Connect with us

Conservatism

The myth of overturning Roe v Wade

Published

on

The myth of overturning Roe v Wade

Many on the right are skeptical about opening up Roe v Wade insisting that overturning Roe v Wade will not serve Pro-Life causes because it will force the issue back on the states. In such scenarios, Alabama will be the safe haven for the unborn while New York becomes the importer for people who want to kill their babies. Even if this is the case, it is still a giant win for the pro-life side to enable entire states to ban abortion. But this is merely a literal overturn of Roe v Wade, not a practical one.

Take Brown v BOE as an example of a Supreme Court case that overturned a predecessor: Plessy v Ferguson. The Ferguson ruling maintain the theoretical notion that separate accommodations could be equal; therefore, private businesses must comply with the state’s discrimination policies. It’s a pretty bad ruling, comparable to Roe v Wade, which conjured out of nowhere a Constitutional right to an abortion. But Plessy v Ferguson was overturned by demonstrating that the black schools were inherently inferior to the white schools. So Plessy v Ferguson, was overturned by the parameters of its own ruling.

The Alabama bill defines an abortion as a murder by the practitioner. This is a different animal than what the Supreme Court has ruled on before. In this case we have multiple issues. The chief issue at play is when does personhood begin? The Supreme Court, in order to strike down the Alabama law would have to rule that an unborn child is not a person, again. Evidence has changed since the Casey ruling in biologically proving that an unborn is a human being, not a clump of cells. The pro-abortion arguments against moral personhood have gotten more extreme than viability. Arguing that a fetus is not a person is a losing argument as conception/implantation are the most logically defensible points of the transfer of moral personhood.

The next issue is who has the power to define personhood? Should the Supreme Court strike down the Alabama or the Georgia law, the Supreme Court, out of their own superfluous arrogance would, once again, assert their own jurisdiction in the realm of life. If the Supreme Court rules that a state can define where life begins, they will be denying the self-evident. But what if the Supreme Court rules that inalienable rights, in our founding documents, plainly recognize life begins at creation. In such ruling the Supreme Court would be taking a hint from the Divine, and could issue a sweeping ruling denouncing abortion everywhere.

A third issue at play: does a state have the power to write homicide statutes? The state’s ability to write criminal law is on the line in this court case to come. Alabama has placed steep penalties on the mob doctors who perform abortions. The Supreme Court, in upholding infanticide, would essentially be placing limits on the state’s ability to write criminal law as it relates to homicide. The anti-Constitutional implications of this is yet another power reserved to the states impressed upon, subject to overseeing by the federal government. This ruling would enable people who kill an unborn child and the mother to only be charged with one homicide, not two. Essentially, the law in New York will be the law of the land in a worst case scenario.

What if it fails

I would advocate that Alabama and Georgia ignore the Supreme Court, instead choosing to enforce the law which they pass. The Supreme Court does not have the power to enforce their rulings, by design. So let them try. If they do not recognize when life begins or recognize when life begins and still decree that Alabama must sanction murder, then the Supreme Court is not worth obeying.

Final Thoughts

When does personhood begin? Who has the power to define personhood? Does a state have the power to write homicide statutes? These three questions need answers, and a sweeping ruling is almost certain.

Advertisement

0

Conservatism

Gun control will be a litmus test for RINOs to primary in 2020

Published

on

Gun control will be a litmus test for RINOs to primary in 2020

Gun control is a hot topic. Nearly the entirety of the modern day Democratic Party wants gun control measures in place at the local, state, or national level that they influence. This has been and always will be one of the main reasons conservatives vote for Republicans – as a shield against the gun-grabbers.

But today, many Republican lawmakers are leaning towards “common sense” gun control measures. Whether it’s universal background checks that lead to a national gun registry, red flag gun laws that sidestep due process, or outright gun bans that will turn hundreds of thousands of law-abiding citizens into criminals if they are unwilling to give up their rights, the attacks against the 2nd Amendment are growing in scope and scale.

We will be watching very closely at how Republican politicians discuss and vote in regards to gun control measures. It’s a litmus test; either they are willing to defend the 2nd Amendment or they are betraying their oath to protect the Constitution.

As the American Conservative Movement inches closer to officially launching, we will use this litmus test and a feasibility analysis to determine which RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) are poised for a Constitutional conservative challenger in their next election. We must be pragmatic about this. There’s no reason to invest in primary battles that have no chance. But if a lawmaker favors gun control and is vulnerable, we will go on the attack.

This is, of course, secondary to the primary goal of removing progressives from office. Like a political Hippocratic Oath, we will not do harm to the republic by bolstering a progressive candidate against a moderate Republican. If it isn’t feasible to replace a RINO with a Constitutional conservative who will win the general election, we will direct our efforts elsewhere. Gun control is a litmus test, not an ironclad call for immediate opposition.

We will not repeat the mistakes of those who came before us, who occasionally did so much harm to the Republican they tried to primary that they ended up helping a Democrat take over the position. We will also not attack for the sake of attacking. If we are unable to find a viable candidate to replace the RINO, then we’ll move on and search harder next election.

Installing Constitutional conservatives into the halls of government requires a systematic approach. Gun control will help us identify targets. Realistic yet passionate grassroots efforts will help us push the right people into office.

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

Conservatism

Conservatives are a hard ‘NO’ on gun control

Published

on

Conservatives are a hard NO on gun control

This week, the GOP and President Trump intend to put out a plan to slow gun violence in general and mass shootings in particular. Some are assuming this means adopting the Democrats’ universal background checks, progressive red flag gun laws, or both. To the President and representatives of the GOP, we of the conservative right are a hard “NO” on any such restrictions to the 2nd Amendment.

Let’s look at the three major pushes underway right now…

Universal background checks are a not just a slippery slope. They’re a Slip ‘n Slide sprayed down with WD-40 that lead us down a path. That path includes stops at purchasing restrictions and a national gun registry that leads to the bottom of the hill where full-blown gun confiscations take effect. This is why the left has been pushing so hard for them despite the fact that none of the mass shootings they claim they’re trying to prevent would actually have been affected if UBCs were in place. It’s a con job, plain and simple.

Red flag gun laws have some populist appeal because they seem to address the problem of mental illness. The problem is that it does so with a complete disregard for due process. Victims of red flag gun laws are guilty until they can prove themselves innocent. Moreover, there are already laws in place that allow concerned citizens, medical professionals, and law enforcement officers to utilize due process to legally restrict firearms for those who can be proven to be dangers to themselves or others. With those laws on the books, red flag gun laws are a lazy redundancy.

Assault weapons bans… there really should be no reason to describe why this is a horrible idea to those who will read this. But just in case, we know the 2nd Amendment was designed to keep government from disarming the people in a way that would prevent them from fighting back against an oppressive regime, foreign or domestic. The scary “weapons of war” the left wants to ban are only unreasonable to protect to those who don’t know the facts or understand what firearms like the AR-15 really do. Are they used for murder by a handful of mentally ill criminals? Yes. But they are NOT used for murder by the tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of owners who are law-abiding citizens.

Some Republican lawmakers seem to think they’ll appease the left and center by betraying their oath to protect the Constitution, including the 2nd Amendment. This is not true. They will never thank the GOP for gun control. It will always be Democrats who get credit for pressuring Republicans to reluctantly act. Any form of gun control enacted by this Congress and signed by this administration will be a betrayal to the conservative American patriots who look to the GOP to do what’s right for the Constitution and the American people. Instead of reacting to flawed polls asking questions of the ignorant, they need to spend more time educating the people that gun control doesn’t work and is unconstituional to boot.

If the GOP turns its back on the conservative base, they may not lose all of our votes. We’re pragmatic in knowing we won’t be voting for Elizabeth Warren or Joe Biden. But our enthusiasm for the party will drop dramatically. Our financial support will dry up. Our passionate defense of Republican doctrine will be replaced by lukewarm support of the lesser of two evils. We expect the GOP to defend the 2nd Amendment. Otherwise, we get disillusioned by the feckless pandering to a left-leaning group of Americans who are going to vote Democrat in 2020 anyway.

Patriots, we need your help. Spread the word. We need the President and Republican lawmakers to know where we stand. If you agree with this assessment, retweet the following Tweet, like and share the following Facebook post, and share this post with all of your acquaintances through email. We need to get dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of patriots echoing this sentiment to the GOP before they make the mistake that seems to be looming over us all.

Millions of American conservatives voted for President Trump and the GOP because we want them to defend the 2nd Amendment without giving an inch. The enthusiasm behind our support hinges on the GOP saying “NO” to gun control, period.

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

Conservatism

5 reasons Trump’s conservative detractors need to rethink their stance

Published

on

5 reasons Trumps conservative detractors need to rethink their stance

President Trump makes mistakes. All presidents do. All humans do. He also has many policies that have done what he said would happen. They’re making America great again. I wasn’t one who bought into the slogan before, but I’ve come around. I’ve seen what has happened over the last three years. More importantly, I have a clear vision of what would happen if he is not reelected.

There are a few things that must be established before I get into the meat and potatoes of this article. The first is understanding the difference between “critics” and “detractors.” Many, perhaps most, who support President Trump do so without question. It doesn’t matter what he says or does. They love it. I am a “critic” of the President’s. When he does well, I praise. When he does poorly, I criticize. I spoke out profusely about the administration’s bump stock ban. I pleaded for months against replacing free trade with fair trade with several articles before acknowledging after the tariffs were in place that if we’re going to have a trade war, we need to go all the way. No half-measures. The fastest path to free trade is by crushing China into economic submission. These and other issues define me as a Trump critic while still allowing me to support him unabashedly.

Detractors are against the President wholly. Those conservatives who have turned from criticism to insult are detractors. And in the nature of detractors, they are taking away from the President’s ability to win. Perhaps a better way of putting it is they are actively increasing the chances of Democratic Socialists taking control in Washington DC. They’ll justify their actions by saying things like, “Trump’s just as bad” or “If he can’t take criticism he shouldn’t be in the White House.” But what they’re really saying is they hate the President so much they’d rather America be transformed piece by piece into a socialist state.

Honest criticism is righteous and necessary to keep the President and the GOP heading in the right direction. Detracting from their abilities to lead and win in 2020 is de facto support for the opposition, which is the Democrats. There is ZERO chance any of the primary challengers now or in the future can do anything other than harm the President’s chances of victory. We can do advanced political calculus all we want and try to goad the President into debating Bill Weld, Joe Walsh, John Kasich, Justin Amash, or whoever else wants to challenge him, but it’s disingenuous to try to disguise this as anything other than an attempt to embarrass the President. Competition internally will not make the Republican Party stronger in this case. We had our chance to put someone else in the Oval Office during the 2016 primaries and we lost. Now, we must be proper defenders of the Constitution against the machinations of he radical progressives trying to take it down.

I was “NeverTrump” for a while, especially during and after the 2016 primaries. I was so against him and most of the GOP that I started a new political party. Over time I learned a few things, which I will detail below.

As a final point before diving into the topic at hand, it should be noted that our efforts to launch the American Conservative Movement hinge on support for President Trump and conservatives within the GOP. If there are opportunities to replace RINOs with Constitutional conservatives, we must seize on them. The protections against detractors given to President Trump within this movement do not apply to RINOs on Capitol Hill or in state offices around the country because we actually can make a difference there. We can support strong Constitutional conservatives to replace RINOs without fear of contradiction to the cause because the source of the movement is adherence to proper policies, not bowing to the party itself. And a movement that would exclude Trump supporters would’t be much of a movement at all.

In short, it behooves conservatives across America to support the President and conservatives in other offices as we push forward towards 2020. Many have grown indignant and disenchanted with the party and/or its leader, but there are five important reasons why these people need to suck it up and focus on doing what’s best for America.

The binary choice

It’s important to start with this one, not because it’s the most pressing reason but because two important points must be made regarding this. I’m not a fan of binary choices, which is why I tried to start a new political party. But until such a time comes when we aren’t forced to pick between Democrats and Republicans, those will be the only two valid cards we’re dealt.

There’s another component of binary choice that must be understood, one I eluded to before. Many of President Trump’s conservative detractors say we can get someone better to run as a Republican for president. They say that this “someone” has a very small chance of defeating President Trump. When they say this, they’re wrong. Any Republican who runs against President Trump has absolutely zero chance of defeating him. Striving for better in the face of futility is not honorable, not when the damage done is beneficial to the opposition.

But it’s bigger than just the Oval Office. Without massive support for President Trump, the down-ballot races will fall like flies hitting a bug zapper. Turnout is everything in presidential elections, and I can say with a high degree of certainty that Democratic turnout in 2020 will break records. If Republican turnout doesn’t do the same, we’re not just going to lose the White House. We’re going to lose the Senate. We’ll lose governors and mayors. The House of Representatives will return to the pre-1994 days when Democrats controlled it for decades.

The economy

Unemployment is at an all-time low, particularly for African- and Hispanic-Americans.

Wages are finally rising after nearly two decades of stagnation and fiscal mismanagement kept wage growth slowed compared to cost of living.

The dollar is strong. Wall Street is flourishing. Prosperity is on the rise.

Whether you attribute these positives to President Obama, Congress, or President Trump, you do so without knowing for sure because nobody can honestly and definitively give proper credit when it comes to the economy. That’s the nature of economics and why there’s still plenty of debate over what works and what does not. But the easiest attribution can be given to the 2018 tax cuts, and both President Trump and the GOP-controlled Congress delivered on them.

The last thing we need is a Democratic Congress and president reversing the tax cuts and potentially doing great harm to the economy.

The Supreme Court

When the 2020 election takes place, there will be three Justices in their 60s, two in their 70s, and two in their 80s. The next two presidential terms could realistically expect to control the nominations of 2-4 or more Supreme Court Justice seats.

Imagine if Hillary Clinton won in 2016. Instead of two decent Justices in Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, we would have a very left-leaning Supreme Court that is pro-abortion, anti-gun, and pro-authoritarian rule.

This is the omnipresent argument about the presidency and the Senate. Every presidential election makes this the great equalizer when someone we don’t necessarily like represents our party for the presidency.

The border

Despite unhinged Democrats, activist judges, and feckless GOP leadership during the two years they had total control of Capitol Hill with a Republican in the Oval Office, the administration has still made the most strides to protect the border than any administration in history. Supporters often invoke “best in history” when referring to President Trump’s various policies, but this is one that is actually backed up by demonstrable actions.

The border crisis was inevitable. We should have seen it coming five years ago. We definitely should have seen it coming before the midterm elections. But we didn’t. Now, we’re stuck fighting the migrant surge with both arms tied behind our backs. But the President is doing everything he can to stop it. He listened to bad advice from the aforementioned feckless Republican leaders on Capitol Hill, but we can assume that won’t happen again. And hopefully, if the GOP regains control of both chambers, they learned their lesson as well.

We’ll make sure they do if they haven’t already.

Without the President’s stance on the border issue, we will have open borders. This is as inevitable as the border crisis was. This point alone should be enough to scare detractors into rethinking their stance, but I have one more, just in case…

The existential threat

I am sick of hearing from so-called conservatives that President Trump is no better than the Democrats running for office. It takes a heavy degree of willful ignorance to not recognize the difference between President Trump’s faults and the existential threats knocking on the White House’s door. The best-case scenario for healthcare under a Democratic president and Congress is a public option and massive expansion of Obamacare, which itself will bankrupt this nation. The various iterations of Medicare-for-All would set this country on an unavoidable collision course with Modern Monetary Theory, the destruction of the dollar, and an economic collapse that would make 2008 seem like a minor fractional correction.

Gun control will be enacted, and I’m not talking about universal background checks or red flag gun laws. The gun control the Democrats will enact will essentially suspend the 2nd Amendment.

Then, there’s the abortion issue. If there’s one thing that disturbs me the most about “conservatives” or “Christians” who oppose President Trump and/or the GOP, it’s this issue. We’ve seen what happens when Democrats are in control of states. Abortion isn’t just available. It’s promoted. There are laws passing now that allow babies born after failed abortions to be left to die. Every “conservative” or “Christian” who works to prevent the President and the GOP from winning in 2020 is pro-abortion in their actions even if their rhetoric pretends to say otherwise.

Self-righteous attacks on the President in light of what has been accomplished and more importantly based on what will be lost if the Democrats take control is not an expression of one’s conscience. It’s selfish and will work towards the unraveling of this nation as we know it.

America is heading in the right direction. President Trump is far from perfect. Everybody is. But “conservatives” who work against him in today’s political scenario are working towards the destruction of America through Democratic control.

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

Facebook

Trending