The Issue that Divides the Nation

It’s been over four decades since Roe v. Wade and the companion case, Doe v Bolton, the Supreme Court decisions that made abortion legal in all 50 states for any reason, through all nine months of a woman’s pregnancy. Yet it remains unsettled. Why?

Roe was a case based on legal quicksand. In 1973, the majority on the high court found a new constitutional right hiding in the “penumbra of the Bill of Rights.” For the uninitiated, a penumbra is the secondary shadow the moon cast on the earth during a solar eclipse. In other words, the Supreme Court made it up. So if the right to abortion can be found lurking around in the secondary shadows of the Bill of Rights, how many more are lurking around out there? Scary isn’t it?

The Roe decision has troubled many of our greatest legal minds on both the right and the left. Shortly before his retirement in 1986, Chief Justice Warren Burger, who joined Harry Blackmun in that decision, suggested that Roe be “reexamined.” Continue reading “The Issue that Divides the Nation” →

Why all the Fuss over NY Abortion Law (There is a bigger Tragedy)

When I arrived at church for a mid-week Bible study, the place was abuzz with the news that New York had just passed a horrendous abortion law that would allow the practice up to the actual moment of birth.

My heart sank. Not because of this new law, but because that has, in effect, been the law of the land since 1973 when the Supreme Court handed down Roe v Wade and its companion case Doe v Bolton. Could it be that the majority of the people in my church and other churches are ignorant of this terrible stain on our nation?

This law in New York broke no new ground in terms of when a fully-formed, viable pre-born baby can be legally killed. Nothing has changed. Let’s be clear: The United States has one of the most permissive and barbaric abortion laws of any country in the world. Continue reading “Why all the Fuss over NY Abortion Law (There is a bigger Tragedy)” →

Look Who is Racist Now

Many years ago I discovered a dirty little secret about left-wing ideologues in the Democratic Party. Yes, I know these terms are largely redundant. The few remaining Democrats who don’t fit that description are either political neophytes or hopeless optimists. They still believe the party line about protecting the poor and working class.

The dirty little secret is that when liberals don’t have an argument they can sell, rather than discuss policy, they call you names. “Racist” and “sexist” are two of the most overused.

Now, after the Kavanaugh debacle, they have been exposed. The liberals, who vowed to defeat this brilliant jurist no matter what the cost, have turned that argument back on themselves. They wanted — and still want — to convict Kavanaugh of sexual assault with no evidence simply because he is a white male. Continue reading “Look Who is Racist Now” →

Supreme Court Go-Round

Radical leftist groups are tying themselves in knots again. They want freedom of expression, yet they seek to silence any speech, be it written, televised, or spoken, with which they do not agree.

Leftist groups want to be free to demonstrate on behalf of their causes. Yet they confront demonstrators with whom they disagree with threats and even physical violence. Leftist groups claim they want everyone to be free to do anything he, she or the “unassigned,” wish to do or not do. However, they are intent on beating up on Jack Phillips, the baker in Lakewood, Colorado, who was the victor in the Supreme Court case Masterpiece Bakeshop vs. Colorado Civil Rights Commission handed down on June 4, 2018.

In case you have been living under a rock and may be unfamiliar with this case, Phillips, a deeply religious Christian man, refused to create a cake especially for a gay wedding. However, he offered to sell the couple any cake that was readily available in his shop. In short, he did not discriminate, by refusing to serve the couple, he simply refused to create something that violated his core beliefs. Continue reading “Supreme Court Go-Round” →

Supreme Court Guilty of Dereliction of Duty

In sports, a tie is said to be like kissing your sister.

The Supreme Court decision Masterpiece Bakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, a case where a baker was punished for refusing to make a cake for a gay wedding, was something like that. It was unrewarding for both sides.

The 7-2 decision ruled in favor of the baker, saying the state commission did not treat him fairly when it disparaged his religious beliefs. Also, the Court found the commission showed an obvious bias against this baker because it had upheld the right of other bakers to refuse to bake cakes with anti-gay themes. Unfortunately, the Court did not rule on the underlying issues in this case. Continue reading “Supreme Court Guilty of Dereliction of Duty” →

Nuclear Option? Call It Constitutional Option

“Elections have consequences.” (Barack Obama, 2009)

Indeed they do and the most important factor to consider in electing a president of the United States is what kind of justices will he or she appoint to the Supreme Court? While a president can serve for a mere eight years, a Supreme Court justice holds that job for life (or as long as he or she can sit on the bench without nodding off).

Will the high court consist of justices who will faithfully decide cases based on the Constitution alone (preferred by conservative Republicans) or should the high court be made up of justices who see the Constitution as a “living instrument” that can be changed on a whim (preferred by liberal Democrats)? Continue reading “Nuclear Option? Call It Constitutional Option” →

Flynn’s Dismissal Highlights the Difference Between Obama and Trump

Donald Trump lost a valuable member of his team when Michael Flynn was forced to fall on his sword and resign as his national security advisor. Flynn’s crime had nothing to do with the Russians, but his failure to tell the truth about his December conversation with Sergey Kislyak.

One can appreciate Flynn’s hesitancy to tell (then) Vice-president Elect Mike Pence that he had discussed the sanctions Obama had recently imposed on Russia with the Kremlin Ambassador. It wasn’t illegal. In fact, it was to be expected that Flynn would be laying the groundwork for what lies ahead. However, in light of all the accusations about Russia’s attempt to skew our election in favor of Trump, Flynn probably wanted to avoid throwing unnecessary fuel on that media-fanned fire.

Does anyone remember that cosy little conversation Barack Obama had in March of 2012 with outgoing Russian President Dmitry Medvedev at the global nuclear security summit in Seoul, South Korea? Obama was caught on tape asking Medvedev to ask his successor, Vladimir Putin, to give hims “space” until after the November election when he would have more flexibility to deal with thorny issues like missile defense. Continue reading “Flynn’s Dismissal Highlights the Difference Between Obama and Trump” →