An organization dedicated to infusing logical reasoning and science into political discussions
The Johnson Amendment is seen as a legal tool for limiting religion. But it is actually not specific to religious institutions at all. Yet it is often applied disproportionately, especially when it comes to cases with ambiguity such as NPR’s indirect politicking.« Continue »
Speech is protected under the first amendment, and always should be. This has presented a moral quandary. Is verbal bullying protected under the constitution? This article, which seeks to answer this question, was spurred by a discussion on Twitter with a group of people who could not accept that speech could be a form of violence.« Continue »
One day it was pointed out to me by a friend in the military that those in the military do not take an oath to the state, or really even to the President, but rather first and foremost an oath to defend the constitution.« Continue »
Many have claimed that Donald Trump must place all of his assets in a blind trust, or else he would be violating the Emoluments Clause of the constitution. This is only half true. And it is on Congress to make a decision in the matter. What is interesting is that some have actually suggested impeachment for Trump, if he does not fully divest his assets, before taking office. But is that really necessary? It might be, if Congress does not make a decision to the contrary. « Continue »
Some people seem to have a very absurd notion of what counts as censorship. The first amendment protects the right to the free exchange of information. It does not guarantee you a venue. Private entities get to choose whether or not to facilitate your exchange of ideas or not.« Continue »