You haven't yet saved any bookmarks. To bookmark a post, just click .

Protest is for me, but not for thee...

I recently wrote an article about political correctness and absolute moral authority and many of the ideas contained therein are relevant to this piece. I do encourage you to read that article also. As we proceed through the days following the recent anti-Second Amendment "March for our Lives" it imperative that we understand what is happening to our society.

This setup has been in process for at least 50 years. We have been ingrained from the earliest days in school and this has continued in businesses and even some churches. There are people, groups, and events which cannot and must not be questioned. They have either assumed or been granted absolute moral authority. Neither the Constitution nor the rule of law matter. Then come the calls that, “We must do something”.

Of course, none of this is even vaguely possible without a willing and complicit media.

In the lead up to the big march in Washington California teacher Julianne Benzel posed a question for her students. “Are all protests equal?” I like to hear this because there is very little critical thinking taught in schools these days, and most certainly that is true in California. If students can decide to walk out of school for 17 minutes in support of gun control, can they do the same to protest abortion? Of course, her point was not only a valid one, it was one designed to make the kids think rather than act like sheep or lemmings.

She learned about absolute moral authority after class when she was placed on administrative leave after receiving a complaint about her comment in class. So the discussion now includes the First Amendment along with the Second. Understand this, absolute moral authority and political correctness are used to stifle speech and take away rights. They protect nothing but feelings and in so doing make us incapable of articulating a position or having a civil discussion.

Ohio senior Jacob Shoemaker refused to walk out of his classroom and was suspended. Now he was directed to go to a special study hall in lieu of the protest, but his point was that he and the other students AND the teacher belonged in class;  divisive politics has no place in school. I admire his pluck, however, I believe schools should neither take sides nor ignore these things. Free speech is always a good thing, free thinking, and discussion; reason and critical thinking.

Every year there is a March For Life in DC, this year was the 45th, a pro-life march focused on abortion and the lives lost. This year an estimated 100,000 attended however in 2013 the crowd was put in the area of 650,000, roughly the same as this event that was put on by school kids (Really? More on that later.), but you did not know that, did you? In 2010 Glenn Beck’s Restoring Honor march attracted an estimated 750,000. Yet if one is to look at media reports we are led to believe only "progressive" rallies capture these numbers, there is no mention of those by conservatives.


And to think this was organized by school children! The organizational skills of these young people are amazing; raising money to fund the facilities and equipment, obtain the necessary permits and everything to pull off this event was incredible. Please excuse my sarcasm.

Obviously, the kids did not put this on, they were used by seasoned operatives; community organizers. A number of well-known people spoke up and declared they would send money in support. A question. Who was the check made out to and to which address was it sent?

Our tax laws enable this darkness. The March For Our Lives Fund was organized as a 501(c)(4) organization. Donations to such an organization are not tax-deductible, but they DO NOT have to disclose their donor's identities. It is possible for a 501(c)(3) to give money to a (c)(4), thus money can be funneled to an event such as this and be deductible. I have no proof of this, but it is not out of the realm of possibilities. There was a suggestion made publicly that donations would be deductible if written to “March For Our Lives - Everytown Support Fund”, a Michael Bloomberg organization. Hmmm, high school kids. Right.

Front Page Magazine did a great job of following the money and I will not repeat it here, click on that link and see the trail that leads to the groups behind this “children’s march”. None of it comes from Florida.

What I felt was the most interesting was the aftermath of the event. While it is odd to me that people gathered demanding that their constitutionally protected right be taken away, one of the primary faces of the event (David Hogg) was furious when it touched him personally. One of the policies taken up by his Parkland school was to allow only clear plastic backpacks. It seems David views this as an infringement on his constitutional rights. Remember, David is the only one allowed to protest…

“It’s unnecessary, it’s embarrassing for a lot of the students and it makes them feel isolated and separated from the rest of American school culture where they’re having essentially their First Amendment rights infringed upon because they can’t freely wear whatever backpack they want regardless of what it is,” Hogg said.

“One of the other important things to realize is many students want their privacy. There are many, for example, females in our school that when they go through their menstrual cycle, they don’t want people to see their tampons and stuff,” he explained.

“What we should have is just more policies that make sure that these students are feeling safe and secure in their schools and not like they’re being fought against like it’s a prison,” according to Hogg.

Perhaps he didn’t think it through- that a government that can give you what you want can also take away what you want.

If you listen to what the protesters demanded and who they blamed, it seems it was the fault of politicians, the NRA, the gun, an outdated constitution (only certain parts I suppose)...but no one blamed the actual shooter, Nicholas Cruz. Cruz broke many laws, to think passing another law would matter does not make sense.


No one blamed the resource officer who refrained from entering the building or the initial deputies who also stayed outside. EMS personnel was prevented from entering (understandable since there was no law enforcement inside) to render aid to the ones who had been shot. No one blamed the collusion between the sheriff’s office and the school administration to under-report incidents in order to receive more federal funding. You see, none of those fit the agenda of gun control. Remember, never let a crisis go to waste.

Unheard was any vocalization against the proposed gun restrictions. Ben Shapiro gave some of them a voice, but the mainstream media will not. Ben makes some excellent points, such as a seventeen-year-old cannot buy a gun but is old enough and mature enough to set public policy and law. An 18-year-old must register for the draft and can volunteer to join the military, but would be denied the ability to buy a gun. Should we also restrict their right to speak out? Again, political correctness and absolute moral authority dictate who may speak and have a valid opinion and who may not.

And what of those who marched and carried signs at the event in Washington? Would it make any sense at all for those who march and demand gun control, specifically banning “Assault Rifles”, should they know what they are talking about? To have credibility, one should have a working knowledge of the subject. In this case, it seems not to be so. This video interviews some of the marchers. Are these the people who should be shaping public policy infringing our natural rights?

The reason they cannot define what an Assault Rifle is because the term was made up. The Germans used the term “Storm Rifle” (sturmgewehr), it seems in 1988 John Sugarmann of the anti-gun Violence Policy Center coined the term to apply to scary looking guns. An excerpt from his study “Assault Weapons and Accessories in America”:

"Assault weapons—just like armor-piercing bullets, machine guns, and plastic firearms—are a new topic. The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons..." I think the confusion is the difference between the term "Assault Rifle" and "Assault Weapon". Assault rifles are any of various automatic or semiautomatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use.”

It is simply taking advantage of the public’s ignorance. So, protesters who are ignorant and know nothing about what they are protesting have the absolute moral authority and those who understand the meaning of “Shall not be infringed” and that a semi-automatic sporting rifle is not a rifle designed for military use.

The division in our society has been created intentionally. A divided society is easier to control. And many seem anxious to keep the division alive and well. The media plays it, politicians play it and many on social media. Many of the speeches given at the DC event and interviews since offer no inclination to understand the truth or the other side.

May we endeavor to educate those who are willing to learn and stand firm against those who would take or diminish our rights.

Michael Murphy

by Michael Murphy

Read more posts by this author.