowed to pray according to the dictates of their own conscience, and in accordance with their faith traditions, while being respective of the faith traditions of others."
USA Today

I applaud the Governor and his reversal of this bizarre policy. Bizarre, in light of this:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
U.S. Constitution

I'm just a simple carpenter and I don't understand all the subtle nuance and complexities of the law, but really, you don't have to be a brain surgeon, or an attorney, to see what the Founders intended. Why does anyone need special dispensation from the state to pray anyway they want to?

COURT STRIKES A BLOW FOR FREEDOM

This should force the Obama administration to come out from behind the cover of regulation and justify their attempt to crush the First Amendment through regulation of the internet.

"The Federal Communications Commission does not have the legal authority to slap Net neutrality regulations on Internet providers, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.

A three-judge panel in Washington, D.C. unanimously tossed out the FCC's August 2008 cease and desist order against Comcast, which had taken measures to slow BitTorrent transfers and had voluntarily ended them earlier that year.

Because the FCC "has failed to tie its assertion" of regulatory authority to any actual law enacted by Congress, the agency does not have the authority to regulate an Internet provider's network management practices, wrote Judge David Tatel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit."
CNET

WHAT ABOUT THE BOY SCOUTS?

I wonder (and you would think the professional journalist that wrote this story would have asked) is this code only applied to church groups or does it apply to all meetings in private homes? It sounds as though it is a clear cut case of violation of the First Amendment but if it applies to everything, maybe not. I wonder what their reasoning is? Again, you'd think that might be in the story.

If the First Amendment applies in this case why wouldn't the Second Amendment apply in Chicago? The question of whether it does is in the Supreme Court. Just wondering?

"The national Alliance Defense Fund says a town code that bars religious assemblies in private homes in the Arizona community of Gilbert is unconstitutional.
The Oasis of Truth church began meeting at Pastor Joe Sutherland's house in November and rotated homes several times a week for Bible study and fellowship.

A Gilbert code compliance officer hit the church with a violation notice after seeing a sign near a road advertising a Sunday service.

A zoning administrator told the church that Bible studies, church leadership meetings and fellowship activities are not permitted in private homes.

The Alliance Defense Fund's Doug Napier says no neighbors complained.

The Scottsdale-based group has filed an appeal with the town of Gilbert, contending its code violates the U.S. Constitution."
Fox News