Home Politicians EW Jackson: People Should NOT Be Able to Object on Religious Grounds...

EW Jackson: People Should NOT Be Able to Object on Religious Grounds on “Bear Arms” Clause


So let’s get this straight: according to EW Jackson, people should NOT be able to, as the Christian Science Monitor explains, “object on religious or moral ground” to military service when taking the Oath of Allegiance, by omitting the words “bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law.” But the same EW Jackson goes nuts at any suggestion that people can’t object on religious grounds to their businesses serving gay customers cakes or whatever. As one friend of mine put it, “EW doens’t really much get consistency, does he?” And as another noted, “One person who might have objected to taking up arms? Jesus.”

P.S. It’s interesting that this language was added in 1950, at the height of Cold War hysteria/McCarthyism, “several years after the Supreme Court decided that the promise to bear arms was not implied in the overall promise to ‘support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic.'”

  • mikoglaces

    I’m no EW Jackson fan to say the least, but his own words provide for “allowance for conscientious objectors.” So I think you’ve misstated his position.  

  • pvogel

    i wonder what drugs he has  imbibed?

  • spincipher

    If Jackson had proposed adding language to the Oath of Allegiance requiring immigrants to support and defend an alleged inviolable right of same-sex couples to buy cakes from Christian business owners, you’d have no problem with it, right?

    Do you even know what ‘allegiance’ means?

    I could be wrong but I have a hunch your strident hostility toward E.W. Jackson belies homosexual tendencies, no? Don’t worry, you can “come out of the closet” because the Supreme Court just ruled that sodomy is the new normal. I bet this Court could even rule that the mental illness five of its members just displayed is sound thinking. What’s to stop them now that the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God no longer apply? Maybe the Supremes can rule that America will be the first great civilization in history to survived moral depravity?

    Why don’t you get this straight-smart-aleck-You are untethered. You’ve drifted so far into space cadetville that sound thinking is your new ‘nuts.’