That Constitution thing

What if Connecticut passed a law that said that anyone who wished to sell guns had to attain NRA "high master" marksmanship rating for every kind of gun they sell and maintain that rating for 5 years? What if that caused all the gun stores to close up shop? What if the legislators defended this hypothetical law by saying, "Hey, we're not banning guns! Just keeping people safe!"

Well, of course, people of many persuasions would be up in arms (so to speak). The gun nuts would be frothing at the mouth. Because that would be a blatant attempt to do an end run around the Constitution and impose a stupid requirement on gun sellers that's unrelated to their vocation of selling guns, with a clear goal of putting gun stores out of business in Connecticut.

Well, if they did something like that, it would be a lot like Alabama (and many other states) saying that abortion clinic doctors have to have admitting privileges at local hospitals. The wing nuts defend these by saying, "Hey, we're not banning abortions! Just protecting women's health!"

Such laws are blatant end runs around the Constitution that impose a stupid requirement on certain doctors that is unrelated to their day job, with a clear goal of putting abortion clinics out of business in Alabama.

And US District Judge Myron Thompson said so. In so many words.


As clear as that is

we bet that most of the right-wing loons still can't see the double standard, or won't acknowledge it.

Perhaps because their copies of the Constitution say "We the People blah blah Liberty yadda yadda Impeachment blah blah No Tax [whatever] Full Faith ... religion blah blah right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, etc., reserved to the States!

"What I see from the folks who are opposing our agenda is whining coming from losers." -- Thom Tillis

That would be


"What I see from the folks who are opposing our agenda is whining coming from losers." -- Thom Tillis

However, this is a flaw with this argument

The "right to bear arms" is ensconced in the Constitution. We can interpret it in different ways - and, yes, I think it has more to do with forming militias to track down slaves than a personal right to turn your home into a weaponized camp - but it is there.

The right to abortion is a Supreme Court decision, based on interpreting the Constitution, that puts a woman's right to determine her own health with her doctor above the rights of the state to meddle in those decisions.

The setbacks for women in US society over the past few decades, with everything from contraception to abortion to equal pay or laws around domestic abuse, rape or divorce, boils down to the fact that we never passed the Equal Rights Amendment.

There's been some talk recently about how gays and lesbians have had victories for gay marriage at the same time we've seen so many setbacks for women. The truth is that a case can be made for gay marriage or non-discrimination against gays through the freedom of (and from) religion and equal access aspects of the Constitution. The lack of an ERA makes it easy for those on the hard-right to make an end-run around women's rights.

The simple reason we've never had an ERA is simply because of neanderthals like this - evangelicals who look at women as a kind of "property" subject to the whim of men, the "masters of the house".

Progressives and liberals let the ball drop on this one back in the 80s. It's time to get the job done. Passage of an ERA is the only way to shut down the twisted legal logic of judges like Alito and Scalia.


certainly would help. We've noticed that the loons who stomp on women's rights tend to be (SURPRISE!) men (not that there aren't any female right-wing nut jobs, there are too many). In North Carolina's case, considering NCGA elected officials, that's more than 80% men.

"What I see from the folks who are opposing our agenda is whining coming from losers." -- Thom Tillis