As Written By Allen B. West:
When the Supreme Court decided in Brown vs the Board of Education
that “separate but equal” would no longer apply to our education system,
in effect ushering in school desegregation, some states stood against
the ruling. The federal government stepped in, and in Little Rock,
Arkansas, a Republican president nationalized the National Guard to
enforce the rule of law, the “law of the land.”
Fast forward a few decades. The Supreme Court decides in Obergfell vs
Hodges that marriage is a right, and that all states must comply with
the “law of the land.” Of course it’s still perplexing that we have a
Second Amendment right, enshrined in our original Constitutional bill of
rights, but the progressive socialist left does not consider it the
“law of the land.” And what is even more hypocritical, and abjectly
disturbing, is that we have a legal system for immigration, yet the
liberal progressive left tells us there is no rule of law when it comes
to illegal immigration. Consider this distressing report coming from a
state, that I must admit, appears to be the largest concentration of
incompetence and idiocy: California.
Read more...
1 comment:
What is hypocritical is to consider these issues in an artificial vacuum. Marriage is no more an absolute right than gun ownership- you can't marry a minor, you can't marry an animal, you can't marry someone who is legally incompetent. Why should the Second Amendment be absolute? What about the repeal of prohibition? It didn't make alcohol a right- you can drink, but not if you're under 21 and not if your are driving. In other words, shouldn't reasonable limits exist?
Post a Comment