Winds of Change- reply to Raphael and Hari

Submitted by Yehoshua Zeller (United States), Sep 29, 2005 at 12:13

In reply to Raphael and Hari Iyer who have mentioned Canadien-Canadian and U.S. Constitutional guarantees against any religious group trying to usurp our Constitutional Rights: They are correct as to Past Practices. The Winds of Change are here and with it comes a newer and more politically correct view of past "policies" in interpretation of the U.S. and Canadien-Canadian Constitutions.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has commented to the U.S. Conference of U.S. Lawyers last year in Texas that the old way needs to be reviewed. Justice Ginsburg believes the U.S. Constitution to be "a living document" and "needs input of world opinion" as well in bringing the United States closer in harmony within the world community.

So one can see the movement of future actions on the way when it comes to direction of thought with a newer Supreme Court that is replacing the present court. Future appointees will have to pass the litmus test on certain social issues in order to get confirmed by our politicians in terms of such criteria: political correctness and world opinion. Europe and the rest of the Western Nations will become a rubber stamp image of each other in all matters.The idea of a(an) One World Order is not so far fetched as it was considered not so long ago."Brave New World" was a novel but may become a truism.Please remember that Canada and the USA are ruled by the "Golden Rule" which means that those who have the gold ,rule, and their interests are Omnipotent . Oil seems to be the goal of the "gods" of gold. So as Betty Davis once said in a movie," Fasten your seat beats and get ready for a bumpy ride."
Yehoshua Zeller

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".