Connect with us

Culture and Religion

Can the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage be reversed? Should it be?



Can the Supreme Courts ruling on same-sex marriage be reversed Should it be

Conservative Christians around the country have been trying to figure out ways to go against the Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges. We had Kim Davis doing her thing three years ago. We had Judge Roy Moore suspended for trying to stop same-sex marriage license from being given out in Alabama. There were multiple attempts to subvert it until very recently. Today, it appears to be just a normal part of life. Everyone has moved on.

Did America have a change of heart? In some ways, yes. But there’s also a sense of hopelessness over a situation most believe cannot be changed any time soon. Most conservatives and Christians are doing what we can to stay afloat; fighting past battles is very low on the priority list. But there are still occasional attempts similar to Davis’s and Moore’s that pop up from time to time. None of these can work. It’s not possible for them to work based upon the Constitution. There’s nothing that the citizens, Senators, Congressmen, or even a President can do to directly oppose or reverse the decision. There’s only one thing that can be done. The original ruling must be overturned and that’s no easy feat.

To do this would require one of two things: a 3/4th majority of state legislatures amending the Constitution or a powerful ruling by the Supreme Court itself to overturn its previous ruling. The first option is all but impossible on this particular issue given the sentiment of citizens in the nation itself. The second is very difficult given the doctrine of stare decisis, but it’s conceivable under the right circumstances.

First and foremost, the balance of power in the Supreme Court must be changed. It’s easy to argue that appointing Supreme Court Justices is by far, hands down the most important task of the President. It will have bigger and longer-lasting effects on the future of this country than any other action the President is capable of taking. So far, we have one strong originalist and one ideologically-yet-to-be-determined, so it seems things are heading in the right direction. But Chief Justice John Roberts has been acting as a counterbalance so far, meaning President Trump will need to get at least one more originalist on the bench to replace one of the progressive justices in order to have a remote chance of reversing some of the damage done from the bench over the last few decades.

The next thing that would need to happen is that a case must be reviewed by the freshly-conservative Supreme Court that is directly related to the ruling of Obergefell v. Hodges. This, too, is not an easy task and will require the type of planning nobody’s talking about doing right now. As I said before, the issue has been pushed aside. But there’s still chance it could happen. Slim, but present.

In essence, this is a one-time shot. It has to be perfect to have any chance of working. The timing would have to coincide with the next appointment in the Supreme Court. The proper path of venues would need to be chosen ahead of time so that it would have the best chance of reaching the Supreme Court in the appropriate session. Those involved with the case would need to be compelling.

Of course, this raises the question of whether or not it even should be considered. Has the battle been lost permanently? Is it too early to try to reverse a decision that hasn’t even reached a decade since it was made? At this point, it doesn’t seem to be as important to most conservatives as it was just a couple of years ago.

But if one of our goals is to be reestablishing the power of the people and the states while reducing the power of DC, this would be a great issue upon which to make that happen. The proper path here would be to attack the Constitutionality of the Supreme Court’s ability to make the ruling in the first place. This should be a state issue; even proponents of gay marriage who know the law and understand the Constitution are very well aware of this. It’s the Achilles Heel of the ruling. For this reason, it’s no surprise that making this an issue for individual states to decide has been conservative’s argument since before the Supreme Court ruling was even made.

One thing that we must remember regarding whether or not this should even be tried. The Bible is unambiguous. Marriage is between a man and a woman. As I noted before, the financial ramifications of unions should be wide open. If a gay couple wants to get tax breaks, share benefits, or any of the other secular benefits associated with legal marriage, so be it. But the covenant of marriage has always been between a man and a woman millennia before the United States was even a nation. That portion of Biblical worldview means Christians cannot give up on this issue any more than we shouldn’t give up on overturning Roe v. Wade.

Does that mean same-sex marriages should be outlawed? That’s up to the states, and I would assume most states would not outlaw it. But the mandate for adherence by churches, bakers, and anyone else to be forced to participate in same sex marriages must be reversed.

Everything else that is being done in protest of gay marriage is just that: a protest. The path to fight it with a chance of success is extremely narrow. Meanwhile, the battle for hearts and minds may have been lost long ago.

Is the nation ready to revive the American Conservative Movement?


NOQ Report editors use ExpressVPN



Culture and Religion

Let’s have that ‘conversation’ about guns and why we’re never giving them up




Lets have that conversation about guns and why were never giving them up

#GunPrideMonth is the perfect time for a calm, rational discussion about the true causes of violence.

Our friends on the national socialist Left love to bring up the issue of guns in the context of a ‘serious crisis’. Tying to make it seem as Corey Booker falsely claims that there is a mass shooting every day. Well, its been several days since one of those occurrences, so that is clearly a lie. Even the Washington Post has made it clear that gun homicides have dropped substantially over the past 25 years in this article: Most Americans incorrectly think gun-murder rates have become worse, not better.

However, for the Left they have convince themselves of the righteousness of their causes, so making something up here or lying there is perfectly acceptable to them, never mind that reality shows them to be complete frauds, ‘in the aggregate’.

At least it used to be that way. Now the Liberty Grabber Left has come out of the authoritarian closet with a full court press for socialism and gun confiscation [funny how those two things go hand in hand?]. At this point in time, it’s a case where they haven’t stopped complaining about guns, despite the violence rationale dropping out of the news.

It’s time for a calm and rational conversation about the basic human right of self-defense.

The Liberty grabbers are at a decided disadvantage in having these discussions in a relatively calm environment. It always seems to work best for them when emotions run high and they can run around with the hair on fire screaming ‘we have to do something –anything – about guns, now before we rationally think about it too much’. Well, they usually don’t add that last part, thinking is the last thing they want anyone to do.

The fact is a research study from Northeastern University demonstrated that: Schools are safer than they were in the 90s, and school shootings are not more common than they used to be.  Facts like that don’t help the Liberty Grabber Left in their gun confiscation quest, so such things are ignored. It’s better for them to engage in their usual routine of making things up and repeating them ad nauseam until they are believed as the truth, thanks to the admonitions of socialist luminaries Hitler a Lenin.

A discussion on the underlying causes of violence instead of inanimate objects.

We’ll begin with a video from a year ago from the Warrior Poet Society on Why Gun Control is NOT about GUNS:

[Note that even he mistakenly states that shootings are getting worse.]

He points out that the worse thing we could do is establish so-called ‘Gun-Free’ zones where mass murderers can have free reign. Most mass shootings since 1950 have taken place in ‘Gun-Free’ zones.

This leads to the larger point that even if the Liberty Grabbers got their wish and confiscated every gun from the innocent, the criminals and the government would still have them to prey on people.

Still further, making the point, even if those of evil intent didn’t have guns, they could use other means: explosives, poisons, edged weapons, vehicles..

He makes the last point that this is a recent phenomenon, unheard of 50 or so years ago. This is partly due to the glamorization of these killers in the media.

One change has been in the culture and in our society and the fact that many of these killers have grown up in fatherless homes. An article from last February pointed out that Of the 27 Deadliest Mass Shooters, 26 of Them Had One Thing in Common: fatherlessness.

The Takeaway.

The Liberty Grabber Left would like to have a ‘Conversation’ about gun confiscation. We of the Pro-Liberty Right want to Keep our freedom. Despite the lies of the Left, guns aren’t a growing epidemic. But they do stand in the way of the Socialist-Left attaining their desired authoritarian power. Thus they keep on bleating about the ‘problem’ even though its diminishing in intensity.

The intent here is to have that ‘conversation’ and prove that it’s NOT a question of guns, but of the breakdown in our culture induced by the Left. They would prefer it to be about guns, and how fast and how soon they will be confiscated.

[But only from certain people ]

Additional reference links

Poll: More Americans Have a Gun in Home Than Ever Before
Nearly 120 million Americans have a firearm in the home

Any Study Of ‘Gun Violence’ Should Include How Guns Save Lives

That Time The CDC Asked About Defensive Gun Uses

UPDATED: Mass Public Shootings keep occurring in Gun-Free Zones: 94% of attacks since 1950

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Article about Imam Mohamad Tawhidi pulled down over threat of lawsuit



Article about Imam Mohamad Tawhidi pulled down over threat of lawsuit

An article that appeared on NOQ Report last week has been removed following threats of a lawsuit. In our current revenue situation, we are not in a position to defend against lawsuits from powerful people like Imam Mohamad Tawhidi, known on Twitter as the “Imam of Peace.”

It should be noted that Tawhidi did not request the article to be pulled, only edited. While I appreciate his position and the cordial way he has handled this from the start, the author of the piece was unable to edit the story in a way that would be satisfactory without changing the premise and conclusion of the article itself. The only recourse was to remove the article altogether.

As much as I hate censorship in just about any situation, prudence is called for in this particular circumstance. Despite incredible growth in traffic – more than triple of what we had in March of this year – revenue has been challenged. Our attempts to be completely crowdfunded have not yielded the dollars necessary to be able to fight lawsuits. I hate most ads but at this point they’re necessary. Even a frivolous lawsuit could be enough to shut the site down, which is why we continue to ask for donations whenever possible.

It’s saddening to have to resort to taking down articles when faced with challenges, but we know if we persevere we will continue to grow. Someday, we will have the clout to fight lawsuits, but for now we are fighting for survival.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

This could be a daily headline: ‘Ilhan Omar invokes race card’



This could be a daily headline Ilhan Omar invokes race card

Being anti-Semitic wasn’t getting enough attention for Representative Ilhan Omar, so in recent weeks she’s shifted her standard operating procedure to go from attacking Israel to playing the constant victim and labeling anyone opposed to her as racist. The latest episode of “How Ilhan played the race card today” happened at the ideal place for such things: the far-left Netroots Nation gathering.

DailyWire’s Ryan Saavedra gave the short version as well as a video of the pertinent parts of her speech:

The biggest flaw of Omar’s argument is causation versus correlation. She claims the illegal immigrants are being put in “cages” because they don’t look like the people putting them there. But even if we set aside the false notion that people of color are all against stopping illegal immigration, they aren’t being detained because of the way they look. They’re being detained because the broke the law and attacked the sovereignty of our nation by stealing entry and claiming an asylum status that is reserved for truly oppressed people, not economically challenged people as most of the migrants are.

If a Caucasian family crossed the border illegally, they would be detained just as quickly and with the same rules applied to them. The fact that most who do so are people of color does not mean they’re being detained because of their race.

Omar and her cronies from the Justice Democrats – Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ayanna Pressley, and Rashida Tlaib – have made it a habit to invoke the race card in every circumstance and regarding every policy. Today is just them on repeat.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading