Robert O’Rourke Questions Whether Any Constitutional Right is “Absolute”
LA School District Wants Kids To Learn Pronouns, And Look At Boudoir Photos While They’re At It
August 12, 2022
Do The Ends Justify The Means For Electric Vehicle Production?
August 13, 2022We at Chicks on the Right have not covered much of Robert “Beto” O’Rourke’s gubernatorial campaign, because we endeavor to bring you only news that it relevant and/or amusing(ly shocking). O’Rourke is not at all the former and only occasionally the latter. But this is one such occasion.
Behold, Failboy’s newest hot take on your rights:
Naturally this diatribe began with him crusading against the second amendment, because Beto thinks only criminals should be able to protect themselves, and ended with him questioning, “Is any constitutionally protected right absolute?”
I have not been able to find an extended clip, I presume because everyone there stood up and walked out, but in total fairness it is possible that he followed up that (hopefully) rhetorical question with something to the effect of, “Of course they are!”
Even if he did, though, there’s no way he could or would claim that Constitutional rights are absolute without a “But. . .” because he doesn’t believe they are. The only splash O’Rourke made in the 2020 Democrat primaries was thanks to his authoritarian attitude toward the second amendment, and he has no choice but to cling to that awful take if he wants a chance in hell of being even remotely relevant.
But I guess that explains why he has to resort to shock value to garner any attention at all: the substance of his beliefs (what little there is) is weak and, frankly, laughable. Much like him.
11 Comments
So this would mean that Robert believes the “right” to abortion (which, according to liberal screeches, is a Constitutional right) is also not absolute, right? Cue the cancel culture outrage…
I mean look at china. The right to abortion in china or even the right to not have an abortion was never absolute. They can force you to get an abortion and they can force you to not get an abortion.
I question whether this character is leadership material!
Yep. Liberal don’t believe in much of anything being absolute. Things like marriage, age of consent, words, gender, exposing kids and babies to porn and perverted sex acts, up to what age you can kill your kid – as an adult with kids. I always advocated you should be able to abort them until they reach 30 years old. /sarc.
The only thing they seem to believe is absolute are things like all white men are inherently racist.
It’s an unpopular opinion, but he’s right.
The First, you can’t libel or slander someone, you can’t petition your Representative at 3 A.M. by banging on his bedroom window, you can’t sacrifice a person in a religious ceremony, you (a “normie”) can’t assemble in the middle of Area 51, etc.
The Third doesn’t apply to police.
The Fourth, the police force there way into your house if you are “swatted” and they know it is a false call.
The Fifth, civil asset forfeiture (which should have been struck down a hundred times already, but hasn’t).
The Sixth, “January 6th” defendants.
The Seventh, well, the Seventh is stuck to pretty well.
The Eighth, EPA fines of tens of thousands a day for farm stock ponds.
The Ninth, that has totally received a groin kick with a steel toed boot (even from Republicans and Conservatives). See “privacy”.
The Tenth, Social Security, Medicare… pretty much the entirety of the Federal “budget” excluding the Navy and, maybe, the Army.
But the Second has that pesky, “shall not be infringed,” part added to it.
…police force *their…
In principle I don’t disagree with you Mike, though I’ve always contended that the First is (or should be) viewed as absolute. The example of an exception people always give is, “You can’t shout ‘Fire!’ in a crowded movie theater.” I would suggest that you absolutely can do that. However, your right to free speech does not include a right to not be held accountable for the results of your speech. You can shout “Fire” if you want to, but if you do, then you can’t expect to not be prosecuted for the harm your speech has caused.
Yes, everything in the Constitution is absolute. The only way to change it is through an amendment. Good luck with that. That is why liberals want a liberal SCOTUS. They can create rights out of thin air.
I’m actually happy to hear Bozo’s willingness to question every Constitutional right we already have. That tells me that deep down he’s really an anarchist. I wonder what country he would like us to emulate? It’s clear, O’Roarke’s de-armament and unlimited baby-killing preferences don’t come close to agreement with an overwhelming majority of Americans.
Anarchism is about giving people more right though
I wish people would stop using the ‘beto’ and use his actual name, Robert, and clearly indicate he is a white man of Irish decent, so most likely a white supremacist who should be canceled.