In relation to an article by Jack my co-blogger, called Dane Cook, Groceries Online and Swastika Shaped Buildings,a State Senator introduced a bill (PA SENATE BILL 1294) which would BAN such displays of symbols.

It started with this as its concept:

“As a society, we must be conscious of others,” Kitchen said. “That means understanding the historically bad connotation the noose holds for African-Americans.”

But the legislation pushes this precept:

“…intentionally or recklessly displays a symbol which is offensive to the race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, gender or gender identity of another individual or group of individuals…”

What happens if you do such a thing? According to the bill;

“…shall be classified as a misdemeanor of the third degree…”

Let’s put the language into perspective, shall we?

 

“Intentionally or recklessly”

First let’s hit “intentionally”. That means, with intent and on purpose.

Second, “recklessly”. This means, impulsively, obtusely, willfully, riskily, arbitrarily, hastily, accidentally or randomly act.

 

So the final intent of this bill is to try and make it so that any person or group of persons, anywhere and for any reason can claim foul on another persons opinion and that those opinions are legally contempt and able to be persecuted.

Some examples of the illegalities that would be caused by such a law:

  1. I decide, as a Christian, that those who wear symbols that represent an anti-Christian belief system are ATTACKING my RELIGION.
  2. I decide, as an Atheist, that symbols of any formed religion in any manner is a threat to my mental and personal well being.
  3. I feel that the symbol of a wheelchair in parking lots and on select bathroom doors is a direct and defamatory attack on my inability to walk.
  4. A person wearing a shirt with a symbol of a swastika offended my ancestry and culture of being Jewish. Even though, the person wearing the swastika shirt was actually celebrating the concept of luck in their ethnic heritage as a Navaho Native American.

I could go on for days with examples of how this type of law would bring about the Third Reich full blown.


Let’s look at an old document that we as Americans should hold near and dear. It is called The Constitution of the United States. The first Amendment to the U.S. Constitution dictates that:

“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.”

Here is a simple question to my readers; Does PA Senate Bill 1294 pass the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?

The answer is quite simply, No.

As a matter of fact, the entire intent behind the bill appears to be in complete contradiction of what is stated in the First Amendment.

This bill was introduced by State Senator Shirley M. Kitchen 3rd District of Philadelphia. It doesn’t mean Shirley wrote the Bill, but she did put her neck out there with this one. It was co-sponsored by Senators Washington, Tartaglione, Huges, Dinniman, C. Williams, Stack, Lavalle, Folmer, Browne, Rafferty, Costa, Wozniak and Rhoades.


There are 50 State Senators in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Out of that number, 14 co-sponsored this bill. What that tells me is right off the bat 28% of our state representation obviously have never read the Constitution. Now that number may appear to be a little bit high, but I figure I would give amenity and credit for ignorance where it is due. I mean, I could always point out that maybe they didn’t read the bill and just decided to sponsor it anyway, or perhaps they didn’t understand what the bill is saying and just decided to sign it, or maybe even the fact that they don’t go to work on a regular basis and just tell their assistants to pass their votes in for them while they are out doing some sort of hullabaloo. I will leave it at my belief… they just didn’t read the Constitution. You get the idea, benefit of the doubt.

Now I am not one for political commentaries, but I couldn’t let this one slip on by without giving it a formal acknowledgement that something is wrong in the state of Denmark.

My posts from my blogs span several sites (approximately 30) and I wonder how many will impeach my freedom of speech because of this particular post. I am curious and may very well post again on this subject (especially if it gets knocked off of any of my cross posted blog sites).

With all of this diatribe, I leave you with a picture of something that is on the website, the very front page, of Bill 1294’s head sponsor, PA State Senator Shirely M. Kitchen:

Anti-Noose

Hey Senator Kitchen… I am offended by the negative historical connotation that you have posted on the front page of your website and demand you take it down… sheesh… maybe you could at least practice what you preach.

Moreso, I am greatly offended by your blatant attack on my rights given to me by OUR forefathers to freedom of speech and pursuit of happiness.

Subscribe to the Darkside of ROM: