May 9, 2021
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH LEGISLATURE OF NEBRASKA, FIRST SESSION:
- That we hereby reaffirm our solemn oaths of office by expressing a firm resolution to maintain and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Nebraska against every act of aggression whether foreign or domestic, including every act of unconstitutional abuse of power arising from the state or federal government.
That sounds fantastic, unfortunately, it seems that you also use this document to then break those oaths, so it may have been advisable to put this at the end of the document. Regardless, this point exists solely as a ‘war cry’ of sorts to simultaneously stir up feelings of national pride in readers as well as stoke the flames of the exact crowd that believed there was an abuse of power so strongly that they choose to break into the U.S. Capitol or supported those that did.
- That we are greatly alarmed that a factious and contentious spirit has recently manifested itself in the federal government, emanating both from the legislative and executive branches, with the desire to enlarge their powers by forced constructions of the Constitution of the United States to expand certain general phrases in order to destroy their meaning and effect. Such phrases include: “Congress shall make no law . . . prohibiting the free exercise [of religion] . . .”, “. . . the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”, and “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof . . .”. This design appears to have no other end except to consolidate the states by degrees into one sovereignty, the obvious tendency and inevitable consequence of which would be to obliterate completely the rights of sovereignty by the several states, and to destroy the rights and liberties of the people, as explicitly granted to them by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.
‘Spirit’ is indeed the right word, as this fear is about as substantial as the specters of a mid 2000’s ghost hunting T.V. series. This is again a dog whistle thrown into rhetoric for the sole purpose of trying to defend against a threat that simply does not exist. Nobody is seeking to strip the sovereignty of states nor strip the rights of christian nor take from any person a gun for which they have reason for and competence to own. As for the “Time, Place, and Manner” of elections, it’s worth noting this quote was cut at a rather interesting point, as it goes on to say “…Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.”
So, you know, doing as the constitution says. But I will still even agree with you, the point of states is to allow for legislative testing grounds and Congress should not get involved unless necessary. Unfortunately, it has been shown again and again that voter ID laws, purging voter rolls, limiting absentee voting, and restricting the voting of convicted persons disproportionately affects minorities, minorities that largely vote Democrat. Now, the argument could be made that this is coincidental and that these laws get passed to protect our elections. That argument would also be in incredibly bad faith as the Hofeller Files so clearly show that this is direct and intention voter suppression by the GOP.
More than anything though, the choice of language here “obliterate” and “destroy the rights” shows that is written not because of anything based on fact, but rather on emotions and conjecture on the insidious plans of the far left, the radically well equipped and tightly organized terrorist group known as ANTIFA, and the ever looming day on which the gays finally deploy their agenda.
- That we in particular protest the ominous plan revealed by the executive branch to take unilateral action in explicit violation of the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. This sacred right is also protected by our Constitution of Nebraska: “All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights; among these are . . . the right to keep and bear arms for security or defense of self, family, home, and others . . .”.
Plan? What plan. Also, while I’m all for the enjoyment of guns, maybe when it takes a global pandemic to even put a dent in a shooting epidemic the problem is systemic, and as such should actually be addressed rather than simply fear mongering. Putting this in writing only a little over a month after the shooting in Boulder, just one state over, where ten people, ten lives, were lost seems to me to be an outright slap in the face of reason and sanity. Keep in mind, in 2019 there were more mass shootings than days. I support gun rights, but I also support gun restrictions and acting based on reason. I don’t want to take your guns, unless of course, you’re mentally unstable, have a history of violence, or have proven yourself to be reckless with firearms. These aren’t radical ideas, they’re common sense. This being in this resolution seems to defy this common sense and instead state that the right to a deadly weapon regardless of their competence. Something even our current laws and regulations do not support as while or constitution may say you have the “inalienable” right to bear arms, we still require concealed carry permits and disallow guns on school grounds.
- That we further protest against federal government actions which seek to punish traditional religious beliefs about the sanctity of life and sexual mores. These actions are in direct violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which states that “Congress shall make no law . . . prohibiting the free exercise [of religion] . . .”, and of the Constitution of Nebraska which states that “All persons have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences. . . . [N]or shall any interference with the rights of conscience be permitted.”.
There is no ‘punishment’ against
traditional religious beliefs Christianity - this is particularly absurd to claim when you consider that the US is 63% Christian. Rather, there is this often ignored ideal in our government that there should be separation of any church and the state. The sanctity of life and “sexual mores” are almost exclusively talking points of the religious right, and, as it turns out, we’ve been over this. Roe v. Wade was decided back in the 70’s and the decision then holds now. Frankly, it’s not as if I will convince anyone pro-life to be pro-choice. I don’t expect that. Instead, I think it’s pretty clear that the country is divided on the issue, and as such it seems draconian to enforce the ideal onto a woman who does not believe in it. If you don’t want an abortion, don’t get one. pro-choice does not mean pro-death, it simply means that women who chose to have an abortion should not be legally restricted from getting one. As for “sexual mores”, whether or not I want to engage in a rigorous session of anonymous yet passionate love making with a group of men or prefer to explore new territory with my non-binary partner is truly none of the state of Nebraska’s business- except in the sense of providing scientific information on how I may do safely. Something for which we have failed at miserably, given how common it is for kids in Nebraska to receive abstinence only education which has been shown by a large number of studies to result in more women seeking abortion, not less.
- That we express distress at the prospect of proposed federal legislation designed to usurp the election process that was constitutionally left primarily to the legislatures of the several states, and only secondarily to Congress as Alexander Hamilton argues in Federalist Paper Nos. 59‑61. These bills would dictate uniform election rules in all fifty states and eviscerate protections such as voter identification requirements, periodic updates of voter files, and restrictions on fraud‑prone ballot harvesting. They also seek to steal the right and privilege of redistricting away from state legislatures and instead empower unelected commissions with this ability. Therefore, we affirm that this right must remain with elected state officials whose power is granted by the people themselves.
Soo… You’re still mad about Trump losing I take it? As mentioned above, it’s pretty clear that voting restrictions from the GOP are often intentionally written to restrict minorities and boost republican wins. As an aside, this argument would really hold a lot more water if you didn’t cite the Federalist Papers and purposely cut off the quote from the constitution above.
- That we also protest the stated goal by the executive branch of the federal government to restrict the private use of at least thirty percent of America’s lands and waters by 2030. As evidence, we expound section 1 of the Constitution of Nebraska, “To secure these rights, and the protection of property, governments are instituted among people, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”. In concurrence, the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States declares: “No person shall be . . . deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law . . .”. The acquisition, possession, and use of private property for private purposes is inextricable from the right of liberty and the obtainment of happiness. Such an appropriation of property is a gross violation of the fundamental principles of our state and nation.
- That we strongly affirm the sacred and constitutional right of all persons of the liberty to decide what, if any, vaccination is necessary for their health or the health of their family. We explicitly reject the idea of vaccine passports and other federal mandates that restrain a person’s right to peaceably assemble or restrict their freedom to travel or conduct commerce.
Ahh, yes, let’s just put into a legislative resolution a dog whistle for the anti-vax movement and essentially condone behavior that has resulted in nearly the amount of deaths in Nebraska as the attacks on 9/11 caused in New York and has caused 557,000 deaths in the United States, which is over a quarter of the population of Nebraska and more than the total population of Omaha. This point is sure to age well and those that affirm it to be reflected on in a positive light by history.
- That the Legislature requests cooperation from the Governor of Nebraska, the Nebraska Attorney General, the President of the United States, the President pro tempore of the United States Senate, the Secretary of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Clerk of the United States House of Representatives, and the presiding officers of each of the legislative houses in the several states in defending the Constitution of the United States, the states, and the people against federal overreach.
“We seek to have our idiocracy reviewed and mocked by only the most highly regarded positions”
- That the Clerk of the Legislature shall transmit copies of this resolution to the Governor of Nebraska, the Nebraska Attorney General, the President of the United States, the President pro tempore of the Senate, the Secretary of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Clerk of the United States House of Representatives, and to the presiding officers of each of the legislative houses in the several states.
“Transmission has been received and will be promptly crumpled up and tossed into the nearest garbage receptacle. Please allow 3 to 5 business days before sending the follow up message indicating that this was intended to be taken seriously, as our staff can only laugh so much before our ribs begin to hurt”