Judicial Restraint and Originalism

I do not think any conservative judge believes in judicial restraint or originalism. Too many judges are political and use their opinions over the law and constitution. I hear about precendent, stare decisis, but it does not exist. All judges are activist but it depends on their point of view!! 1) Founders did not believe in standing army-the second amendment was about militia and Brutus from Brutus 1 was worried about Congress destroying and getting rid of state militias-militias to put down slave rebellions!! 2) Founders believed in freedom of speech-was speech symbolic? That was created by conservatives? Did founders believe money was speech? That was created by conservatives. 3) Founders did not believe in poltical parties-founders thought Congress would protect its territory and powers but now it is not done. Party is more important than country. Madison was correct about the dangers of factions. The Supreme Court allows the dangers of factions continue-partisan gerrymandering, partisan rules. 4)Justice Alito believes in originalism?! Based on originialism-no womens rights, no African american rights, no LGBTQ rights, no privacy rights-what is the 9th amendment to ALito? What is included but not stated? 5) Justices make decisions and state that this does not affect other decisions-that is not true. Judges read and politicans read. Politicans now want to state: interractial marriage in Loving v VA was wrong, Griswold v CT was wrong. While Alito says, this Dobbs is only about Abortion, his allies are looking at all the issues. 6) The Founders had the chance to make right to own gun an individual right-it failed. If it was individual right it would be included in first amendment. They were logical. PS Madison had religious exemption for right to own gun-is that militia or individual-hmmm 7) Gun nuts state people have right to overthrow government-see Article 3-Treason-did the court see this?