Tag Archives: rights

She Said No Such Thing

Posted on by
Reply

The ACLU, pretending to celebrate the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and her position on abortion, has utterly changed—falsified—what she said about the matter.

The ACLU’s fabrication:

The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a [person’s] life, to [their] well-being and dignity… When the government controls that decision for [people], [they are] being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for [their] own choices[.]

What Ginsburg actually said was this:

The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman’s life, to her well-being and dignity. It is a decision she must make for herself. When Government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices.

But that wasn’t woke enough to suit the “lawyers” at the ACLU, so they fabricated a claim and falsely attributed their artifice to her.

Greg Scott, Senior Vice President of Communications at Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), has one aspect of this:

The ACLU literally erasing women.

Additional to erasing women, this is an example of how blatantly dishonest the American Civil Liberties Union—the ACLU—has become.

Mandates and Military Discharges

Posted on by
Reply

The House version of the current National Defense Authorization bill for 2022 contains a provision barring a service member being discharged over his refusal to take the Wuhan Vaccine from being given any other form of discharge than honorable. The Biden-Harris administration strongly opposes the provision.

The Pentagon, according to Fox News, has described the vaccine mandate as a “lawful order” that must be obeyed.

The Biden-Harris administration added

To enable a uniformed force to fight with discipline, commanders must have the ability to give orders and take appropriate disciplinary measures.

Certainly. However, whether the order, or the mandate in general, is lawful has yet to be established.

In any event, anything less than an honorable discharge is vast overkill for something as minor as disobeying an order to get a particular vaccine. Dishonorable discharges are handed down for crimes like sexual assault, murder, desertion, sedition. Refusing an order to get vaccinated hardly fits with those.

Assuming an order to get vaccinated is lawful, there are much more appropriate penalties: nonjudicial punishment and fines come to mind.

Insisting on a DD over such a minor act is nothing but an exercise in power for the sake of exercising power—petty ego by the authority doing the exercise.

Pope Francis, Communion, and Abortion

Posted on by
Reply

This is a subject into which I’m going to poke my Protestant nose, which may be a symptom of my own sin of arrogance, but there it is.

Pope Francis insists that communion is a gift to all of us, not a prize for the perfect. He also says,

What must the pastor do? Be a pastor; don’t go condemning. Be a pastor, because he is a pastor also for the excommunicated.

He’s right, too, as far as he goes.

He also emphasizes

Whoever has an abortion kills. It is a human life. This human life must be respected—this principle is so clear.

He’s right here, too.

But while communion is for us sinners, including the excommunicated, for us who truly try to do better, who truly try to repent for our past failures, can it really be for those don’t bother, for those who reject the Church’s teachings outright?

It seems to me that those latter have taken themselves out of the church [sic] altogether. It’s not so much that they should be, or are, denied communion; they’ve made themselves ineligible for it.

And so it is for those who claim to be anti-abortion personally but fine with abortion for others. That strikes me as an especially grievous example of a sin of hypocrisy.

Bishop Michael Olson of the Ft Worth, Tx, Diocese:

He [Pope Francis] wants us to be pastors, and we also want to be pastors. But a pastor is not just a mascot for one’s private point of view.

“Unfortunately”

Posted on by
Reply

Our Surgeon General has let the cat out of the bag. Again, regarding the cat.

Centering his remarks on vaccination against the Wuhan Virus and President Joe Biden’s (D) edict that we must all take the vaccine—because it’s not about freedom or personal choice—Vivek Murthy had this to say regarding exemptions to that edict:

Unfortunately, as a country, we have experience in dealing with exemptions….

Because what Progressive-Democrats want in their all-governing, heavily intrusive reign is one-size-fits-all rule, no exceptions. Ever.

Breathtaking Ignorance

Posted on by
Reply

Attorney General Merrick Garland is suing Texas over its heartbeat abortion law, and he’s basing it on Constitutional grounds. Garland justified his suit with this:

This kind of scheme to nullify the Constitution of the United States is one that all Americans, whatever their politics or party, should fear[.]

And

The obvious and expressly acknowledged intention of this statutory scheme is to prevent women from exercising their constitutional rights by thwarting judicial review for as long as possible[.]

It’s a good thing Garland wasn’t approved for the Supreme Court; his ignorance of our Constitution is breathtaking (and it makes him unfit to sit as AG).

There is no Constitutional right to an abortion; there are only Supreme Court rulings to that effect. Supreme Court rulings have the force of law unless and until they’re overruled, but those rulings do not amend our Constitution, even when they purport to interpret a clause in our Constitution–only We the People can do that.

Garland may or may not have a legal case to make, but he has no Constitutional case to make.