Before I present the contents of a very good article about the two opposing views on the Supreme Court, I have a story to tell.
This morning I received an email from my Congressional Representative, Andy Levin (yes, he is a member of the same family that produced Senator Carl Levin, and Representative Sander Levin.) It concerns abortion and is, in my opinion, being used as a fund raiser for Mr. Levin. Here’s part of it. Notice the phrase ‘people who can get pregnant’, and I fail to understand how it impacts the LGBTQIA+ people:
I am infuriated that the Supreme Court’s Republican-appointed extremist Justices have stripped away the right to abortion care for an estimated 36 million women and people who can get pregnant. The decision, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization will harm all of us who value personal freedom and bodily autonomy, but those who already face barriers to health care, especially Black and Brown women, rural communities, LGBTQIA+ people, disabled people and those struggling to make ends meet will face devastating consequences. I want to share some of the actions I’ve taken since the decision came down.
My answer to this email:
You know very well that the Supreme Court has not “stripped away” any rights. Those ‘rights’ are now up to the states to decide, as they should be. Abortion is still legal in your state and, if that is what the people of your state support, they will continue to be legal.
Please stop using a serious issue as a fund raiser. It’s disgraceful.
I got another form letter about abortion, and I answered him finally:
Calling something reproductive rights doesn’t change the fact that at least one person dies in every abortion. That is considered a successful procedure.
Would you support murder of children if that made a mother’s life easier? Of course you would not.
But that isn’t even the point here. The Supreme Court followed the Constitution when it returned the responsibility for making law (if they desire to do so) regarding abortion back to the states, where it belongs. When Roe and Casey were decided, it was judicial activism for the Court to MAKE LAW rather than interpreting the Constitution as it was written.
You may not agree with my beliefs regarding abortion, but you should agree with me regarding the Supreme Court and the Constitution. The state of Michigan and its people can now decide what is best for its citizens.
As it should be.
Now, what this is really all about. Excellent opinion piece in the Manhattan Contrarian:
All three cases were decided 6-3 along ideological lines. These cases involved the most basic issues of what the Constitution is and how it is to be interpreted. On those issues there is virtually no hope of one side ever convincing anyone from the other side. There just are two fundamentally irreconcilable visions of how this should work. The two visions can be summarized in just a few sentences each:
Vision 1. The Constitution allocates powers to the three branches of government, and also lists certain rights entitled to constitutional protection. The role of the courts is (1) to assure that the powers are exercised only by those to whom they are allocated, (2) to protect the enumerated rights, and (3) as to things claimed to be rights but not listed, to avoid getting involved.
Vision 2. The Constitution is an archaic document adopted more than 200 years ago, and largely obsolete. The role of the courts is to implement the current priorities of the academic left and then somehow rationalize how that is consistent with the written document. If a right is enumerated in the Constitution but disfavored by the current left (e.g., the right to “keep and bear arms”), then the courts should find a way to uphold enactments that minimize that right down to the point that it is a nullity. If a right is not enumerated in the Constitution, but is a priority of the left (e.g., abortion), then that right can be discovered in some vague and unspecific constitutional language (“due process”). [. . .]
Of the three decisions discussed, the one likely to have the most far-reaching impact is West Virginia. During his first days and weeks in office, President Biden issued one Executive Order after another instructing every part of the bureaucracy to figure out any way it could to implement the “climate” agenda. Statutory authorization? Who needs that? Now, not only is EPA’s most expansive regulatory initiative getting shut down, but multiple other agencies have comparable gambits likely to fail in the courts. Most famously, the SEC is now out with 100 pages or so of new proposed regulations, mandating corporate disclosures of “emissions”; and the Federal Reserve supposedly is adopting saving the climate as a third of its missions (the other two being price stability and full employment). More such dubious initiatives are under way in agencies from the Department of Energy to the Department of the Interior.
A major transformation of the economy requires specific legislation duly enacted by Congress. Who could have thought of such a crazy idea?
“On those issues there is virtually no hope of one side ever convincing anyone from the other side. There just are two fundamentally irreconcilable visions of how this should work.”
Non-overtly ideological citizens who follow the Dem agenda oftentimes do so because it’s a family tradition and they give issues little thought. Those folk, once the issues are explained in a truthful way, are reachable. Unfortunately, those who are a bit more brainwashed won’t even listen to an explanation…sort of the stick your fingers in your ears and hum loudly types.
The youth of our nation are being indoctrinated at an accelerated pace and, of course, abortion is the cause of the day. They are the leaders of tomorrow; so holding out much hope that the two sides will reconcile is not gaining much traction. Praise God that many young people are in leadership of the life movement. And praise Him, too, that our Supreme Court has justices who love life also.
As we know, life-loving justices are, though, having an unsuccessful time of trying to convince RINO governors and other persons in authority to follow the law when it comes to harassing and bullying those same justices over the abortion issue. Daniel Greenfield wrote a short article yesterday regarding this…
“Gov. Hogan, Officials Refuse to Enforce Laws to Stop Supreme Court Harassment”
I’ve said it before, let me say it again, if a judge in any apolitical case were being targeted at his or her home with angry protests and death threats, those responsible would very quickly be in prison and the protests would be shut down by a heavy law enforcement presence.
This is happening because the Biden administration and its allies, which include Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, refuse to enforce the law.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The current occupant of our beautiful White House was not duly elected by the people! I remember a previous White House occupant explaining to the people: Never underestimate Joe Biden’s ability to f… things up! There’s a reason why everything Joe Biden touches turns to crap! The process of doing the same thing over and expecting different results is the definition of insanity. Has the Dominion voting machines been replaced yet?
I have noticed that the Left side of this Uniparty can’t win elections on what they want to run on, thus, the rigged elections. There is a reason why PBHO did not supply a State Birth Certificate. Twenty years ago or so, I needed a Birth Certificate to go to Niagara Falls, Canada and back. The only other form acceptable was a passport. Previously, all that was needed was a driver’s license.
It’s a shame at that what this country’s progress is measured as!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Another article by Daniel Greenfield yesterday….
Another Day, Another Arrest for Threatening to Kill Supreme Court Justices
And meanwhile AG Garland and the rest of the Biden administration are actively abetting this leftist insurrection and campaign of political terror.
LikeLiked by 1 person