OpinionTrending Commentary

Creating “rights” that don’t exist while taking away rights that do


Leonardo da Vinci, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Two decisions were just handed down from the US Supreme Court this week and both have left the Left unhinged.

Of course, it’s hard to tell these days. They live in that state and they try to force the rest of us to live in it with them.

Both decisions were juxtaposed beautifully as one affirmed the right to carry a concealed weapon “outside the home,” and the other affirmed states’ rights on abortion. Both dealt with the defense of life and under whose jurisdiction that decision should rest.

For almost fifty years, the Left has worked and progressively succeeded in equating abortion with Liberty. They have now been exposed for their steady attempts to destroy the Liberties actually guaranteed to us in the Bill of Rights. That’s no accident.

In one of the greatest political bait-and-switches since they successfully projected their ugly, racist past onto Republicans, they have used the language of Liberty to describe the termination of a pregnancy: “It’s a personal, private decision between a ‘birthing person’ and its doctor,” It’s none of the government’s business,” and the ever popular, “my body, my choice.”

As their minions willingly give up every right they have and dutifully partner with the government to bully their fellow citizens into doing as they’re told, they continue to believe that abortion is synonymous with freedom.

Not only has the topic served as a supreme distraction but it has indoctrinated several generations to cheapen life.

Consequently, the act of affirming life in general and life in the womb is a spectacular triumph of political defiance against the credible evidence we see of a deliberate movement to “de-populate” the earth (translation: genocide and forced sterility)

No wonder pro-abortionists are so furious. Their ideology to elevate death and depravity has been temporarily defeated.

Despite the threats of violence we have come to expect from a certain group of adult children when they don’t get their way, let’s savor and celebrate this double-barreled victory.

We’ll get back at it tomorrow.

Agree/Disagree with the author(s)? Let them know in the comments below and be heard by 10’s of thousands of CDN readers each day!

Support Conservative Daily News with a small donation via Paypal or credit card that will go towards supporting the news and commentary you've come to appreciate.

Karen Kataline

Karen Kataline is a commentator, columnist & talk show host. She holds a Master’s Degree from Columbia University and is a frequent guest host on AM Talk Radio. She has an active blog and her Op Eds can be seen online at Fox News, Investor’s Business Daily, Western Journal, Town Hall, The Daily Caller, FrontPage Mag, and The American Thinker.

Related Articles


  1. The decision in Dobbs was that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion. This is correct as the Constitution does not confer rights, it protects specific listed rights, retained by the people, against infringement by the government. There may be other rights the people have retained that are not specifically listed in the constitution as being protected. If a claimed right is not listed, how do we know that it is one of those protected rights. Is abortion one of those inherent and unalienable rights to be protected? Maybe it is and maybe it is not. There is a way to make sure, if it is. The proponents of abortion can focus their energies to peacefully amend the U.S. Constitution something like this:

    “An Abortion is herein defined as the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy. The control of one’s own body being necessary to exercise individual privacy, the right of the people to Abort their own pregnancy anytime pre-birth or terminate the life of their post-partum living fetus or organism up to XX days post birth, shall not be infringed. Other persons and entities shall not be compelled to fund, assist or facilitate an Abortion.”

  2. Of course, the pro life problem with your argument is that a “living fetus” is not just a part of a women’s body (like a foot or a hand) but a human being living in her body; therefore abortion is taking the life of that living being. Incidentally, the definition of murder is “the premeditated killing of one human being by another”.
    Regardless, the Supreme Court decision is correct in that it does not “ban” abortion, merely leaves the decision to each state and their elected representatives where it should have been all along. That is how our representative Republic was designed and (contrary to the Liberal hypocrisy) is the essence of Democracy not the antithesis of it.

Back to top button