From Pine View Farm

Culture Warriors category archive

“A Republic, If You Can Keep It” 0

William Rivers Pitt fears that we cannot.

Share

Courting Disaster 0

At the Des Moines Register, John and Terri Hale explain why they disagree with four recent, major Supreme Supremacist Court decisions. Their article is notable for its clarity and simplicity and I commend it to your attention.

Here’s their take on one of them (emphasis in the original):

In a case involving the state of Maine, the court decided that public tax dollars can flow to private faith-based schools.

Our view: Public dollars are for public schools that take on the challenge and the opportunity of educating everyone, regardless of skin color, abilities, beliefs, primary language, gender identity, or sexual orientation. They should not be used to support the teachings of any particular faith nor any institution that discriminates in admissions or hiring.

Share

Tell Them What They Want To Hear 0

Jeff Shapiro writes of Virginia Governor Trumpkin’s–er–loose relationship with consistency, particularly as regards his position on abortion. A snippet (emphasis added); follow the link for the evidence.

Youngkin’s rhetorical gymnastics — on an issue that might put out of reach for his party Luria’s and two other Democrat-held suburban congressional seats — do not conceal a reality: He refuses to deal straight with Virginians, the majority of whom favored Roe v. Wade. We know Youngkin stands to the right on abortion, but how far right depends on his audience.

Share

Courting Disaster, Conflict of Amendments Dept. 0

At the Hartford Courant, Samuel Teixeira suggests that there is a logical flaw in Samuel Alito’s reasoning in his decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. (Of course, the moral flaw is obvious, but the law and morality are only occasionally related.)

Here’s a bit from hit article:

Sadly, beyond rewriting the history of 1866 and reviving the position originally adopted by the 14th Amendment’s opponents, Justice Alito ignores — and explicitly violates — the original constitutional limits on the Court set forth in the Ninth Amendment. Just 21 words, it reads: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

The Ninth Amendment effectively makes unconstitutional just one method of construing — interpreting –– the Constitution: an interpretation that denies or disparages a right because other rights are explicitly enumerated –– listed.

Teixeira’s reasoning is interesting, perhaps even correct, but irrelevant.

Alito’s opinion was not based on logic or reasoning and certainly not on precedent. It was based on dogma, and the arguments he made in it are nothing more than Sunday-go-to-meeting clothes for “because we can.”

(Broken link fixed.)

Share

American Taliban 0

Preacher sporting halo says to woman,

Click for the original image.

Share

Supreme Court: Rules Are for Other People 0

Joe Patrice explains.

Share

Courting Disaster, Creeping Theocracy Dept. 0

Sam and his crew dissect the slow-moving theocratic coup.

Share

Played by the Misdirection Player 0

Image:  Plutocrat looking at two persons fighting inside an aquarium.  Caption:  They get you fighting a culture war to stop you from fighting a class war.

Via Yellowdoggranny.

Share

Restrictions Need Not Apply 0

Steve M. points out that the rich are different from you and me.

Share

Lies and Lying Liars 0

The American Scholar points out–er– mistatements in Samuel Alito’s abortion rulingwrong concerning American legal and medical history.

Just read it.

Share

The American Taliban Dons Robes 0

Title:  Delivering the Goods.  Image:  Justice Roberts, assisting at a birth, says to the mother,

Click for the original image.

Share

When the Right Takes Away a Right . . . . 0

Female soldier asks,

Click for the original image.

And Elise Kalin writes powerfully of the loss at the Des Moines Register. Here’a little bit of her article:

To lose one of your rights is to know what it really means to be afraid. To be failed by the systems you were taught to trust. It is to be told that your life means less than your counterparts, that you don’t deserve bodily autonomy. It is a terrifying reminder that “other” religions mean nothing to half of this country’s government. It is a promise that every step forward we’ve made in the past 50 years will be forced backward until the word “progress” is replaced with its antonym in the dictionary.

Share

Originalist Sin 0

A man, holding a sign reading

Click for the original image.

Share

True Believers 0

Football coach surrounded by kneeling players days,

Via Juanita Jean.

Share

A Well-Turned Phrase 0

Grung_e_Gene gives us a new and timely coinage:

The Supremacist Court.

Share

The Obvious Will Out 0

Emma points out, “Lay in bed with a tiger and it claws your face.”

He laid in bed with a tiger. It (figuratively) clawed his face.

Share

Originalist Sin, Catch-22 Dept. 0

It’s the best catch there is.

Jonathan Wolf explains at Above the Law. Here’s a bit (warning: mild language):

So, if a justice doesn’t think the right to an abortion should be protected because the word “abortion” doesn’t appear in the Constitution, then that same justice shouldn’t be saying shit in the first place, because the Constitution sure doesn’t say anything about justices of the Supreme Court getting to decide what is and isn’t constitutional.

Share

Alienable Rights 0

Michael Paul Williams reminds us that the United States and its Supreme Court have a history of granting, then retracting rights. Here’s just one of the examples he cites (emphasis added):

In 1868, the 14th Amendment affirmed citizenship and equal protection under the law for Black Americans. But the 1877 compromise between deadlocked presidential candidates Rutherford B. Hayes and Samuel Tilden resulted in a Hayes victory, on the condition that he pull federal troops from the South. This politically expedient sellout of Black citizens signaled the end of Reconstruction and a new reign of terror in the South and presaged the Supreme Court’s 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision upholding the constitutionality of “separate but equal” segregation by race.

“Every 15 years, the status of Black people changed according to the Supreme Court,” Perry* said. “Our rights are as firm as the people who vote to protect them.”

The battle is never over.
___________________

*Howard University political science professor Ravi Perry.

Share

Republican Family Values 0

Lady Liberty lying on her back, bleeding to death in an alley.  At her feet lies a coathanger labeled

Click to view the original image.

Aside:

When I was a young ‘un, back in the olden days, my mother subscribed to Lady’s Home Journal and McCall’s Magazine (both of which are now defunct). I read them, because I read everything I could get my hands on, even my father’s issues of U. S. News and World Report, which he subscribed to after Time Magazine ticked him off for some reason.

Those ladies’ magazines were not just about fashion and make-up. The death toll from back-alley abortions was a frequent topic. Because I was a young ‘un, I can’t say that I understood the physiology, at least not until later when I was not quite such a young ‘un, but I certainly understood the psychology: frightened women in crisis, feeling imperiled, futures and reputations endangered, desperately taking dangerous chances to protect themselves, their futures, and sometimes their families.

And today’s Republican Party would bring those days back.

Share

“Checkpoint Clarence” 0

Young woman labeled

Click for the original image.

Share
From Pine View Farm
Privacy Policy

This website does not track you.

It contains no private information. It does not drop persistent cookies, does not collect data other than incoming ip addresses and page views (the internet is a public place), and certainly does not collect and sell your information to others.

Some sites that I link to may try to track you, but that's between you and them, not you and me.

I do collect statistics, but I use a simple stand-alone Wordpress plugin, not third-party services such as Google Analitics over which I have no control.

Finally, this is website is a hobby. It's a hobby in which I am deeply invested, about which I care deeply, and which has enabled me to learn a lot about computers and computing, but it is still ultimately an avocation, not a vocation; it is certainly not a money-making enterprise (unless you click the "Donate" button--go ahead, you can be the first!).

I appreciate your visiting this site, and I desire not to violate your trust.