I was struck this morning by this article:<\/p>\n
“Judge strikes down age restriction on morning-after pill”<\/a><\/p>\n and the irony that it represents.<\/p>\n Amerika [with a ‘k’] once had a Constitution and Bill of Rights which protected all people from prohibited actions by its legitimate government – from illegal searches, to property confiscation, to any restriction whatsoever on the Right to “keep and bear arms”.\u00a0 All arms.<\/p>\n Now, travel can and is routinely prohibited unless victims “consent” to searches, groping, and theft of items which might offer protection from such abuse by other criminals.<\/p>\n An attempt to give a 16-yr-old a .22 rifle for a birthday gift can — and has — resulted in the arrest of fathers.<\/p>\n And while I am no fan of unconstitutional ‘laws’ prohibiting the so-called ‘possession’ of ANYTHING (find THAT in Article 1 as a power delegated to the central government!) I do find the irony in the decision today “ironic”, to say the least.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n A 16-yr-old girl can no longer buy a rifle, even though the Second Amendment once demanded that such a God-given Right “shall not be infringed”.\u00a0 No matter HOW old she is, if Big Brother prevails against the last shreds of the Constitution, she will not be able to BUY such a tool without permission, without Big Brother’s “universal background check'” and the “Mark” it so clearly represents.\u00a0 In many places she cannot possess any such tool.<\/p>\n So – we have the following:<\/p>\n In places like Chicago, or NYC, or Washington, D.C, or Connecticut, that 16-yr-old girl cannot so much as THREATEN a rapist with a gun.\u00a0 But she can kill the baby.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A young girl can now buy a “Morning After Pill” without a background check, or any ‘infringement’ whatsoever. She can’t “keep and bear arms”, of course.
\nSo – she can’t DEFEND herself against a rapist at all, but she CAN kill the baby. Continue reading