She was also instrumental in helping to defeat the ERA, the so-called Equal Rights Amendment the radical feminists were pushing in the 70's.
And yes, she's right again, massive civil disobedience to this SCOTUS perversion ruling is called for.
The ruling is unconstitutional.
She is right. Which candidates are willing to do this?
God Bless that Woman!
The constitution is currently not being followed. Therefore we don’t have a constitution.
Our federal government is a creation of the states. When this creation gets out of control, then the states have the right to abolish it or change it.
Besides the three branches of federal government that we are aware of,
there exists a fourth branch which most people forget, it is the states. And actually, as mentioned above, this fourth branch has more power and authority than any of othe other three combined.
It is time for the fourth branch to assume it’s proper authority, and alter or abolish the other three.
Kill 600 000 Americans and 1/3 of the country in ruins?
Kill 600 000 Americans and 1/3 of the country in ruins?
Phyllis is still awesome!
She’s also dead wrong about the forthcoming Article V Convention.
Maybe she will smarten up but she lives in the Beltway milieu that causes her much derangement.
As recently as 1961 anal sodomy was illegal in all 50 states. There is a reason that anal sex was illegal, it is a dangerous/unhealthy practice.
“[T]he Law of Nature stands as an eternal rule to all men, legislators as well as others. The rules that they make for other men’s actions must . . . be conformable to the Law of Nature, i.e., to the will of God. [L]aws human must be made according to the general laws of Nature, and without contradiction to any positive law of Scripture, otherwise they are ill made.”
— John Locke, Two Treatises on Government
“This natural law, being as old as mankind and dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority, from this original.”
— William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Law of England (1765)
“Upon this law, depend the natural rights of mankind, the supreme being gave existence to man, together with the means of preserving and beautifying that existence. He endowed him with rational faculties, by the help of which, to discern and pursue such things, as were consistent with his duty and interest, and invested him with an inviolable right to personal liberty and personal safety.
“Hence, in a state of nature, no man has any moral power to deprive another of his life, limbs, property, or liberty; nor the least authority to command, or exact obedience from him....
“Hence also, the origin of all civil government, justly established, must be a voluntary compact, between the rulers and the ruled; and must be liable to such limitations, as are necessary for the security of the absolute rights of the latter; for what original title can any man or set of men have, to govern others, except their own consent? To usurp dominion over a people, in their own despite, or to grasp at more extensive power than they are willing to entrust, is to violate that law of nature, which gives every man the right to his personal liberty; and can, therefore, confer no obligation to obedience.”
“When human laws contradict or discountenance the means, which are necessary to preserve the essential rights of any society, they defeat the proper end of all laws, and so become null and void.”
— Alexander Hamilton
“The propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained.”
— George Washington, 1789
She’s a great lady and as evidence of just how bad the ERA is it comes up every couple of years in Illinois and even with 100% Democrat control it can’t pass, just like Amnesty.
This entire thing was a pander to voters by Democrats and a hoped-for windfall by divorce lawyers. It may just fade of its own accord. After the initial rush of publicity after the Supreme Court ruling, you haven’t heard much about it. That confirms the realists’ take: there really weren’t all that many gays who wanted to get married, anyway.