Listening to the media fallout from the Supreme Court's overturning of Roe, as well as a host of other rulings this term, you’d think the world was coming to an end. Headlines like "Judicial Activism" and "Illegitimate Court" dominate the Marxist media.
What the media types are banking on (or at the very least, hoping for) is that the majority of people can be snookered into thinking the current court is the activist one — not the various courts that preceded it for decades.
It all revolves around a proper understanding of the Constitution, meaning, Should it be seen in a very narrow manner or a very broad manner?
A very narrow meaning means just that. Only the rights laid out in it count — life, liberty and pursuit of happiness; press; speech; religion and so forth. Of course, as time goes by, all that sometimes needs interpreting, but never so much as to actually create new rights.
In the parlance of Catholic theology, you could call it the "development of doctrine" versus the creation of new doctrine.
When new rights are created, particularly as they happen to align with the spirit of the age, the court ceases to be a body of interpreters and instead becomes a court of activism.
Since the 1960s, the Supreme Court has largely been an activist court full of activist judges.
For example, it takes jumping through more than just a few hoops to move from a constitutional right to liberty to a constitutional "right" to kill an unborn child.
But that's exactly what the court did in Roe in 1973. The same with Obergefell in 2015. The concept of liberty was massively expanded to embrace the idea that sodomy was not only lawful but actually a cultural good and, therefore, should be enshrined as legal marriage. Another activist interpretation — with nothing to support it other than opinion polls and societal moods married to the whims of a culture.
During the halcyon days of the activist court, the media were cheering and hooting and hollering — celebrating all of the rulings as good for America, democracy and so forth.
But — and here’s the rub — they were all based on illegitimate readings of the law, deliberately poor interpretations of the Constitution.
A basic common-sense test could be applied to many of the decisions to determine if they were legitimate or not. For example, would anyone seriously argue that the Founding Fathers had intended to promote anal sex between two men as "marriage"? Or that an entire industry could spring up dedicated to nothing more than killing tens of millions of preborn children?
It just doesn't pass the "smell test."
So over the past several decades, from the dawn of the sexual revolution forward, Americans have had hammered into their skulls by the Marxist media that all these things are "rights." And not just rights, but constitutional rights. And not just constitutional rights, but fundamental constitutional rights.
The truth is they were never any of that. They aren't spelled out in the Constitution at all, so how could they be? A fundamental right, a foundational right, would surely be spoken of in the nation's foundational documents, right?
Some are life, liberty, the bearing of arms, freedom of speech, freedom of the press and so forth. And sorry, Marxists, if it ain't in the original you don't get to "interpret" it into being. If you want to add it, then get a constitutional convention going and amend the Constitution, but you don't get to make it up as you go along.
The truth is there is no appetite in the United States for their Marxist agenda. That's why they had to grab the court and pervert it in the first place. But since it took so long for political conservatives to get to a point to get control of the court back, a generational problem has arisen.
Almost four generations have now gone by where abortion has been able to have been spoken of as a constitutional "right." Indeed, many of the signs we saw last week in Washington, D.C., claimed rights were being taken away, while, in truth, those rights as rights never existed to begin with.
So now the headlines are just that — rights are being rolled back, taken away by an activist court, while the reality is nothing is happening other than a restoration of the correct view.
But here's the Marxists' ace in the hole — the media.
The Luciferian media, who created the atmosphere and the lexicon that sodomy and child killing were "rights," now get to speak incessantly about rights being taken away, a theme repeated by the shock troops on the streets.
This narrative is just one of many that has to be attacked relentlessly by the honest media, media that deal in the truth. And yes, we are of course speaking of our wall-to-wall coverage of this issue, not just last week, but what Church Militant has been doing since its inception.
What the Marxists' control of the media has afforded them is the ability to cut off debate.
On their way to power, they are all about debate and fairness and blah blah. But once they achieve power, all debate is over, like in a cardinal-elect-Bp.-McElroy "listening session" where people who say things the pro-sodomy prelate doesn't want to "listen to" are driven out of the building.
It's how affairs are being handled in the Church right now.
These sessions, laughably labeled as "listening" sessions, are being held all over the country in anticipation of next year's synod in Rome. But, of course, the notes from all these sessions are held very close to the vest as a final document, supposedly summarizing people's thoughts, is assembled.
But the average Joe is not allowed anywhere near that part of the process and is just supposed to accept the establishment narrative. "Trust the process" is a load of malarkey we hear way too much.
Hey, bishops, it's not the "process" we don’t trust — it's you and the people you've appointed to be in charge of the process. Like the Marxists and their media in the culture, the institutional church has forfeited any amount of trust.
The bishops learned to cut off debate much earlier than the Left did. In fact, the Marxists read their book on how to cut off debate. The parallels between the Marxists and those in operational control of the Church are stunning.
The only reason debate is ever cut off in midstream is to conceal the truth. The truth is very clear.
The court was co-opted and then created new so-called rights to support the immoralities of the sexual revolution, which has led to the destruction of the family and severe downgrading of America.
Then, through the democratic process, a correct judicial philosophy was restored to the court, and now, it is simply fixing the mistakes of the past 60 years.
That's not "activism"; it's correction — and much needed.