The left hates America.
They hate everything about this country. They hate the values America was founded on, they hate our form of governance, they hate the way our system works, and most importantly, they hate our Constitution. Not only do they hate our Constitution, but as the Tony Nominated Broadway play ‘What The Constitution Means To Me’ proves, they have absolutely no idea how the Constitution works.
Now this all might sound like my opinion, but as Newsbusters shows, this is anything but fiction. Heidi Schreck talked about her Tony-nominated ‘What The Constitution Means to Me’ by calling the founding document “this 231-year-old document shapes, limits, protects or even ruins the lives of people who often have very little access to the high-minded rhetoric of law schools and court rooms.” Not sold on Schreck hate for the Constitution yet? How about when she talks with Salon about the fact that she has a problem with the way the Constitution was originally written because it didn’t provide protections for abortions.
Schreck, whose play is a finalist for the 2019 Pulitzer Prize for Drama, discussed with Salon that many Americans’ strict adherence to the Constitution as it was written doesn’t provide necessary protections for women, like explicit protections for “abortions,” and “bodily autonomy,” and protections from “domestic violence.”
She recalled being fascinated and enamored with the Constitution since an early age, but after dealing with her family’s own history of sexual violence and seeing lawyers being “unsuccessful at finding Constitutional protections for women,” Schreck began to “question all of my assumptions.” And because she stopped viewing it that way, we should to.
Schreck is not only upset with the founders for not putting the right to end the life of a child as one of the primary amendments, but she believes that because of this, Americans should not have ‘originalist’ view of the Constitution because abortion is no where to be found. In other words, we shouldn’t pay any attention to the fact that abortion is nowhere listed as a responsibility of the federal government nor is it granted in the Bill of Rights because that makes the agenda harder for the left.
But she doesn’t stop there, Schreck hatred of the Constitution intensifies as she says that the founding “holds us back and through its positioning as a neutral document and actually perpetuates violence and racism and misogyny”
She clarifies by saying:
“How does something like law, especially law that was created by men for men by white men for white men, how does that deal with something as specific as women’s bodies? I don’t understand how a government mostly run by white men can possibly make good decisions for the entire country.” They don’t know what it’s like to have a woman’s body, therefore “there is no way you can make the best possible choice for other people. I feel like that is clear in the case of abortion.”
Now, I for one would like to think that in 1787, the founding fathers had more pressing issues on their plates than legalizing the killing of babies (you know, their own kids) in the womb nearly 100 years BEFORE the first public hospital was even created. Abortions that would have surely led to the death of the woman in 10 out of 10 cases just to please 3rd wave feminists 230+ years in the future…but let’s save this half of the idiot sandwich for later.
You see, this takes us back to the default position of the left, that this country was only founded for white men and privileged white men oppress *insert victim here*. The left pretends to like America when they need people to vote them into office, otherwise they spend all day telling you how awful and oppressive it is. Explaining to you how it is a hotbed of racism, sexism, homophobia, and xenophobia among others. Their belief is, America since it’s founding is evil and wrong and the only way to correct this is to fundamentally change the country into a more diverse, democratic socialist, secular, female led utopia which looks more like a country that has never existed. But don’t take my word for it, Marxist director Michael Moore is famous for saying that “The America I want to save is an America we’ve never had”. In other words, the America they want is not the free country we have today, it has to fundamentally change to fit their agenda.
Schreck rounds out her nonsensical rant by pretending that despite her earlier comments condemning the Constitution, she really just wishes that we could just change it.
“I don’t want to abolish the Constitution. I think that would be terrifying (despite the fact she literally just called it racist and sexist). There’s no way to do it in a way that I don’t think would bring chaos and destruction. I do wish we could amend it.”
Yes…Amend the Constitution…
If only there was a way to amend the Constitution…
If only the founding fathers could have established a system that would have allowed us to change the Constitution…
In case you too are stupid, there is already a way to amend the Constitution, it’s called the Amendment Process. The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures. The amendment then becomes part of the Constitution as soon as it is ratified by three-fourths of the States (38 of 50 States). This process has been used for certain key moments in the history of this country such as ending slavery, ending prohibition on alcohol, and GIVING WOMEN THE RIGHT TO VOTE…
You CAN amend the constitution as it is written but the left doesn’t like this method because this means that they have to get 2/3 of the house, 2/3 of the senate, and 3/4 of the states to support they stupid ideas and unfortunately for them, there aren’t enough idiots in this country (yet) to go along with their Anti-American agenda. Now while left wing media outlets such as Variety, Washington Post, The NY Times, and The Wrap can’t stop gushing about how amazing Schreck’s interpretation of the Constitution is, her own words shows how dangerous and negligent her views of the law in this country can be in the wrong hands.
If there is one thing you can say about the strength of the founding document, after 232 years, the left STILL haven’t figured out a way to break it, but they are trying.
Don’t forget to Subscribe for Updates. Also, Follow Us at Society-Reviews, YouTube, Instagram, Twitter, Odysee, Twitch, & Letterboxd
5 thoughts on “Tony-Nominated ‘What The Constitution Means To Me’ Proves The Left Hates America…And They’re Stupid AF”
Amendment process? They already tried that. It was called the “Equal Rights Amendment” or ERA for short. Basically, it failed because it would have forced women to be drafted*, to share public bathrooms* with men and guaranteed “rights” that were already covered in general by the civil rights laws and other laws. I suspect the real reason was to keep abortion legal as it’s based on a shaky foundation of a SCOTUS decision that could be changed should the court move to the right. *
* Do these sound familiar and relevant to today’s leftist agenda?
“How does something like law, especially law that was created by men for men by white men for white men, how does that deal with something as specific as women’s bodies?
There’s your mistake. It deals with everyone’s bodies. Most laws do.
I don’t understand how a government mostly run by white men can possibly make good decisions for the entire country.”
Says the white woman who wants to make decisions for the entire country.
They don’t know what it’s like to have a woman’s body, therefore “there is no way you can make the best possible choice for other people. I feel like that is clear in the case of abortion.”
I’ve heard there are more pro-life women than men, but y’all keep ignoring them because they complicate the Narrative. In fact, I’ve seen y’all do it.
You don’t appear to know what ‘left’ is amd you seem to connect it somehow to Marxism. There is no left or Marxism in America. Surely you don’t consider Obama or the Clintons as being ‘left’ . The democratic party is just a name – no different from the republican party. If you consider politicians who represent the American workers as being ‘left’ – fine – but who are they? Can you name any American politicians who have represented the American people? Bill Clinton and Obama pretended to be ‘left’ and democratic in their election campaigns but once elected – they did nothing for the American people. The genuine ‘progressives’ are the real ‘left’ in America and they certainly are not Marxist.
If I where to read The Ten Planks of the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx, the endgame would sound a lot like what many who consider themselves to be left of the political arena would want and campaign for. This idea that there is no real Marxism or Communism is constantly held up by the idea that the control of means and goods aren’t by “the people” aka “It hasn’t actually been tried”. However, you can only come to this conclusion by ignoring the role of the state. Even the wildest Anarcho Communist utopia requires the presence of the state to survive. What people who believe in this system don’t understand is that control is NEVER going to be in their hands, it’s always going to be in the hands of the people they elect to change the system. These people are the useful idiots of the state.