"Dogs Have 5 Legs" -- Emperor Anthony

Thanks to last Friday’s ‘five-legged dog’ SCOTUS decision any state permit to carry concealed weapons is now legal in all 50 states. When SCOTUS creates something out of nothing, unintended consequences usually follow. This recent decision, a love poem about lovers, written by Supreme Intergalactic Emperor, Anthony Kennedy, is no exception.

Someone in Abraham Lincoln's weekly card game once blurted out "If you call a dog's tail a leg, then doesn't a dog have five legs?" To which Lincoln replied "No, calling a tail a leg don't make it a leg." According to SCOTUS Justice Anthony Kennedy, dogs now have five legs. Here are the reasons that this five-legged-dog is unconstitutional on its face and its unforeseen benefit for gun owners. (Theophobes may continue reading here as God and religion are not part of my argumentation.)

1. First-year law students always ask, What does the constitution mean? Professors always respond, “Whatever 'The Supremes' want it to mean". Until Marbury v. Madison in 1803, judicial review by SCOTUS was limited to actual language, articles and sections of the U. S. Constitution in squabbles between various agencies of government. Constitutional revision, the idea that the high court could craft new constitutional law about ‘unspecified human rights’ using new language not found in the constitution, was unthinkable. Nothing in the constitution permitted this ‘judicial activism’. Marbury v. Madison itself was unconstitutional. Therefore, any fruit from that poisoned tree is itself poisoned. If you are a proponent of judicial activism and constitutional revision by the temporary gang of 9 known as SCOTUS, then stop reading. You won’t like the conclusion that proceeds logically from this underlying predicate. In this homosexual marriage case, there was no democratic national referendum by the 330 million citizens of the country.

Prior to 2010 in all 31 individual states that did allow its citizens to democratically vote, homosexual marriage was thrashed decisively. Five other states had ‘legalized homosexual 'marriage' - Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, and Iowa - but all did so through legislation or court rulings, not by a vote of the people. In some states, such as Maine, it was soundly rejected in two separate referenda and by wide margins. Of the total 330 million American citizens, only 5 citizens redefined the unanimous, millennial, cross-cultural definition of marriage as between one man and one woman with the prospect of procreation at least in principle. One of the 5 citizens, Justice Kennedy writing from the 5-4 majority became the sole author of this redefinition. In effect, he became the first secular Pope in America. Never mind that the Constitution of the United States never mentions the word ‘marriage’. It also never mentions the word ‘dignity’, and it never mentions the word ‘autonomy’. Not even the wildest leftie law professor claims there is a constitutional codicil that slings all three terms together in some intimate human right of autonomy arising from the natural law.

2. Like some secular sacramental Eucharist, the exact words of marital transubstantiation from Pope Kennedy’s Bull are these: (highlight mine)

“Under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, no State shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” The fundamental liberties protected by this Clause include most of the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights. See Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U. S. 145, 147–149 (1968). In addition these liberties extend to certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy, including intimate choices that define personal identity and beliefs. See, e.g.,Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U. S. 438, 453 (1972); Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U. S. 479, 484–486 (1965). The identification and protection of fundamental rights is an enduring part of the judicial duty to interpret the Constitution.

3. 1. Wait! What sort of things might be covered by this arbitrary and capricious dicta of individual dignity and autonomy, including intimate choices that define personal identity and beliefs?

How about some of these?

“My dignity and autonomous intimate choice that defines my personal identity and beliefs is: ______

…marry my sister

…marry my three sisters

…marry my brother and three sisters

...self-identify as President

…self-identify as a heart surgeon

…self-identity as a ‘Supreme’

…marry my farm animal (yes, it’s already claimed)

http://lastresistance.com/3371/whats-wrong-interspecies-marriage/

( Insert your lunacy self-identity here)

4. Therefore, if Pope Kennedy’s language, reasoning, and logic are valid and sound, then it follows that all of these, and many more, autonomous, intimate personal, dignity choices are now constitutionally protected. That brings us to guns.

On the bright side of this infallible edict, are some unforeseen consequences that will come back to bite The Supremes in their leftie patootie. Your Second Amendment right and state-issued permit to carry a concealed weapon, for instance, is now legal in all 50 states thanks to the imposition of homosexual marriage in all 50 states . Former Florida Congressman, Allen B. West explains;

Allen B. West

“By using the Constitution in such a manner, the Court argues that the Due Process Clause extends ‘certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy’ accepted in a majority of states across the state lines of a handful of states that still banned the practice. The vast majority of states are ‘shall issue’ on the matter of issuing concealed carry permits, and enjoy reciprocity with a large number of other states. My North Carolina concealed carry permit, for example, was recognized yesterday as being valid in 36 states, which just so happened to be the number of states in which gay marriage was legal yesterday. But 14 states did not recognize my concealed carry permit yesterday. Today they must.

Using the same “due process clause” argument as the Supreme Court just applied to gay marriage, my concealed carry permit must now be recognized as valid in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

In other words, there is a standing right called the Second Amendment, which grants the right to keep and bear arms, and that specifically granted right shall not be infringed. So, the SCOTUS does not need to have a court case and prolonged legal, judicial activism — that right already exists and defined as stare decisis (standing law).

Former Congressman West continues: “Since I have moved from Florida to Texas, my concealed weapons permit is not only transferrable here, but all across the country, in all fifty states. Thanks to the LGBT community for making it very clear, my constitutionally declared right MUST be recognized in every state. Not only is it my right to keep and bear my arms (weapons) but that personal choice is central to my individual dignity and autonomy.”

Bottom line – the Supreme Court of the United States just solidified the right to keep and bear arms — and made it clear with their decision on marriage that no state – including Illinois – has the “right” to infringe upon another’s Second Amendment right. Notes West, “If the violation of federalism works ok for LGBTs — then it works well for gun owners!” (source: http://allenbwest.com/2015/06/yeehaw-this-side-effect-of-the-gay-marriage-ruling-will-make-liberals-explode/