Friday, June 26, 2015


The radicalize Supreme Court has ruled on same-sex marriage. I was shocked the decision went the way it did. The fundamental ruling was in keeping with the way conservative claim to think. They claim their desire is to protect individual rights as a conservative principle, which is why it shocked me to learn the details of how the voting went. The liberal on the court voted to protect individual rights. When we examine the vote, we realized the most radical conservatives on the court voted against what turned out to be the majority decision. Conservatives usually speak about protecting individual rights. They turn right around and fight to destroy those rights by claiming States Government and not the Federal Government should have the power to make those decisions. The reason they want the states governments to have control is that they can gain control of state governments with the objective of destroying certain individual rights. They know it is easier to control state government than it is to gain control the Federal government; in fact, they now control a large number of state governments. The four radical upreme Court justices do not seem to realize their vote against same-sex marriage counters having States control the social agenda. As long as the Federal Government prohibited same-sex marriages, the more their radical conservative supporters are willing to fight and fight harder, for their bigger issue, which is to fight for states rights. They want to weaken and destroy the Federal government. States in which conservatives control the government are those states that do not allow same-sex marriage, which is the way the four radical conservative judges voted. The fact the most conservative Justices voted against what they fundamentally profess to believe may sound confusing because it is. Thus, as just argued, the conservative justices on the court opted to vote to oppose same-sex marriage; thus, remove one of the big reasons they use to argue for states’ rights. The Republican Party; thus, the conservatives in our nation insist on having individual rights dominate Federal government mandates. Conservative extremists have taken over the Party and the Federal courts. They have done this by taking over one state government at a time and by taking over one Federal judge at a time. That is the purpose of the corporate-funded American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Of course, they do not mean democracy in the usual sense of the word, one-man-one-vote. What they mean by individual rights is doing things their way. Yes, one-man-one-vote but the trick is they are the only ones whose vote counts, which is what voter suppression is all about. Conservatives destroyed this in my state of North Carolina and shamefully elected Thom Tillis senator. Thus, they approached their quest for distorting individual rights in a circuitous way. They took over states legislatures and many Federal Judgeships by electing radical conservatives member to the state houses and appointing radical conservatives judges. The Supreme Court is a prime example. In the conservative mindset, if you have a simple majority you have complete control. We constantly hear a conservative will not compromise with liberals, which means once the scale tips, minority members will have nothing to say. The Supreme Court is no different. The Court has radical conservatives Roberts, Alito, and Scalia. Thomas, the fourth is a radical conservative member, but he is only conservative to take advantage of his token value. Then you have conservative Justice Kennedy, who is conservative to be sure but is not radical. The Court has a conservative majority, but the redeeming feature is that only four are radical! What happened in the same-sex marriage decision was a compromise, which was shocking because it was counter to conservative views on social issues. Conservatives demand states right for one reason and one reason only, which is to control such things a voter rights, and to prevent abortion and stop same-sex marriages. URL: Comments Invited and not moderated

No comments:

Post a Comment