Polarizing the Masses With Tomi Lahren & Neil Gorsuch

Polarizing the Masses With Tomi Lahren & Neil Gorsuch

LISTEN TO TLR’S LATEST PODCAST:


Polarizing the Masses With Tomi Lahren & Neil Gorsuch

By Betsy Pearson

The polarization that exists in our political sphere is insufferable at times. Because I side with a political party that isn’t one of the two dominant groups in our two party system, this division is further exacerbated. One of the things that I have always noticed about this issue is that it is usually brought about from an election cycle or change of power. There are ‘hot button’ issues that are often brought up so people can see how they fit ideologically with the candidate. Most of the time, these issues are already settled in law, making the politicians opinion on the issue just a tool used to create polarity in the system and amongst the American people.

One of these polarizing issues is abortion. Most people understand the division strongly correlated to party ties, and for some this is their number one issue. Whether it be for religious reasons, or human rights concerns, it was not surprising when Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch was asked about whether or not he would work to overturn Roe v. Wade. Another political spotlight was shone on Tomi Lahren when she was recently fired from her job at a ‘conservative’ publication, for saying she is pro-choice.

As democrats struggle to fight against the confirmation of Gorsuch, and as Tomi Lahren’s social media fame inevitably dies, abortion is yet again at the forefront of political discourse. In a reality where there are protests against protests, and Donald Trump’s twitter feed creates its own drama, we do not need anymore unnecessary polarization in the country. Roe v. Wade will never be undone, and Tomi Lahren can have whatever opinion she likes on this issue. These are just arguments that prevent our government from getting work done and pits people against each other. We have to look past our differing opinions and focus on issues that both sides of the isle can positively impact.

EDITOR’s NOTE: The views expressed are those of the author, they are not representative of The Libertarian Republic or its sponsors.
Original Post Can Be Found at College Reaction.

WATCH TLR’S LATEST VIDEO:

Judge Napolitano FIRED From Fox News?

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
13 comments

Latest Stories

13 Comments

  • Mike Handy
    March 29, 2017, 10:45 am

    No idea why Roe V Wade can never be undone. It comes down to definition of human life and rights of privacy weighed against right to life.
    Just because you say something, that is unsupported, does not make it necessarily true.

    REPLY
  • Aidan Mattis@Mike Handy
    March 29, 2017, 12:14 pm

    It could be overturned, but it would require a new and well put together argument based in science.

    REPLY
  • Mike Handy@Aidan Mattis
    March 29, 2017, 12:52 pm

    Well by definition a fetus is alive it meets all scientific criteria for life and is made up of human DNA. Scientifically this makes it both human and life.

    That aside roe v wade is exclusively about right to privacy, precedent has never been extended beyond that. So legal logic need only use about 10,000 other legal arguments to overturn the Ruling. Has nothing to do with science and everything to do with privacy.

    REPLY
  • Edward Havens@Mike Handy
    March 29, 2017, 3:40 pm

    Roe v. Wade established a woman’s right to an abortion is a fundamental human right, and thus protected under the Constitution. In order for the Supreme Court overturn their previous decision, a case would have to come before them that shows the original decision was made incorrectly from a legal standpoint, and would first have to pass through a number of lower courts proving the same.

    You don’t have to like Roe v. Wade. You don’t have to agree with it. It may very well be against your personal religious ideas. But it is the law of the land. And the reason why it still stands after forty plus years is because it cannot be legally proven that a woman’s right to an abortion is not a fundamental human right, immaterial of individual personal feelings or religious doctrine.

    REPLY
  • Mike Handy@Edward Havens
    March 29, 2017, 3:52 pm

    No, you had a bad history teacher.
    Roe V Wade ruled that a right to privacy was covered under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment. The scope of that ruling has made getting near abortion difficult because privacy was broadly applied. In its original frame work it was specifically supposed to be counter balanced against: “the state’s interests in regulating abortions: protecting women’s health and protecting the potentiality of human life.”

    REPLY
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
LIVE NOW! CLICK TO VIEW.
CURRENTLY OFFLINE