Reply To: SCOTUS Denies to Hear Muniz


To former Pastor Adam and anyone else concerned about Saddles last freedom of speech, freedom of religion post made. I can not will not speak for the person Saddles, but I will comment what I think was meant. “The hypocrisy” of lawmakers, ruling elite and the public. Many laws in this Country were made and still are on Christian or religious Principles. “A lot” of the people pushing for this laws identify themselves as being religiousor participating or “belonging” to a congregation or group that engages in “religious” activities lawful or otherwise. Please don’t ask me to quantify the numbers to validate my understanding. I don’t do polls and often am skeptical of them because, polls can be used to manipulate too. But also take into consideration that while the many people pushing for these laws would say that they want these laws because, of “their religious beliefs or convictions” the many will not openly say so and keep it “secret” or to themselves privately. Whether people want to see it, understand it or accept it is not my call, but it is historical fact! An open mind, connecting dots and being broken from the “hypnotic” trance the rulers have over the populace might be needed to achieve this knowledge. “They” make and adjusts the “rules” or laws to suit their control over the masses ultimately is not for everyone’s safety, but they own subsistance. Pastor Adam I do appreciate your concern because, sadly in this day and age people read, see, hear smell what they want to and fits their thinking even if illogical or without having the “full picture” of the subject or factual history… And Saddles I am not saying you are wrong to lawfully express your views or understanding or comparison. Like I said, I will not speak for you! …Nor judge. Moderators please do with my post\comment as you wish please. I am just an observer and not an instigator.