Support undeniable patriot Mike Lindell (and us!). Buy from MyPillow with promo code “JDR” at checkout or call 800-862-0382.
The Supreme Court today issued a 6-3 ruling stating that those within the LGBTQ community are now protected within the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Many conservatives across the country are shocked and appalled at this ruling from these Activist judges.
Justifying this decision, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote, “An employer who fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex. Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids.”
Here’s the problem: Justice Gorsuch and the other 5 justices who ruled in this way are behaving like activist judges, not originalists. You see, when a judge at any level rules on a case, they are supposed to be applying justice based on the laws of the land, not creating or changing the laws on a whim. To change a law, you need the legislative branch to write and vote on a bill, the executive branch signs it into law and enforces it, and the judicial branch interprets the law into individual cases. Once any of the branches of government overstep their bounds, as often happens, the rule of law is wiped out.
There’s a reason why the House and the Senate are supposed to debate laws before passing them: The law is intended to be whatever they voted on. The judicial branch does not have the authority to then, after it’s been passed and signed into law, change the intended meaning into something that was never there to begin with.
This is what is happening in relation to this ruling. In 1964, the Civil Rights Act was not intended to protect those within the homosexual community. So for the Supreme Court to rule that it is protected is to literally go back in time and change history. This needs to stop.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote in his dissension, “The Court tries to convince readers that it is merely enforcing the terms of the statute, but that is preposterous. Even as understood today, the concept of discrimination because of ‘sex’ is different from discrimination because of ‘sexual orientation’ or ‘gender identity.’”
If you are going to make the case that, in 1964, the framers of the Civil Rights Act intended to include the LGBTQ community, you’d have to provide some sort of documentation. The fact is, there is no evidence of this. The framers of the act were very specific about who this was protecting, and sexual orientation was not a specified “protected class.”
Now, many conservatives and libertarians have made a compelling case that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 should be overturned altogether, since laws are supposed to be written to protect all Americans, not just those of particular groups. In addition to that, discrimination by a private business owner is a moral issue and many would say that it shouldn’t be a legal issue.
Whether you’ve been jabbed or you’ve been exposed to potential vaccine shedding, you need to look at Dr. Zelenko’s new Z-DTox. Recover your health by making your immune system clean, resilient, and resistant.
I can understand that line of thinking, since we could allow the free capitalist system provide the proper checks and balances. Especially today with social media, if you hear of a bigoted business owner, I think the more appropriate response would be to stop doing business there. I’d rather let the American people run someone out of business than to have the government step in and force someone to comply.
We should be free to conduct business as we see fit. If we treat people poorly, word will get out and the public and protest, boycott and take away your income in response. However, on the positive side, a business owner should be allowed to conduct business with whomever they want for whatever reason they want.
If someone wanted to hire only African-Americans, the left would applaud. If someone wanted to hire only those within the LGBTQ community, progressives would cheer. But the second that anyone who finds themselves a part of a perceived “targeted” group of people within the hierarchy of the Oppression Olympics and they get fired, now they have the ability to sue their former employer.
We live in a free country. This Supreme Court ruling is nothing but an activist court making our nation more progressive. If you want to change the law, do it the right way.
American Conservative Movement
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism. The coronavirus crisis has prompted many, even some conservatives, to promote authoritarianism. It’s understandable to some extent now, but it must not be allowed to embed itself in American life. We currently have 8000+ patriots with us in a very short time. If you are interested, please join us to receive updates.
Will America-First News Outlets Make it to 2023?
Things are looking grim for conservative and populist news sites.
There’s something happening behind the scenes at several popular conservative news outlets. 2021 was bad, but 2022 is proving to be disastrous for news sites that aren’t “playing ball” with the corporate media narrative. It’s being said that advertisers are cracking down, forcing some of the biggest ad networks like Google and Yahoo to pull their inventory from conservative outlets. This has had two major effects. First, it has cooled most conservative outlets from discussing “taboo” topics like Pandemic Panic Theater, voter fraud, or The Great Reset. Second, it has isolated those ad networks that aren’t playing ball.
Certain topics are anathema for most ad networks. Speaking out against vaccines or vaccine mandates is a certain path to being demonetized. Highlighting voter fraud in the 2020 and future elections is another instant advertising death penalty. Throw in truthful stories about climate change hysteria, Critical Race Theory, and the border crisis and it’s easy to understand how difficult it is for America-First news outlets to spread the facts, share conservative opinions, and still pay the bills.
Without naming names, I have been told of several news outlets who have been forced to either consolidate with larger organizations or who have backed down on covering certain topics out of fear of being “canceled” by the ad networks. I get it. This is a business for many of us and it’s not very profitable. Those of us who do this for a living are often barely squeaking by, so loss of additional revenue can often mean being forced to make cuts. That means not being able to cover the topics properly. Its a Catch-22: Tell the truth and lose the money necessary to keep telling the truth, or avoid the truth and make enough money to survive. Those who have chosen survival simply aren’t able to spread the truth properly.
We will never avoid the truth. The Lord will provide if it is His will. Our job is simply to share the facts, spread the Gospel, and educate as many Americans as possible while exposing the forces of evil.
To those who have the means, we ask that you please donate. We have options available now, but there is no telling when those options will cancel us. We just launched a new GiveSendGo page. We also have our GivingFuel page. There have been many who have been canceled by PayPal, but for now it’s still an option. Your generosity is what keeps these sites running and allows us to get the truth to the masses. We’ve had great success in growing but we know we can do more with your assistance.
Thank you, and God Bless!
JD Rucker
When preparing for societal collapse, don’t forget the water!
We must never forget President Reagan’s core reminder that he shared with us often that “freedom is but one generation away from extinction.” He meant this as a timeless warning and reminder that the freedom and rights that we think are secure in our way of life are not, in reality, secure, but rather have to be worked at, nurtured, cultivated, and, yes, sometimes fought for, as we have to do for the important things in life. I would hope we place liberty and representative governance at the top of our list always. If we don’t, the restrictions, dictates, edicts, and arbitrary shut-downs of economic and personal life imposed by governors will seem small and inconsequential, indeed.