The Supreme Court did it again. Once, they created a “right” to abortion out of whole cloth. Another time, they redefined the word “marriage”. Now they’ve redefined the word “sex” in such a way that it could very well bleed through to other parts of law and culture.
Is this how a “representative republic” is supposed to work? (Hint: No.)
There they go again. Democrats are ready to declare Brett Kavanaugh guilt over one more unproven allegation. We have a judicial doctrine in this country; innocent until proven guilty. The Left have decided to dispense with it yet again.
Instead, it’s all about politics. Listen in to this episode which is slightly-more-than 10 minutes or less.
I think we can sometimes go overboard looking for ill intent in comment from “the other side”, whichever side that may be. Some conservatives did just that, in my opinion, over some comments about the Notre Dame fire.
The Supreme Court will be hearing 3 cases next session that will be part of a continuing effort in this country to reconcile the rights of various groups of sexual identities and preferences (groups that seem to be created daily) with the First Amendment right to freedom of religion.
Is it OK to rape if the culture you come from has normalized it?
Why is Havana crumbling? What are the costs, and is it affecting their great (according to Michael Moore) health care?
And is depicting bullying necessary when telling an anti-bullying story? Some people don’t think so. Let’s let Rudolph demonstrate why it is. Merry Christmas!
Right on the heels of the last episode, comes this one. I’ve held off saying too much about the confirmation process for Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. That’s mostly because so much was changing so fast that anything I said about it would be old and stale by the time it got to you. Some of the political podcasts I listen to had that problem, so I wasn’t going to get too detailed with my comments.
But he’s been voted out of committee, and I heard both sides during the hearings, both from Ford and Kavanaugh, and from friends and pundits, that I think my thoughts have solidified. I’m releasing this earlier than normal because it seems the FBI investigation is going to start changing the conversation further, and I don’t want us to forget what happened during the actual hearings.
I can usually figure out what I want to say pretty early in the week, but this week I just couldn’t get excited about any particular topic.
It’s not that there wasn’t any news worth discussing or topics worth pontificating on. It’s that sometimes I wonder if we’ve lost the ability to have a good, honest discussion. You know that “honest conversation” this country is always wanting to have about race or poverty or abortion? Is that even possible?
With the retirement of Supreme court Justice Anthony Kennedy, the Left in this country has been very downcast, and understandably so. But today I want to talk about 2 reasons why this should never have been the case. There really shouldn’t be any reason to fear the retirement of a Justice of a different political persuasion if the checks and balances in this country’s government are allowed to work properly.
They haven’t been allowed to for decades, especially with regards to the Supreme Court. I’m going to highlight 2 of these, but both can be summed up in this one statement; the power you grab will be used against you.
When Sarah Huckabee-Sanders was kicked out of the Red Hen restaurant, that act plus the reactions to it from the Left demonstrated their inconsistent principles. And no, this is not similar to the Masterpiece Cakeshop situation. I’ll explain.
An internal memo from the ACLU shows that defending the constitutional right to free speech will be subject to what they think of the speech. That’s their prerogative, but it may be time for a name change.
And the Supreme Court ruled against coerced speech, saying that the state of California doesn’t have the right to force crisis pregnancy centers to advertise free abortion services elsewhere. If this is a harbinger of things to come, Jack Phillips must be smiling.
Jack Phillips and the Masterpiece Cakeshop won the day in the Supreme Court. The news articles called it “narrow”, but they weren’t talking about the 7-2 vote; they were referring to how narrowly the ruling itself was. The Supremes basically said that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission treated Jack’s religious views in a way incompatible with how government should; with contempt rather than dispassionately. What does this mean for the future of the ruling?
And the White House recently released a list of 60 promises that President Trump has kept in his first 500 days in office. Most of the items are simply reporting statistics that show how good things have been going; there are more objective milestones mentioned than subjective goals. But if you’ve not heard about them, that’s understandable. The media aren’t really into giving credit where credit is due these days. I wonder why.
Oh, and Bill Clinton still thinks he was the victim in the Lewinsky scandal. Really.
