The Supreme Court of the United States over the last to days has systematically destroyed Common Law and Statutory Law. With the destruction of Common Law regarding marriage the Court in essence announced, "The Supreme Judge of the World has made his decision, now let him enforce it." The Court overturned over 5000 years of Common Law and 1500 of English Common Law in order to make its decision. 

Marriage is defined in Western tradition as a union between one man and one woman. In the last several centuries, because of Roman Catholic teaching, even polygamy, which has been accepted and promoted as praise worthy in many global cultures, has been outlawed. The Court acknowledges this history. As justification for its ruling it points to Cicero and others who stated that marriage is the basis for the state. The Court fails in its history lesson when dealing with the "change" in marriage over time. It points to the fact that the status of women has been elevated over time, but the Court fails to acknowledge that that is exactly what happened, the definition of marriage never changed, the status of women was only elevated. 

The Court also noted that they have always affirmed a right to marriage - which is actually incorrect. The Court has, up until yesterday, always affirmed the right of one man and one woman to get married, while striking down other types of marriages. Murphy vs. Ramsey and Davis vs. Beason declared "Certainly no legislation can be supposed more wholesome and necessary in the founding of a free, self-governing commonwealth,...than that which seeks to establish it on the basis of the idea of the family, as consisting in and springing from the union for life of one man and one woman in the holy estate of matrimony; the sure foundation of all that is stable and noble in our civilization; the best guaranty of that reverent morality which is the source of all beneficent progress in social and political improvement." In multiple Court cases polygamy was declared bans constitutional.

Using this reasoning the majority claims that they may overturn the understanding of marriage present at the ratification of the 14th Amendment using the 14th Amendment. After all they claim, they did so in Loving vs. Virginia. In reality they did not change the definition in Loving, they only stopped the State from excluding interracial unions from an already defined institution. They only discarded White Supremacy from Virginia's marriage laws, the definition of marriage did not change.

The Court found the right to marry hiding in the penumbra of the 14th Amendment along side the right to abortion. The only question is, is there actually a Constitutional right to having the State even recognize traditional marriage? There does not appear to have a Constitutional right to State recognized marriage. Also the Liberty section of the due process clause cannot be where such a right is hiding because as Thomas notes, "Since well before 1787, liberty has been understood as freedom from government action, not entitlement to government benefits." Yet we find a right to discard the common law -something traditionally only done by the legislative process not the Courts which use it as a basis for their rulings (but I guess we are discarding tradition) -- and change definitions hiding behind liberty.

Ironically the Court ruled on June 15th that there is no Constitutional right for a married couple to live together (Kerry vs. Din). Despite this ruling they were willing to say that there is a Constitutional right to have a state recognized homosexual marriage.

I will leave you with Scalia's remark, "If, even as the price to be paid for a fifth vote, I ever joined an opinion for the Court that began: “The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that  allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity,” I would hide my head in a bag. The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

The Court has overturned Marriage, Law, and Tradition. Both Law and Common Law create order, and yet we have lost both.

This morning, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, the case affecting a multitude of states that have prohibited same-sex "marriages" in their states, many by a constitutional amendment approved by the people at the ballot box.  

The 5-4 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges says that same-sex "marriage" is now legal in all 50 states, and that the "right" to same-sex "marriage" is found in the 14th amendment.  

The supposedly relevant text is below.  Read it yourself, and if you can legitimately find a right to same-sex "marriage," let us know.

This ruling is a severe disappointment, and combined with yesterday's ruling on Obamacare, in which the Court decided to rule on the law as it should have been written, instead of how it was actually written, is a startling -- albeit not completely unexpected -- reminder of the power of "legislating from the bench."  Or, as Justice Scalia called it in his dissenting opinion in the Obamacare case yesterday, "somersaults of statutory interpretation" and "interpretive jiggery-pokery."

There will be more information to come on this ruling later today here on the blog.  Like our Facebook page to stay updated.

I want you to care about politics. So often, it seems like there’s no point. We frequently get news of scandals, gridlock, and power plays—apathy becomes so easy.

I think that at some level, most of us teens know that the government can be changed by the people. It’s hard, though, and it takes time. The slow pace of change causes us to lose interest.

Keep in mind, however, that politics affect you every day. You may not think about it often, but local government controls the public schools; state government controls the roads. So, if you go to a public school or drive on a public road, you are subject to the government. Those are but two minor examples.

Government is the only institution that can legally use force on people. I realized that I had to care about politics when I realized that the essence of government is legalized force. Think about it. Only government has the authority to make regulations and dispense justice. Such an organization needs to be watched closely. Luckily, in America, we can influence government. And teens can too.

Here are three compelling reasons to care about politics--

1. Politics do​ affect you. Often I hear people say, “But politics don’t affect me!” That’s simply not true. The reach of government is far, affecting matters from the price of gasoline to the availability of jobs. Most importantly, the decisions made by those in power affect your freedoms every day.

2. You can ​make a difference. Some of my friends get a sense of hopelessness when the subject of politics comes up. The mentality is, “Nothing can be done! I can’t make a difference.” Again, the idea that nobody can make a difference is balderdash.

Less than 60% of the eligible population will even bother to vote, even on a presidential election year. As a teen, merely being willing to discuss and think about politics makes a difference, because discussion is where opinions are formed. I’m not asking you to “get involved.” I just want you to think about the issues.

3. Politics can be unpleasant, but they control your freedom​. So often, I hear, “Politics are disgusting; they’re a twisted game for power, and I don’t want to be involved with that.” Yep, sometimes, they are. Power attracts corruption. That’s precisely why the workings of government warrant the attention and vigilance of every citizen.

All over America, teens get involved in political efforts without even being old enough to vote yet. Why? Because they understand that they are part of the next generation of leadership. They don’t want to be part of an apathetic sheeple.

I want you to care, just a little tiny bit. Listen to politicians and try to determine what principles they hold. Keep up with current events. Figure out what you believe.

Remember, your freedom is what’s at stake.

Quinn Reichard is the founder of American Individualists and serves as Director of Music at Hillsboro United Methodist Church in Loudoun County, Virginia. American Individualists is a political education organization located in Purcellville, Virginia. Founded by teens in 2013, the group provides a forum for political education and activism opportunities for young people. The group meets weekly at 5pm at the Purcellville Library. To learn more about American Individualists and its mission, visit www.americanindividualists.com.

The United Nations released a report this morning attacking Israel over Operation Protective Edge. As you may recall last year Israel was under constant fire, with about one rocket being fired into Israel every 15 minutes. This caused Israel to take drastic military action in order to protect her civilians. Also Israeli civilians were restricted from having meetings in areas were rocket fire was the most probable. If a rocket were to be fired civilians had less than 90 seconds to get to the nearest bomb shelter. The Iron Dome was able to intercept most of the rockets that would have hit populated areas (20% of all rockets), but by the end of the conflict IDF was quickly depleting its supply of interceptor rockets, meaning that within a short time the Iron Dome would be ineffective against Hamas fire. Israel had to stop the barrage of rocket fire as well as stop terrorists from sneaking into Israel through Terror Tunnels. These tunnels were used by Hamas to kidnap Israeli civilians or commit acts of violence and then escape undetected back into Gaza. Israeli civilian casualties were limited, 8 civilian deaths.

An Israeli mother relates her son's death in this way;

Hamas has taken away the childhood of many Israeli children, whose parents fear that if they send their child outside they will never see their child alive again. More than anything the tunnels into Israel caused psychological fear. One Israeli stated;

Israel had to respond and destroy the rocket facilities and the terror tunnels before real damage to her population occurred. It is almost as if the UN wished that Israel waited for Hamas' rocket fire to deplete the Iron Dome and have a real murderous affect on Israeli communities. Already the rockets and tunnels were having a severe psychological strain on Israeli citizens.

Israel did not wait, but began blocking shipments of possible terror supplies to Gaza, while letting food into the small country. (Although Israel would have been justified to block all aid to Gaza). Israel began tracing where the rockets were coming from and bombing those areas in order to destroy the rocket launchers. She also began sending ground troops into Gaza to collapse the terror tunnel infrastructure. 

Unfortunately Israel found that terrorists do not care about the civilian population, unlike Israel whose only goal was to protect her civilian population, rather Hamas wanted to destroy Israel. Hamas thus masked rocket locations and placed them within densely populated areas. This lead Prime Minister Netanyahu to comment, "Israel uses rockets to protect her civilians, Hamas uses civilians to protect her rockets." Israel did her best to warn civilians of impending bombings. IDF phoned, dropped notes, and attempted various other means of communication with the civilian population. If Israeli troops determined there were no civilians in harms way they would not warn anyone before launching an attack. In response to Israeli efforts Hamas started regulating the travel of civilians within Gaza so that Hamas could show pictures of Gazan citizens killed in Israeli attacks. The United Nations has a short list of targets supposedly hit for non-military purposes, but the UN forgot a major factor - when interviewing terrorists they may lie. Also although the IDF tried to obtain flawless information, often military intelligence is flawed - a problem the UN itself is quite familiar with (remember when the UN said Saddam had WMDs?).

In the UN report's conclusion it condemns Israel for not helping the UN with a report thats sole purposed purpose was to make Israel look bad. Israel released her own report, giving the UN sufficient sources. The UN still condemned Israel stating; "With regard to Israel, the commission examined carefully the circumstances of each case, including the account given by the State, where available. Israel has, however, released insufficient information regarding the specific military objectives of its attacks. The commission recognizes the dilemma that Israel faces in releasing information that would disclose in detail the targets of military strikes, given that such information may be classified and jeopardize intelligence sources. Be that as it may, security considerations do not relieve the authorities of their obligations under international law. The onus remains on Israel to provide sufficient details on its targeting decisions to allow an independent assessment of the legality of the attacks conducted by the Israel Defense Forces and to assist victims in their quest for the truth."

Only in a book written by a fool would Israel have to give up vital information and put her intelligence network at risk in order to help with an investigation into alleged war crimes that can easily be seen to be baseless. Even the United States has refused to work with the United Nations in such circumstances. The bottom line is if Israel is guilty of war crimes, the allies were guilty of many more during World War II, as the allies did not warn potential civilian populations and accidentally killed many civilians.

To read Israel's report click here

To read the UN's report click here

A big advance was made towards religious freedom in Michigan yesterday when Governor Snyder signed a law protecting religious adoption agencies from being forced to grant adoptions to homosexual couples. The Supreme Court is expected to rule this June on homosexual marriage. Currently State Law outlaws same-sex marriage within Michigan, but this bill ensures that Michigan is ahead of whatever the Supreme Court does by protecting Religious Organizations.

The two organizations most dramatically effected are the Michigan Catholic Conference and Bethany Adoption Agency. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage non-religious adoption agencies will still grant adoptions to homosexual couples. Only religious groups that believe that the homosexual lifestyle is a sin will be exempt from having to grant adoptions to a homosexual couple.

Several "child advocacy groups" joined the Human Rights campaign in their opposition to the bill. These groups fail to realize that homosexual parents cannot provide children with what they need most - both a mother and a father. They fail to realize that Christians would view it as sinful to place a child, God's most precious gift, in the hands of those who in God's economy cannot be married. They also fail to account for the pain that children growing up in a homosexual household feel.

Lo, children are an heritage of the Lord: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.


To see the bill history and read the language of HB4188-4190 please click here.

California Senate for the first time approved a bill to legalize Physician Assisted Suicide. If the Assembly approves, as it is believed that they will, then they will be the fourth state to legalize it through the Republican Process. This law will devalue life, mankind's most sacred gift, by making life only about what makes humans comfortable.

To read more about this topic please click here.

The most important event of my day on April 30, 2015, was not my professing socialist senator announcing a presidential campaign. On that day, I had the privilege of meeting a Vietnam veteran who came through my lane of a small-town Vermont grocery store. I thanked him for his service, but the veterans of Vietnam deserve more than gratitude. They deserve an apology.

What I could have told him was how sorry I am that he and his brothers in arms fought for a just cause, the extermination of an oppressive ideology, under the leadership of a government that would not follow through in achieving the victory he had fought for, but let the righteously shed blood of so many American men flow and dry in vain. I could have said how sorry I am that the forces of communism thwarted him in his own homeland while he was abroad.

I could have told him how sorry I am that he and his surviving brothers returned not to a humble and grateful nation as had all their forbears, but to a people among whom abode a small but vocal minority that spat their contempt at them like napalm, who made the lions of our country scapegoats, who offered no respite to the weary creditors of a debt that can never be repaid.

I could have told him how sorry, how truly sorry I am, that the very same oppressive ideology of forced wealth redistribution at gunpoint has taken hold in his home. How deeply sorry I am that a man like him could travel abroad to fight against socialism with all his might, and live to see the day when he would be scoffed at as a fossil for not embracing it. How inexpressibly sorry I am that someone American by birth – and in no other sense – adopting the very word affixed to this day to the name of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, came to his Green Mountain State and used it as a stepping stool in a quest for the highest office in his country.

How disgusted I am that Bernie Sanders’ name is pronounced by the liberal intelligentsia with a hushed awe no veteran would presume to claim for himself.

If you want to honor the sacrifices of the Vietnam veterans, a wonderful start would be refusing to enlist in the ranks of the enemy. That shouldn’t be too hard. You haven’t been drafted.

The California State Senate Appropriation Committee passed a bill that would legalize Assisted Suicide, so far five states have done so; Oregon, Montana, Washington, Vermont, and New Mexico. SB 128 is dangerous in California and must be stopped. The bill is supposed to be voted on by the full Senate later this week.

Assisted Suicide devalues life because life becomes only about what makes an individual happy. The individual's comfort and their "quality of life" becomes the most important, once that is gone they believe that their life is of no value. The truth of the matter is that life is valuable not because of the comfort that we have but because of what we can learn and those things for which we can strive. A life-threatening and or degenerative disease does not destroy the individual's ability to contribute to those around them or destroy their ability to learn and wonder. Even dementia does not destroy the ability of an individual to wonder and live a full life. If quality of life is our standard for whether life is worth living, poverty and chronic depression would become a decent excuse for suicide. 

For a full explanation of arguments against suicide click here