A Government Which Won’t Protect Children From Genital Mutilation Is Not Worth Existing

Two supposedly “conservative” governors have recently shown their pathetic, cowardly true colors for all to see when they both vetoed legislation which would protect children from sexual predators and pedophiles who seek to destroy their bodies for their own sexual and social pleasure and satisfaction.
 
Kristi Noem and Asa Hutchinson are the two pathetic and cowardly “conservative” governors who have failed to perform government’s first job.
 
But while there are plenty of stories out there about Noem, and since Hutchinson is the more recent example, I would like to talk about him as opposed to Noem.
 
Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson vetoed the Save Adolescents From Experimentation Act, which would make it the first state to ban doctors from administering hormone treatment and puberty blockers to children (other similar legislation will soon be passed and signed into law in other states). Thankfully, the Republican-led state House of Representatives overrode his veto on Tuesday, so the bill will become law. But that Hutchinson vetoed it is still a travesty. Even more so that he went on Tucker Carlson’s show and DOUBLED DOWN on his veto, claiming his reason was that the bill was “government overreach.”
 
The guy even went so far as to claim that William Buckley and Ronald Reagan would both support his decision: “I go back to William Buckley, I go back to Ronald Reagan, to principles of our party, which believes in a limited role of government. Are we as a party abandoning a limited role of government and saying we’re going to invoke the government’s decision-making over and above physicians, over and above health care, over and above parents?”
 
This is nothing more than an asinine appeal to conservatives, invoking the name of Buckley and Reagan, and pretending as though this is a conservative, libertarian value. It’s bullcrap and he knows it.
 
First, neither Buckley nor Reagan would EVER support child genital mutilation, unlike Hutchinson. Both believed in limited, but not absent, government. Buckley, in his 1990 book “Gratitude”, put forth the idea of “national service” for children to serve American interests. In other words, he believed in the idea that government ought to be used to protect moral civic institutions to the best of its ability, provided that it can be, itself, a moral and just government. And Reagan is pretty famous for saying: “Government’s first job is to protect the people, not run their lives.”
 
I even mentioned that both Hutchinson and Noem failed to do government’s first job because I recalled REAGAN when using that term. So the idea that either Buckley or Reagan would support this moral decadence is a flat out lie.
 
Second, Hutchinson’s line of thinking could be taken to its logical conclusion that NO crime ought to be punishable and no action ought to be barred.
 
According to his line of thinking, people ought to be allowed to kill one another, rape one another, steal from one another, and do insidious other things to one another. After all, these are the blessings of liberty, right? For a government to use its decision-making power over and above a free people who wish to annihilate one another and perform cruelties and evil against one another would be overreach, right?
 
If a physician wants to abort a baby, are we to invoke government’s decision-making power over them? That’s Hutchinson’s argument, almost verbatim. If healthcare workers want to physically abuse and kill their patients, are we to invoke the government’s decision-making power over them and get them to stop? If parents want to physically and/or sexually abuse their children, are we to invoke the government’s decision-making power over them?
 
Somehow, Hutchinson believes the answer to those questions is “no,” which is a ghoulish response that I would expect from the Left, but not from someone who claims to be a conservative and even attempts to justify that through a conservative lens.
 
Limited government doesn’t mean absence of government. It means getting out of people’s way of living the life they want to live so long as that life is not an obstruction on the life of another. It means protecting the people both from foreign and domestic threats. It means protecting and CONSERVING moral institutions which we know come from God.
 
Hutchinson’s view of “liberty” is the same kind of liberty that Satan adheres to. “Do what you want, whenever you want, no matter how immoral and how evil.” The freedom to do evil is not a freedom people ought to have. The freedom to do evil is not a freedom conservatives ought to be defending.
 
We have prisons for those who break the law. We have court systems to judge those who have broken the law. And for the most part, while this isn’t necessarily always the case, law tends to protect what is right and just. Again, not always, as abortion is legal and as child genital mutilation is legal in most states and as slavery and segregation were once legal. But the point that conservatives like Buckley and Reagan were trying to make is that a moral and just government will protect civic institutions which are moral and just. We don’t exactly have a moral and just government, and arguably never have, but to argue that that means everything that is evil ought to be permissible is arriving to the worst possible conclusion.
 
For anyone on the Right to assert that government has no place in the protection of children is absolutely insane. Hutchinson even went so far as to tell Carlson that “conservatives” ought to retreat from this kind of cultural battlefield so as to “not invoke ourselves in every societal position out there.”
 
If conservatives do retreat in any area (and we ashamedly have), that means the Left gets to take more and more. If one societal position is not worth defending, we will find ourselves defending absolutely nothing. And then, what’d be the point of being a conservative? What’d be the point of fighting back against the Left? What would we even be fighting back against if they have taken everything?
 
If defending children from sexual predators, even if those predators are their own parents, is a social and civil position that conservatives ought to retreat from, then burn the entire ideology to the ground, for it is utterly worthless.
 
But no true conservative will give even an INCH on this matter. Children shouldn’t be subjected to life-altering and life-destroying surgeries and hormone “therapy”. Any conservative that won’t defend children in an area where they ought MOST be defended is not worth their GOP membership; any conservative politician who won’t defend children against an evil and predatory Left in this culture war is not worth people’s vote; and any government which won’t defend and protect children from those who will cause them irreparable harm is not worth existing at all and should be torn down.
 
Again, thankfully, the Republicans in Arkansas’ House of Representatives have considerably more compassion for children and overrode Hutchinson’s veto, but the governor himself ought to be impeached and removed for this betrayal of Arkansas’ youth.
 
Trump taught GOP politicians how to win. Noem and Hutchinson are not Trump GOP politicians, clearly. That assertion that conservatives ought to “retreat” is indicative of the Bush, McCain, Romney GOP, which has conserved nothing, started endless wars and have utterly betrayed the founding principles of not only the party but the country, as well as betrayed the people of this country in general.
 
The Bush GOP is self-serving, elitist, Washington Establishment crap which has largely been thrown into the trash. Post-Trump, seemingly, some are rearing to go back to those dark ages when the only thing we could hope for in a Republican presidency is a decent tax cut, while society crumbles around us. No more. Any Republican who stands in the way ought to be rid of, for they are worthless and useless at best and a total liability at worst.
 
Thank God that Republicans hold a super-majority in the Arkansas House of Representatives, with 76 seats out of 100. Were the gap between Democrats and Republicans far closer, it is possible that Hutchinson’s veto would have remained, dooming the youth of Arkansas until the next elections (likely, the 2022 midterms, at least). Someone like Hutchinson, for such an action, ought to be removed entirely and replaced with a true conservative who wouldn’t even THINK, let alone argue, that we ought to retreat on any social position.
 
I hate useless Republicans and traitors. So does any sane and patriotic American who has had enough of the Left’s decadence of our society.
 
Ephesians 4:27
“And give no opportunity to the devil.”