Because modern liberalism - the liberalism that is not about limiting government powers - is totalitarian, it does not have any limits in it quest to bring about equality in the elements of society that it defines as paramount.

The WSJ on the Civil Rights Commission's recent report:

//Mr. Castro’s contribution, by contrast, is so bad it’s good. For he confirms that the progressive argument is mostly about insulting Americans with differing views.

The commission report is called “Peaceful Coexistence: Reconciling nondiscrimination principles with civil liberties.” Its top finding is this: “Civil rights protections ensuring nondiscrimination, as embodied in the Constitution, laws, and policies, are of pre-eminent importance in American jurisprudence.”

Translation: Nuisances including the First Amendment’s “free exercise” of religion guarantee take a back seat to the rapidly multiplying non-discrimination causes such as the “right” to coerce any baker you want into baking the cake you want for your same-sex wedding.

In her own submission to the report, the commission’s Gail Heriot pinpoints the flaw in the finding. A University of San Diego law professor, Ms. Heriot says she could easily imagine a case for Mr. Castro’s position. But instead of an argument, she says, the commission offers a decree.

“By starting with an assertion that antidiscrimination laws are ‘pre-eminent,’ she writes, “the Commission’s analysis essentially begins with its conclusion. Why should anyone accept it? The Commission said so.”//

And:

//In Mr. Castro’s world, those who dissent from the prevailing pieties are deemed unfit for the public square . . . the judgment of federal agencies substitutes for Congress . . . and Justice Anthony Kennedy is free to take his own private mystery of the universe and impose it on the nation by unearthing constitutional rights unmentioned in the Constitution at the expense of the rights that are.

What does it mean for the election? Plainly Mrs. Clinton stands with Mr. Castro on this ahistoric and unconstitutional reading of rights. Even poor Gary Johnson, who embarrassed himself on television when he seemed to have no idea what Aleppo was, has come out against religious liberty—suggesting he understands even less about libertarianism than he does about Syria.

And Mr. Trump? No one would ever confuse Donald Trump with Reinhold Niebuhr. Yet even with his ambiguous stands on where gay rights begin and end, Mr. Trump seems unlikely to people his administration with Martin Castros bent on coercion.

In the meantime, we’re left with this: The melancholy spectacle of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights issuing a report trashing the first civil right enumerated in the Bill of Rights.//

In other news.......

....a sitting Democrat senator - part of the Democrat power structure - wants Americans to know that they don't really have religious rights unless they are part of a State-approved cult.


//Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) says the 1st Amendment’s religious liberty protections don’t apply to individuals. On MSNBC last week, Wisconsin’s junior Senator claimed that the Constitution’s protection of the free exercise of religion extends only to religious institutions, and that individual’s do not have a right to the free exercise of their own religion.

****

The relevant portion of Baldwin’s MSNBC appearance transcript reads:

“Certainly the First Amendment says that in institutions of faith that there is absolute power to, you know, to observe deeply held religious beliefs. But I don’t think it extends far beyond that. . . . [I]n this context, they’re talking about expanding this far beyond our churches and synagogues to businesses and individuals across this country. I think there are clear limits that have been set in other contexts and we ought to abide by those in this new context across America.”

The 1st Amendment’s free exercise clause says nothing about protecting religious institutions but not individuals. “Congress shall make no law…prohibiting the free exercise of [religion].”//

This part of the Overton Window - the left is staking out an approved far-left position, so that the middle ground falls to the left.

This bonkers position should be treated the same way that Donald Trump is treated for saying that Mexico exports rapists.

Remember how we were always told by the ACLU that we had to protect the rights of the most despised members of society, e.g., murderers, communists and perverts, in order to protect our own rights?

Hahahahahaha!

If you believed them, you were an idiot.

The enemy remains the same, but the principle change directions.

Organized Atheism....

...protecting the right of atheists to demand conformity with atheist ideology since 2007.

Restaurant that gave a 15% discount to patrons who said grace has been forced to cancel policy because of pressure from the Freedom from Religion Foundation.

This is first.

Under Obama, we've had our debt rating downgraded and been compared to a banana Republic, but to my knowledge, we've never previously been compared to Tibet with respect to religious repression.

“Father Leonard wishes to continue practicing his faith and ministering to his faith community free of charge on the Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay during the government shut-down, but has been told that he is subject to arrest if he does so,” says the suit.

There are about 300 Catholic families on the base that Father Leonard serves. "Father Leonard is not permitted to perform Confraternity of Christian Doctrine (CCD) classes, meetings, and preparations on the Naval Base," says the lawsuit. "Therefore, all preparation of Catholic Sacraments, such as confirmation and marriage are cancelled."

Father Leonard, who spent a decade serving the Tibetan population in China, likened the administration’s behavior to that of the regime in the People’s Republic.

“In China, I was disallowed from performing public religious services due to the lack of religious freedom in China,” Father Leonard said in a statement. "I never imagined that when I returned home to the United States, that I would be forbidden from practicing my religious beliefs as I am called to do, and would be forbidden from helping and serving my faith community.”