Crimes Against Humanity

In the last weeks of June in the year 2022 the Supreme Court of the Unites States (SCOTUS) rescinded federal protection of common sense gun laws and a woman's reproductive rights. In the act of doing so they also weakened the separation of church and state and endangered constitutional guarantees to such basic constitutional precepts as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 

And I'm all for it.

This is a simple case, and a common case, of fundamentalism taking over the judiciary. It happens. But it may be a blessing in disguise. 

First, let's look at the premise of these two cases:

1. New York's concealed carry gun laws (in effect for nearly 100 years). This law stated, among other things, that a person that wants to carry a firearm outside their home had to show cause as to why they needed to. 

SCOTUS interpreted the 2nd amendment of the constitution to mean, literally, a persons right to carry arms will not be infringed. Period. In other words, the onus is on the State to determine why a citizen cannot carry arms - it's not the citizens responsibility to show why they can. The Constitution says they can. Score one for SCOTUS.

2. The Roe vs. Wade (Row) decision that was interpreted to allow a woman's right to abortion was overturned. The Row so called "abortion rights" decision was actually based on a right to personal privacy - not on reproductive rights.

Again SCOTUS rightfully established that reproductive rights are not guaranteed protection in the Constitution, per se. They asserted the association of personal privacy to a reproductive decision in Roe was far and away too separate to be joined in a legal context.

Ramifications of overturning Row:

If reproductive rights are not associated with personal freedoms or privacy in the Constitution, then there may be a complete set of religious social "anti-choice" targets (atheism, adultery, same sex marriage, LGTBQ rights, transexual medical procedures, sex education,...) that States can now legally impose laws against. 

Likewise, other states and private parties, individuals and corporations that defy another State's anti-choice laws could be liable, under said laws, to be sued - and individuals that aid and abed those seeking rights elsewhere could be fined and/or imprisoned in the subject state.

The Blessing:

With a clear majority of American's supporting the right to personal choice - from reproduction to firearms, the time may be right for the progressive left in this country to move our congressional makeup back to the center - where the rest of the western world has been for some time.

With enough votes, we can update the Constitution with reproductive rights and place restrictions - if not replace entirely - the 2nd amendment. But the 2nd amendment is really the harder one to address.

2nd Amendment Details:

The actual wording of the second amendment has always been ambiguous:

“...a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

It's that darn comma between "State" and "the right". It's almost as if it denotes a parenthetical clarification as to what allows an effective Militia - not a singular pronouncement for all citizens. If the word "and" was used in place of the comma, there would be no question as to the intent of the amendment. The author HAD to know that this was going to be scrutinized endlessly for centuries. So why the ambiguity?

The answer may be in the document that inspired the U.S. Bill of Rights in the first place. The English "Bill of Rights" of 1688. It declared: 

"Protestants may have arms for their defence [sic] suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law." 

If this truly was the inspiration for the 2nd amendment, it is clear that the Right was indeed meant to subject to some laws. The author of the 2nd amendment may have simply assumed the "allowed by law" clause was as unnecessary as the reference to "Protestants".

In any case, the amendment has made the U.S. into a sick Wild West show with innocent civilians and children paying the price.

Citizen militias (not controlled by the State as suggested in the amendment) are arming thousands, carrying guns to protests, and mounting insurrection at the bidding of mentally ill leaders. It's time to clean it up and make it relevant to the modern world. Or the amendment that was supposed to prevent an armed overthrow of democratic government may very well be the cause of it.

JB