Painfully Clear to the Casual Observer

Within a few days the United State Supreme Court has made the interlocking connections that link the use of public money to support religious schools with the so-called right to carry concealed firearms without restriction, and both with the prohibition on a woman’s access to safe reproductive healthcare, painfully clear to the most casual observer.

The tie binding Carson v. Makin with New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen with Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization has everything to do with supply and demand. We are, after all, living, or existing, within the capitalist mode of production where supply and demand are the bourgeoisie’s answer to everything vital and nothing’s more vital than keeping public money flowing to religious institutions, bolstering the market for handguns, and attacking women’s struggle to escape domestic servitude.

So the USSC cancels women’s access to safe abortion, thereby restricting a woman’s access to employment outside the “family” where women’s labor goes without compensation; disallows laws restricting concealed carry; and orders states to provide public money to those sending their children to religious schools.

And all of this is done in the name of “originalism” which is a pseudo-legal doctrine that is the equivalent of creationism.

Summing up the significance of these decisions, Chief Justice John Roberts remarked:

“It’s a fundamental right to shoot school children in the United States. The court removes any constraint on the production of school children as an unlawful restraint on trade. The court recognizes no difference between school children and clay pigeons, and acts to maintain the supply of both.

The decision to prohibit restraints on concealed carry is taken in the belief that the fundamental right extends to citizens outside the school environment who, lacking access to clay pigeons and real pigeons, may encounter school children in transit, or at the mall where surprise is essential to success.

This Court is not, contrary to popular belief, heartless and soulless. This Court understand that children have the right to a comfortable, pleasant, after-life, even if the Court rejects the right to have a comfortable, pleasant, present life. Hence we determine that it is a violation of equal treatment under the law, and the unreasonable restraint to the commerce in souls to deny the use of public money for religious instruction of children when such restraint interferes with their safe transit to heaven. The court believes that the condemnation of the children’s poor souls to eternal torment in purgatory is reasonably construed as violating the provision against cruel and unusual punishment.”

2 thoughts on “Painfully Clear to the Casual Observer”

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: