FacebookTwitter

I Asked Somebody About Rights Today At The Supreme Court: Here’s What He Said

By on Jun 30, 2014 | 0 comments

Share On GoogleShare On FacebookShare On Twitter

When did personal responsibility take a back seat to handouts? Why does the left think that as a woman I am incapable of caring for myself without the help of an employer or the government? Should feminism be defined by a movement of people who think that women are victims?

I went to the Supreme Court today to see if I could find answers to some of these questions as the Hobby Lobby decision was announced. Instead, I found many people looking for handouts of free condoms and birth control pills under the presumption that these items were somehow protected under the Constitution.

This made me think.

Unlike birth control, my right to bear arms is clearly defined in the Constitution under the Second Amendment. And my guns very well may save my life someday. Given that the left says there is a War on Women, I take my right to defend myself quite seriously. Since this is a right, should an employer be forced to pay for my ammunition? The cost of ammunition has skyrocketed over the past couple of years making it harder for me to purchase. Under liberal logic this would seem like an applicable request or a “right” to assume. I found this gentleman and asked him:

 

He wasn’t the only one. 

Four of the five people I asked said that they didn’t believe that part of the Constitution.

I didn’t realize there are optional portions of the Constitution. If someone isn’t a Second Amendment supporter, they have the right to not purchase or shoot a firearm. This doesn’t negate the Second Amendment rights of others.

As a conservative, I believe in personal responsibility. I believe that I am capable of buying my own ammunition. And I would never think of demanding an employer to help me stock my arsenal. Why then does Sandra Fluke believe her employer should be forced to pay for her birth control if it violates his/their personal beliefs?

She is not a victim. She is simply a woman in search of free stuff and attention.

Access to birth control is an important issue. The good news is, nothing changed today after this decision.

Both women and men can still purchase birth control. They just may have to pay for it themselves. No rights were trampled upon.

Personal responsibility just won.

The following two tabs change content below.
Rachel Mullen is a John Carroll University Alumna who calls Northeastern Ohio home. She’s a former banker who now obsesses about politics. Rachel sits on several committees of the Republican Party of Cuyahoga County. While she respects the values of good candidates, a good ground game and most of all, winning, Rachel will never be known as one who “goes along” with the party just for the sake of doing so. Check out her blog, Guns and Curves

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. GayPatriot » The Heart of Hobby Lobby - […] Update:  This effete liberal outside the Supreme Court sort of makes the point: “You only have rights to things …
  2. The Left Can't Stop Distorting the Hobby Lobby Decision - GayConservative - […]   Hillary either doesn’t know, or doesn’t care, that Hobby Lobby already offered its employees coverage that included 16 types …
  3. Liberals call for burning Hobby Lobby after Supreme Court decision - […] leave you with these videos taken outside of the Supreme Court yesterday, via the Daily Signal and Pocket Full …
  4. VIRAL – Confused Pastor Says Defending Yourself Not a Right, Healthcare Is | WayneDupree.com - […] h/t Rachel Mullen from PocketfullofLiberty […]
  5. I Was Afraid Of Guns: At 39, I Grew Up | Guns And Curves - […] paints the Second Amendment as something that is controversial. We have a media that seems to view free birth …

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>