Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Alito Takes a Blow Torch to Liberal Justices' Dissent

But in the next breath they will argue that abortion is a constitutional right.

Do those people think that the Constitution was intended to permit states to establish miniature hereditary monarchies? The correct answer is no, because the Constitution guarantees certain rights to the people which that arrangement would, by its nature, violate. So states rights is a big part of our federal/constitutional system, but it's not without its limits, and those limits are delineated in the Constitution.

If you'd try to avoid the trap of seeing everything that happens as "the elite" foisting their will on the majority, you'd be doing yourself a favor. The majority can see through the bullsh*t, and mid-terms will prove that.

Who molded the minds of the people that elected Trump president?

And who molded the minds of the folks who cheered on his impeachment and ultimate ouster? They are countervailing forces. Some are more subject to manipulation than the rest.

And who molded the minds of the 80+ Million voters that elected a Biden.

"Despotic Freedom"
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Not sure why I laughed so hard, your intent is perfectly clear.


Living here in Whiskey Rebellion territory, we probably were better
educated about it than most. The Rebellion was a fight against
government overreach. Picking a particular product and passing
a law impeding the ability of those who produced/used it.

That "mostly peaceful"😉😉protest was put down by armed troops
led by the President.

The man known as The Father of our Country, one known for leading
America to freedom, was acting in a Despotic way then.


Sure as hell wasn't Despotic Freedom.

You know what I mean - we fight "despots and commies" all over the world and give them a death sentence but don't at home - kinda my point.

Alito's masterful explanation falls on deaf ears because leftists do not believe the Constitution is a document that should be followed as it was written and originally understood. They believe that the document should be allowed to "evolve" as the fad of the time would dictate. Their actual belief is more attune to the Marxist view that people are subjects of the state and must be ruled not governed. That is why we must vote out all from both parties that do not actually believe the Constitution as it was written and originally understood.

Zuck bucks molded the mules Fjb rode in on.

Good OP. Indeed, the logic of the dissent was juvenile.

Absolutely.

It was just the combination of those two words.
They paint a clear picture of absolute freedom.
Hard, cold, freedom.


At the same time, it's 2 words not usually seen together.

This thread got me thinking more about The Rebellion.
Reading the Wikki hit, some things stood out as foreshadowing
some current issues.

Our Southern friends would point to a different, more dramatic episode,
But that one is tainted by other complications. The Rebellion could
well serve to provide lessons to today's Americans.

Maybe it has. It seems the goal of many is to spark such a movement,
one that could again allow troops to be moved against Americans.

Computer Programmers.

Do you mean Algorithms?

That would “code” writers, not programmers.

I post this to pose insight into the reasoning ability of the three dissenting Justices. How can it be that we have people in positions of such power over our lives and the nation's future? Their complete failure to remove emotion and their personal politics from their decision process is a prime example of why liberalism is such a threat. They did not logically address the point of the lawsuit and simply ruled along the lines of their bias against guns and freedom.

That the three Justices were voted onto the court in the first place, questions the vetting process of the candidates. Shamefully politics trumps sound reasoning capabilities. These people have a record of their rulings that is not scrutinized to the degree that it would raise alarm of their flawed reasoning abilities. The goal of appointing new Justices to the Court should not be to give advantage to the politics of the President in power, but to install a candidate with superior intellect and reason to uphold the principals set forth in the constitution. I pose that these three Justices demonstrate in their dissenting arguments that the do not meet the requirements the position requires.

Justice Alito's exposure of flawed reasoning should be mandatory teaching in every law class in the Land. The Bar Exam should question that the applicant possesses this ability.

Thanks for posting that link Steve.