Connect with us

Culture and Religion

Supreme Court’s transgender decision is a bad sign for ending abortion

Published

on

Supreme Courts transgender decision is a bad sign for ending abortion

The Supreme Court declined to hear a case yesterday challenging a Pennsylvania school district’s policy allowing so-called transgender students to use the bathrooms and locker rooms of their choosing based on the gender they identify with.

This was an obvious setback for morality and traditional values while chalking up another victory for the agenda of the pro-LGBT radical left. But I believe it also gives us an indication as to how the Court might handle the abortion issue following the passage of worthless abortion laws like those recently passed in Georgia and Alabama.

Why are they worthless? Because despite the pro-life hype, these laws were written in such a way as to do little-to-nothing to end abortion. The only reason these laws were passed was to make the GOP look like they’re pro-life — a classic election-season ploy — and to make yet another attempt at passing the life issue off on the Supreme Court. I believe their scheme will fail based on the transgender case mentioned above.

The Supreme Court has the discretion to accept or reject the cases it will review based on its own set of rules. Currently, the rules only require the vote of four of the nine justices to accept a case. This means the Supreme Court Trump and the GOP claimed to save failed to garner the four votes necessary in the transgender case.

Even if you take Chief Justice Roberts and the four “liberal” justices out of the picture, this decision means one of Trump’s “strict constructionist” justices refused the hear the case. The lower courts had ruled in favor of the LGBT and the Supreme Court let that decision stand.

Now, what happens when we change the issue is to abortion?

The Georgia and Alabama laws are guaranteed to be overturned by the lower courts, and an appeal to the Supreme Court is a given. Will the case manage to get four justices to agree to hear it, knowing the implications it will carry concerning Roe v. Wade? Not likely, even with Trump’s court-saving appointments.

Brett Kavanaugh testified during his confirmation hearing that he considered Roe v. Wade “settled Supreme Court precedent” and has been “reaffirmed many times.” And since joining the court, he has supported public funding of Planned Parenthood.

Neil Gorsuch lacked any history with the abortion issue, but when questioned about abortion during his confirmation hearing, he told pro-abortion Senator Diane Feinstein that a good judge “stays with precedent and does not try to reinvent the wheel.” I’ll leave it up to you as to what that means about his position on the Georgia and Alabama laws.

The Founding Fathers never intended for the judiciary to wield the power the cowards in Congress have given it. But with Republicans and Democrats more concerned about protecting Republicans and Democrats than they are the Constitution, that’s not likely to change any time soon.

That’s bad news for the Constitution, and it’s bad news for unborn Americans who will continue to be denied their unalienable right to life.

Originally posted on StridentConservative.com.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook.

Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

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

Advertisement

0

Culture and Religion

Erica Thomas is every Democrat who’s addicted to playing the race card

Published

on

Erica Thomas is every Democrat whos addicted to playing the race card

There was a time when I assumed hate hoaxes were the result of people seeking personal gain by playing on concepts in the news such as Jussie Smollett’s “MAGA country” claim or Erica Thomas‘s “go back where you came from” story. As Andy Ngo pointed out in his excellent hate-hoax compilation, there are just too many instances when radical progressives are caught either making themselves look like fools or committing actual crimes just to paint the President, Republicans, conservatives, or a combination of the three as bigots.

Now, I’m not so sure it’s all about personal gain. Sure, that definitely has something to do with it as many are seeking sympathy and even reward for achieving the highest status level of radical progressivism – the status of being a victim. But I’m starting to believe it’s an addiction of sorts. It’s not physiological or even necessarily psychological. Instead, it’s like an emotional high, a dopamine rush of sorts, to be able to tell the world, “Look at me, the bigots on the right attacked me! Shower me with your love (before the truth comes out)!”

But it’s not just with hoaxes. There’s a certain knee-jerk reaction seen in many leftists, including the lawmakers who are part of “The Squad,” in which every defense of their words or actions invokes race, sex, religion, or some other component that highlights the lauded intersectionality they possess. For example, if you attack Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in any way about anything, she invokes the phrase “woman of color” in her defense of whatever it was that got attacked.

She’s a woman. She’s of non-Caucasian heritage. Therefore every attack against her latest loony idea must be an attack on a woman of color by default even if the attack was substantive and not racist or sexist in nature. That’s the mindset of too many on the left nowadays. It’s the mindset of Erica Thomas, which is why she scrambled to have a press conference to highlight the racist attack against her. What she didn’t expect is that the attacker would show up at her interview, proclaim that he’s Cuban and a Democrat, and acknowledge that he called her a “lazy b—h.”

He was also crystal clear that he did not say anything racist towards her, including the statement Thomas made that he told her to “go back where you came from.”

But Thomas is not a one-off problem for Democrats. She actually represents a large and growing batch of lawmakers at the state and national level who don’t think twice about lying if it means they can call someone else a bigot. Like I said before, I believe they’re addicted to victimhood which is why they try so hard to manufacture it.

The problem we’re seeing with this isn’t just a Democratic Party that can’t be trusted. They haven’t been able to be trusted since JFK. The bigger problem is there are actual victims of racism whose stories don’t get nearly the attention they deserve. There’s racism from the right and the left. There’s racism by Caucasians and towards Caucasians. There’s bigotry between members of the various aspects of intersectionality; feminists and LGBTQ activists have been clashing on and off for a couple of years now, for example. Sexism is rampant in both parties; when we have Democratic presidential candidates state they will only consider a Vice President who is a woman, they don’t see that this is both sexist and eliminates half the potential nominees for the second-ranking position in our government.

The playing of the race card is so rampant on the left, it’s becoming hard to distinguish between what’s real and what’s just another hate hoax. They like to say “words matter.” I am more in the camp of believing “truth matters.”

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

Nothing says ‘running out of ideas’ more than overusing certain words

Published

on

By

Nothing says 'running out of ideas' more than overusing certain words

Its time for normal people to ignore the far-Left fringe and its exploitation of the language.

The radical far-left is now in diminishing-return-mode in abusing the language and certain words. When all they have are shrill false accusations, endlessly repeating them only has the opposite effect over time. Most normal people are busy living their lives unencumbered by the concerns of the country’s political minority. However, the far-left radical fringe sees things differently, with every utterance by the chief executive is nascent racism, with his actions verging on some sort of authoritarian preeminence.

The charge of racism only works the first few billion times.

The problem for our friends of the radical far-left is that they are rapidly using up their language. When everything is racist, nothing is. Where do they go after screaming the word over and over again when it doesn’t really apply? Criticism isn’t racism unless it refers to race. That should be obvious to everyone.

They are turning into their own variation of an Aesop fable ‘The Leftist Who Cried Racism’. Eventually no one will listen or worse yet, see them for what they truly are, Racists who project that derangement on everyone else, failing to see it in themselves.

Try as they might to enhance the charge as being worse than racism, eventually the taunt will fall on deaf ears. That this will immunize true racists will be a horrible outcome, one that will be correctly blamed on the far-left radicals.

Where do they go after claiming it’s a climate emergency?

Much like the abused and rapidly diminishing racism charge, trying to stampede the ceding of Liberty to them because of what naturally occurs will eventually see diminishing returns. Anyone with a sense of history will realize that we’ve heard this song and dance far too many times. It’s been 30 years of hysteria, 30 years of ‘emergency’ conditions that people are starting to ignore, were do they go from here? Do they declare that it’s worse than an emergency?

They have already admitted what is obvious to everyone, that this is just a pretext to control the people and the economy. After some point it won’t matter what term they use, everyone will ignore their climate conniptions.

Nazis, Klansman and Brownshirts, oh my!

Apparently, Godwin’s humorous aphorism only applies to the targets of Leftist projection. Never mind that all three originated on the far-left and that history proves this to be the case. Much like other Leftist pejoratives on a hair-trigger deployment at anyone not of their political minority, they keep on using these words, not knowing what they truly mean. We’ve all heard these illogical insults, gradually they become so much background noise, meaningless in scope and diminishing in return.

Still worse for the radical far-left fringe, over-using these words will bring forth the point that these are all apparitions of their side of the political spectrum. With the KKK begun by Democrats with one infamous participant, Robert C. Byrd. Then there is the historic fact that the Nazis and Brownshirts were of a socialist workers party.

Their complaints that people are pointing out that those offensive words describe the far-left will fall on deaf ears as they continue to weaponize the language. Correctly stating that the Nazis were Leftists will be the natural result of their trying to falsely project that on their political opponents.

Divisiveness.

This little gem its only in the beginning stages of overuse, it’s one of those double standard terms the radical far left favors since they can project it on others while ignoring it in themselves. Much like racism, it has a circular logic confirmation. Someone is racist because they are racist, someone is divisive because they are divisive.

Then of course, denying the accusation somehow affirms the accusation. It’s divisive to deny one is divisive, and denying one is being divisive is being divisive. It helps to not logically think about and just spew a convenient hashtag with an accompanying supply of aspirin.

It’s not socialism, its ‘Democratic’ socialism.

At some point along the line, trying to repackage this societal slavery as something else will be seen for what it truly is. Even now there are reports that socialists are trying to sell this enslavement without using the word itself. We’ve seen this little shell game before, when they tried to foist this socialistic snake oil as ‘Project X’.

Bolt on a positive term like ‘Democratic’ and that should make all the difference. Just like referring to equine excreta as road apples changes the whole perspective on manure. Repackage such things as something else and viola! People will seemingly buy the deception for at least a little while. Then reality crashes in and no rewording will ever work again.

First, it was socialism, then the bait and switch of communism, then Leninism, then fascism, then democratic socialism, each time it’s the same base ideology of centralized government control and wealth redistribution, dressed up with a new label. Each time the Left denied that the failures of the past were really socialism, each time they were going to do it correctly and each time had the same horrible results.

There is something about the concept of Liberty that is very persuasive. Most likely, this is why those trying to sell its antithesis falsely using the term ‘Liberal’ and talk of ‘Liberation’. Thus, it makes perfect sense to ‘Liberate’ a society with secret police and concentration camps.

The Bottom-line.

Using words instead of a functioning ideology only works for a little while, then people see through the deception. The resulting downfall is even worse when the words are false pejoratives justified only by circular logic. An attempt at playing the same game with alternative words only proves that it was all a sham in the first place.

The radical far-left fringe cannot compete with the Pro-Liberty Right because we have the better system: Economic freedom or free enterprise [No, we’re not using that leftist pejorative: capitalism]. It’s not perfect, but nothing based on the interaction of flawed beings can ever meet that goal. This is why the Left loves to exploit the woefully inept comparison of the theoretical ideal of their system to the practical reality of ours. But comparing apples to oranges is meaningless, directly comparing the practical reality of both shows that ours the superior system, and that is why we are winning.

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

No, Rashida Tlaib, boycotting Israel is not the same as boycotting Nazis

Published

on

No Rashida Tlaib boycotting Israel is not the same as boycotting Nazis

There are many things the nation of Israel, as well as every other nation in the world, does that deserves to be called out by the international community. But Israel gets the lion’s share of criticism despite being the freest nation in the Middle East and one of the freest in the world. Israel has nothing in common with Nazi Germany, but that’s the comparison Representative Rashida Tlaib made in her attempts to justify support for the Boycott, Divest, and Sanction (BDS) Movement.

On one hand, she has a point. Singling out the BDS Movement, as vile and misguided as their precepts are, is not necessarily the proper way to handle them. On the other hand, one has to wonder if she’d be making the same argument if a pro-Israel group was the target instead.

The BDS Movement was powerful enough before picking up friends in Congress. Now, they’re systematically infesting the Democratic Party with supporters through Justice Democrats and others.

But even if one were to agree with Tlaib’s desire to protect BDS, making the comparison between their activities and the activities of those who boycotted the Nazis before World War II is over the top. She strategically included them among other boycotts to appeal to those in the American Jewish community who are Democrats and who are not friendly to Israel. She’s giving them talking points as well as support in an effort to get more people to compare Israel to Nazi Germany.

It seems a day doesn’t go by that a member of “The Squad” doesn’t make headlines by saying something stupid. Today was no different. This time, it was Tlaib and her love for BDS that got the better of her and the worst for us.

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