Forum
»
Roe v wade may have just been overturned
05-03-2022, 10:49 PM
-
#241
- Vardoger
- Ojeblikket
-
- Vardoger
- Ojeblikket
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Location: United States
- Posts: 2,226
- Rep Power: 51787
-
-
Originally Posted By monty097⏩
Allegedly it allows individual states to decide whether or not they'll allow abortions in their respective states. To that end, my own Governor has stated the following:Even if they overturn it, it doesn't mean abortions are illegal or outlawed.
"We want Oklahoma to be the most pro-life state in the country," Stitt said at the time."We want to outlaw abortion in the state of Oklahoma."
So, while overturning Roe Vs Wade might not outlaw abortion on the federal level, it permits states to do so, and that is the end goal of at least one Republican Governor.
"Better well hung than ill wed." - Kierkegaard
05-03-2022, 11:10 PM
-
#242
- MoeBettuh
- Golden boy
-
- MoeBettuh
- Golden boy
- Join Date: Aug 2012
- Location: United States
- Posts: 17,468
- Rep Power: 142304
-
-
Originally Posted By Vardoger⏩
The goal of permitting states to set their own legislation should be the end goal of all governors, regardless of political affiliation. Imagine being distressed at the thought of the federal government losing power and as 5x10 said, relinquishing that power instead to each individual state.Allegedly it allows individual states to decide whether or not they'll allow abortions in their respective states. To that end, my own Governor has stated the following:
"We want Oklahoma to be the most pro-life state in the country," Stitt said at the time."We want to outlaw abortion in the state of Oklahoma."
So, while overturning Roe Vs Wade might not outlaw abortion on the federal level, it permits states to do so, and that is the end goal of at least one Republican Governor.
"We want Oklahoma to be the most pro-life state in the country," Stitt said at the time."We want to outlaw abortion in the state of Oklahoma."
So, while overturning Roe Vs Wade might not outlaw abortion on the federal level, it permits states to do so, and that is the end goal of at least one Republican Governor.
MFC
drum, it holds fifty, uh
05-03-2022, 11:21 PM
-
#243
- TaeBoNinja
- Vagina Whisperer
-
- TaeBoNinja
- Vagina Whisperer
- Join Date: Sep 2009
- Location: United States
- Posts: 46,748
- Rep Power: 174067
-
-
Originally Posted By MoeBettuh⏩
The argument is that some amendments grant rights in the case of abortion. Which is why the original decision came about. It's far deeper than states rights.The goal of permitting states to set their own legislation should be the end goal of all governors, regardless of political affiliation. Imagine being distressed at the thought of the federal government losing power and as 5x10 said, relinquishing that power instead to each individual state.
6'3 Master Race
GOATCal Crew
No Pillow Crew
Pureblood Crew
05-03-2022, 11:23 PM
-
#244
- Vardoger
- Ojeblikket
-
- Vardoger
- Ojeblikket
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Location: United States
- Posts: 2,226
- Rep Power: 51787
-
-
Originally Posted By MoeBettuh⏩
I don't disagree with anything you've posted, however, regarding Governor Stitt, he has pleaded with SCOTUS to rule in his favor regarding McGirt. Stitt asks for federal intervention when it fits his agenda. Don't misconstrue Stitt as being an anti-federalist, states right advocate when the truth is he's using the SCOTUS to impose his will on the state of Oklahoma. The following quote is an appeal for federal intervention masquerading as a question of states rights.The goal of permitting states to set their own legislation should be the end goal of all governors, regardless of political affiliation. Imagine being distressed at the thought of the federal government losing power and as 5x10 said, relinquishing that power instead to each individual state.
“I am encouraged that the Supreme Court has decided to address whether a state has authority to prosecute non-Indians who commit crimes against Indians in Indian Country. The fallout of the McGirt decision has been destructive. Criminals have used this decision to commit crimes without punishment. Victims of crime, especially Native victims, have suffered by being forced to relive their worst nightmare in a second trial or having justice elude them completely.
“The reality is that the McGirt decision has hamstrung law enforcement in half of the state. Oklahoma is a law and order state, and I was elected to protect all four million Oklahomans, regardless of their race or heritage. I will not stop fighting to ensure we have one set of rules to guarantee justice and equal protection under the law for all citizens.”
https://oklahoma.gov/governor/newsro...ss-mcgirt.html
edited to add - as a resident of Oklahoma, I can confirm that every bleeding heart word provided by Stitt in the above quote is less than factual. Crime has not increased in those jurisdictions as a result of McGirt.
"Better well hung than ill wed." - Kierkegaard
05-03-2022, 11:27 PM
-
#245
- greenleaf
- Registered User
-
- greenleaf
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2008
- Posts: 8,619
- Rep Power: 35570
-
-
Why tf businesses have to take a stand on this?
Major companies, including Disney and Walmart, keep largely silent as leaked Supreme Court abortion draft sparks outrage
Companies were reticent to weigh in on a leaked draft of a Supreme Court decision that would strike down abortion rights.
Dozens of companies, including Walmart, American Airlines and Disney, have yet to issue statements or respond to CNBC requests for comment.
The Business Roundtable, a trade group that’s made up of top CEOs, said it “does not have a position on this issue.” The U.S. Chamber of Commerce declined to comment.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/03/supr...eep-quiet.html
Major companies, including Disney and Walmart, keep largely silent as leaked Supreme Court abortion draft sparks outrage
Companies were reticent to weigh in on a leaked draft of a Supreme Court decision that would strike down abortion rights.
Dozens of companies, including Walmart, American Airlines and Disney, have yet to issue statements or respond to CNBC requests for comment.
The Business Roundtable, a trade group that’s made up of top CEOs, said it “does not have a position on this issue.” The U.S. Chamber of Commerce declined to comment.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/03/supr...eep-quiet.html
05-03-2022, 11:28 PM
-
#246
- RayBoccini
- Registered User
-
- RayBoccini
- Registered User
- Join Date: Dec 2012
- Posts: 6,010
- Rep Power: 19091
-
-
First I don't really care since more abortion means less dingers and feminists but the meltdown on social media is so retarded.
It literally boils down to using common sense and personality responsibility for your own actions.
Don't act like an animal with no impulse control, wrap it up or don't spread your legs for every chad who looks at you and you'll never have to worry about this. Pretty easy tbh.
I don't want to go to jail for drink driving. So guess what? I don't drink drive.
Obviously this won't apply to rape victims, but 99% of sloots just want consequence free sex.
Feminists out here acting like they caught pregnancy like they catch a cold lmao.
It literally boils down to using common sense and personality responsibility for your own actions.
Don't act like an animal with no impulse control, wrap it up or don't spread your legs for every chad who looks at you and you'll never have to worry about this. Pretty easy tbh.
I don't want to go to jail for drink driving. So guess what? I don't drink drive.
Obviously this won't apply to rape victims, but 99% of sloots just want consequence free sex.
Feminists out here acting like they caught pregnancy like they catch a cold lmao.
05-03-2022, 11:35 PM
-
#247
- greenleaf
- Registered User
-
- greenleaf
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2008
- Posts: 8,619
- Rep Power: 35570
-
-
Without fail...
‘We can’t trust Scotus’: California pledges to protect abortion rights
Governor Gavin Newsom said an amendment is being proposed that would ‘enshrine the right to choose’ in the state’s constitution
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-v-wade-scotus
‘We can’t trust Scotus’: California pledges to protect abortion rights
Governor Gavin Newsom said an amendment is being proposed that would ‘enshrine the right to choose’ in the state’s constitution
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-v-wade-scotus
05-03-2022, 11:42 PM
-
#248
05-03-2022, 11:47 PM
-
#249
- monty097
- Registered User
-
- monty097
- Registered User
- Join Date: Apr 2012
- Location: Canada
- Posts: 12,833
- Rep Power: 75637
-
-
Originally Posted By Vardoger⏩
Ok, so unless the other 49 all feel the same way then abortion is not going to be outlawed nationwide.Allegedly it allows individual states to decide whether or not they'll allow abortions in their respective states. To that end, my own Governor has stated the following:
"We want Oklahoma to be the most pro-life state in the country," Stitt said at the time."We want to outlaw abortion in the state of Oklahoma."
So, while overturning Roe Vs Wade might not outlaw abortion on the federal level, it permits states to do so, and that is the end goal of at least one Republican Governor.
"We want Oklahoma to be the most pro-life state in the country," Stitt said at the time."We want to outlaw abortion in the state of Oklahoma."
So, while overturning Roe Vs Wade might not outlaw abortion on the federal level, it permits states to do so, and that is the end goal of at least one Republican Governor.
-always pick 4 crew
-mod negged crew
-mod repped crew
-Conservative crew
-Trump 2024 crew
05-03-2022, 11:52 PM
-
#250
- MoeBettuh
- Golden boy
-
- MoeBettuh
- Golden boy
- Join Date: Aug 2012
- Location: United States
- Posts: 17,468
- Rep Power: 142304
-
-
Originally Posted By TaeBoNinja⏩
I understand what you’re saying, but that exact argument being wrong is largely why Dobbs is being decided as it allegedly is (which it turns out, indicates that it is in fact not a deeper issue than states rights). The court doesn’t really determine rights as much as interprets that balance between rights remaining unencumbered and the law of the land.The argument is that some amendments grant rights in the case of abortion. Which is why the original decision came about. It's far deeper than states rights.
Originally Posted By Vardoger⏩
I don’t follow Stitt at all, I can’t really comment on his authenticity or character or anything breh. His behavior notwithstanding, I’m just pointing out that I personally believe that allowing the states to decide (on nearly everything) is eminently desirable.I don't disagree with anything you've posted, however, regarding Governor Stitt, he has pleaded with SCOTUS to rule in his favor regarding McGirt. Stitt asks for federal intervention when it fits his agenda. Don't misconstrue Stitt as being an anti-federalist, states right advocate when the truth is he's using the SCOTUS to impose his will on the state of Oklahoma. The following quote is an appeal for federal intervention masquerading as a question of states rights.
“I am encouraged that the Supreme Court has decided to address whether a state has authority to prosecute non-Indians who commit crimes against Indians in Indian Country. The fallout of the McGirt decision has been destructive. Criminals have used this decision to commit crimes without punishment. Victims of crime, especially Native victims, have suffered by being forced to relive their worst nightmare in a second trial or having justice elude them completely.
“The reality is that the McGirt decision has hamstrung law enforcement in half of the state. Oklahoma is a law and order state, and I was elected to protect all four million Oklahomans, regardless of their race or heritage. I will not stop fighting to ensure we have one set of rules to guarantee justice and equal protection under the law for all citizens.”
https://oklahoma.gov/governor/newsro...ss-mcgirt.html
edited to add - as a resident of Oklahoma, I can confirm that every bleeding heart word provided by Stitt in the above quote is less than factual. Crime has not increased in those jurisdictions as a result of McGirt.
“I am encouraged that the Supreme Court has decided to address whether a state has authority to prosecute non-Indians who commit crimes against Indians in Indian Country. The fallout of the McGirt decision has been destructive. Criminals have used this decision to commit crimes without punishment. Victims of crime, especially Native victims, have suffered by being forced to relive their worst nightmare in a second trial or having justice elude them completely.
“The reality is that the McGirt decision has hamstrung law enforcement in half of the state. Oklahoma is a law and order state, and I was elected to protect all four million Oklahomans, regardless of their race or heritage. I will not stop fighting to ensure we have one set of rules to guarantee justice and equal protection under the law for all citizens.”
https://oklahoma.gov/governor/newsro...ss-mcgirt.html
edited to add - as a resident of Oklahoma, I can confirm that every bleeding heart word provided by Stitt in the above quote is less than factual. Crime has not increased in those jurisdictions as a result of McGirt.
MFC
drum, it holds fifty, uh
05-04-2022, 01:18 AM
-
#251
Originally Posted By XterraRob⏩
Why does this kunt keep getting reelectedCHINA MITCH at it again, trying to take the wind out of the Republican sales for 2022. They are intentionally sabotaging Republicans in 2022. **** this god damn scum bag.
Dems who would probably be apathetic to voting given the state of the economy have a reason even more now.
Dems who would probably be apathetic to voting given the state of the economy have a reason even more now.
RIP Pedro Suarez Vertiz. Te queremos Hermano
If your right leg is Thanksgiving and your left leg is Christmas, can I come and visit you between the holidays?
05-04-2022, 02:00 AM
-
#252
- Shysty021
- Registered User
-
- Shysty021
- Registered User
- Join Date: Sep 2012
- Location: North Carolina, United States
- Posts: 26,058
- Rep Power: 209290
-
-
Originally Posted By BadMonkeyFunker⏩
kavanahug and amy lied about it during their confirmations. reversing a settled law opens pandoras box. this issue is NOT about "unborn fetuses"
you have no idea how much you angered literally 70% of the country....
after this one, whats next ? since settled law means nothing... over turn gay marriage ? leave it to states if they allow interracial marriage ? - 70% of the country is against because of this. This is way bigger than just abortion.
u fuked up
you have no idea how much you angered literally 70% of the country....
after this one, whats next ? since settled law means nothing... over turn gay marriage ? leave it to states if they allow interracial marriage ? - 70% of the country is against because of this. This is way bigger than just abortion.
u fuked up
Originally Posted By monty097⏩
Even if they overturn it, it doesn't mean abortions are illegal or outlawed.
Yet you retards think not only that will happen, but they will also make gay and interracial marriage illegal.
Are you people actually fuking brain dead?
Yet you retards think not only that will happen, but they will also make gay and interracial marriage illegal.
Are you people actually fuking brain dead?
Originally Posted By XterraRob⏩
So much for that argumentCHINA MITCH at it again, trying to take the wind out of the Republican sales for 2022. They are intentionally sabotaging Republicans in 2022. **** this god damn scum bag.
Dems who would probably be apathetic to voting given the state of the economy have a reason even more now.
Mouth drooling Republican voters who don't see through this charade will jump on board with Mitch's wishes and also sabotage the movement.
Dems who would probably be apathetic to voting given the state of the economy have a reason even more now.
Mouth drooling Republican voters who don't see through this charade will jump on board with Mitch's wishes and also sabotage the movement.
By their standards they can go ahead and ban interracial marriages even after we established it as law
05-04-2022, 02:08 AM
-
#253
I am as anti-abortion as you can be, because it is baby killing being allowed for females, especially whores, sluts, and mentally ill females. However, this is so obviously a tactic with the goal of bringing out a massive liberal turnout. I wonder how many "conservatives" are in on the plot.
05-04-2022, 03:18 AM
-
#254
Originally Posted By DDSF1⏩
Sure looks that way, such convenient timing...it's going to absolutely ridiculous if they manage to throw away the midterms over this shyt - which doesn't seem far fetched at all.I am as anti-abortion as you can be, because it is baby killing being allowed for females, especially whores, sluts, and mentally ill females. However,this is so obviously a tactic with the goal of bringing out a massive liberal turnout.I wonder how many "conservatives" are in on the plot.
05-04-2022, 03:29 AM
-
#255
- Bodhy
- Paddling to New Zealand
-
- Bodhy
- Paddling to New Zealand
- Join Date: Mar 2020
- Posts: 17,326
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Yep, exactly the kind of GOP BS people are underestimating changing the landscape of upcoming midterms. People believe the GOP might mogg the Dems, and they actually might, but by the same token this has rustled the jimmies of millions of Americans which is, of course, going to motivate voters in the millions.
Dems need to lose some apathy and show up and vote, because the cultish GOP base most definitely will. And many of the Republican bans in Texas don't allow for abortions for rape, incest, ectopic pregnancy or some other medical emergency. Definitely a theocratic agenda being pushed here.
Dems need to lose some apathy and show up and vote, because the cultish GOP base most definitely will. And many of the Republican bans in Texas don't allow for abortions for rape, incest, ectopic pregnancy or some other medical emergency. Definitely a theocratic agenda being pushed here.
Back off, Warchild.
Seriously.
05-04-2022, 03:48 AM
-
#256
05-04-2022, 03:55 AM
-
#257
- gachase21
- Join Date: Dec 2010
- Location: Georgia, United States
- Posts: 31,767
- Subscribers: 4
- Rep Power: 389233
-
-
Originally Posted By JT11RTR⏩
This year they can protest, and loot, to continue allowing the great black baby genocideSo much this. It's getting warm outside and time to make the dumb ass cities burn and loot some chit
05-04-2022, 03:59 AM
-
#258
Originally Posted By Bodhy⏩
Yeah...because Dems/the left definitely aren't "cultish", retard.Dems need to lose some apathy and show up and vote,because the cultish GOP base most definitely will.And many of the Republican bans in Texas don't allow for abortions for rape, incest, ectopic pregnancy or some other medical emergency. Definitely a theocratic agenda being pushed here.
05-04-2022, 05:56 AM
-
#259
05-04-2022, 06:11 AM
-
#260
05-04-2022, 06:47 AM
-
#261
- 128
- We on TV?
-
- 128
- We on TV?
- Join Date: Mar 2005
- Location: United States
- Posts: 64,672
- Rep Power: 351111
-
-
Originally Posted By Shysty021⏩
Is overturning Roe vs Wade banning it? They're leaving it up to the states, what states have ever floated any bans on marriage?So much for that argument
By their standards they can go ahead and ban interracial marriages even after we established it as law
By their standards they can go ahead and ban interracial marriages even after we established it as law
This SCOTUS more or less legalized gay marriage and as for Mitch, HIS WIFE IS ASIAN:
Stop repeating hysterical points you heard blue haired they/them freaks and DNC shills say on Twitter like an NPC cuck.
05-04-2022, 06:52 AM
-
#262
05-04-2022, 06:56 AM
-
#263
05-04-2022, 06:58 AM
-
#264
i think people are overestimating the voting populace’s memory span. If this happened in October then I would agree that it could energize the liberal base to vote.
Theres plenty of time for this to fade, especially because this decision wont actually prevent them from genociding as many babies as they please.
In november people will vote on whats affecting them in the moment, and thats their wallets.
Theres plenty of time for this to fade, especially because this decision wont actually prevent them from genociding as many babies as they please.
In november people will vote on whats affecting them in the moment, and thats their wallets.
Certified 1200 ng/l T
05-04-2022, 07:10 AM
-
#265
- Bodhy
- Paddling to New Zealand
-
- Bodhy
- Paddling to New Zealand
- Join Date: Mar 2020
- Posts: 17,326
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Originally Posted By 128⏩
The point is that it deals a major blow to the image of SCOTUS. It will sow distrust amongst the justices and damage the court's reputation.Is overturning Roe vs Wade banning it? They're leaving it up to the states, what states have ever floated any bans on marriage?
This SCOTUS more or less legalized gay marriage and as for Mitch, HIS WIFE IS ASIAN:
Stop repeating hysterical points you heard blue haired they/them freaks and DNC shills say on Twitter like an NPC cuck.
This SCOTUS more or less legalized gay marriage and as for Mitch, HIS WIFE IS ASIAN:
Stop repeating hysterical points you heard blue haired they/them freaks and DNC shills say on Twitter like an NPC cuck.
The SCOTUS is meant to be the exemplar and the image of a non-partisan institution. This isn't a stand-alone issue but an exclamation point to a long pedigree of tarnishing. There was Merrick Garland's nomination obstruction; then the pushing through of contentious nominations and rushed appointees moments before the national election.
Then in 2001, conservative judges stopped the democratic process when they allowed the brother of a conservative candidate to determine the outcome of a national election.
So see, it's not exactly a standalone issue. There are decades of partisanship behind the court, but it's just increased in its blatantness to the point where it's threatening to implode. The image of SCOTUS is meant to be a scholarly repository of legal genius, not something nakedly partisan. It is meant to be an impartial tool of justice, not a biased political cudgel the far-right uses to mould a theocratic agenda.
The anti-voice brigade are squealing, but they're too blinkered by a theocratic wet dream to understand they'll all be inevitably impacted by the implications of Roe v Wade.
Back off, Warchild.
Seriously.
05-04-2022, 07:10 AM
-
#266
- freeheeler
- Registered User
-
- freeheeler
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jun 2002
- Location: United States
- Age: 65
- Posts: 11,675
- Rep Power: 83841
-
-
Originally Posted By Vardoger⏩
And every POS mama will come to California, get put up in a hotel free of charge, be given $10k to live off, get a free abortion at the expense of the California taxpayers, free drugs, free everything. This is the way of the country we now live in, where killing your baby is celebrated as an achievementAllegedly it allows individual states to decide whether or not they'll allow abortions in their respective states. To that end, my own Governor has stated the following:
"We want Oklahoma to be the most pro-life state in the country," Stitt said at the time."We want to outlaw abortion in the state of Oklahoma."
So, while overturning Roe Vs Wade might not outlaw abortion on the federal level, it permits states to do so, and that is the end goal of at least one Republican Governor.
"We want Oklahoma to be the most pro-life state in the country," Stitt said at the time."We want to outlaw abortion in the state of Oklahoma."
So, while overturning Roe Vs Wade might not outlaw abortion on the federal level, it permits states to do so, and that is the end goal of at least one Republican Governor.
Scubastevo :-What percentage of women have STDs? (serious) If I just wanted to go bareback with any girl that I could get with, what are my chances of ending up bed ridden with STDs?
05-04-2022, 07:12 AM
-
#267
- Bodhy
- Paddling to New Zealand
-
- Bodhy
- Paddling to New Zealand
- Join Date: Mar 2020
- Posts: 17,326
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Originally Posted By JaxBrah⏩
I don't suppose you caught one of my many posts explaining the nature of the voting populace and their inclinations to vote? I've looked at that issue in depth many a time.i think people are overestimating the voting populace’s memory span. If this happened in October then I would agree that it could energize the liberal base to vote.
Theres plenty of time for this to fade, especially because this decision wont actually prevent them from genociding as many babies as they please.
In november people will vote on whats affecting them in the moment, and thats their wallets.
Theres plenty of time for this to fade, especially because this decision wont actually prevent them from genociding as many babies as they please.
In november people will vote on whats affecting them in the moment, and thats their wallets.
Back off, Warchild.
Seriously.
05-04-2022, 07:15 AM
-
#268
- Bushmaster
- Masculine Toxicity
-
- Bushmaster
- Masculine Toxicity
- Join Date: Jul 2003
- Location: Greenville, South Carolina, United States
- Posts: 68,360
- Subscribers: 2
- Rep Power: 700751
-
-
Originally Posted By Bodhy⏩
NY Post is garbage, for starters, and this will be another frivolous crybaby law suit that gets tossed, like all the election fraud suits.
Same old shopworn tactic from the right. They get properly and rightfully suedfor promulgating BS conspiracy theories and lies like Sandy Hook and voting machines,then turn around and file vexatious litigation which they really don't intend on following through with. It's an intentional effort to generate outrage media, feed their insatiable addiction to victimhood, and act like this is a 'both sides' thing.
Worse still is that this is Qtardy in nature; intending to discredit the media, the FBI just to sow distrust.
Whatever happened to Trump suing Hilary BTW? Is that still a thing, or did I correctly call that for the BS publicity stunt it was?
Same old shopworn tactic from the right. They get properly and rightfully suedfor promulgating BS conspiracy theories and lies like Sandy Hook and voting machines,then turn around and file vexatious litigation which they really don't intend on following through with. It's an intentional effort to generate outrage media, feed their insatiable addiction to victimhood, and act like this is a 'both sides' thing.
Worse still is that this is Qtardy in nature; intending to discredit the media, the FBI just to sow distrust.
Whatever happened to Trump suing Hilary BTW? Is that still a thing, or did I correctly call that for the BS publicity stunt it was?
Originally Posted By Bodhy⏩
Gosh, I just can't imagine why nobody takes you seriously...The point is that it deals a major blow to the image of SCOTUS. It will sow distrust amongst the justices and damage the court's reputation.
The SCOTUS is meant to be the exemplar and the image of a non-partisan institution. This isn't a stand-alone issue but an exclamation point to a long pedigree of tarnishing. There was Merrick Garland's nomination obstruction; then the pushing through of contentious nominations and rushed appointees moments before the national election.
Then in 2001, conservative judges stopped the democratic process when they allowed the brother of a conservative candidate to determine the outcome of a national election.
So see, it's not exactly a standalone issue. There are decades of partisanship behind the court, but it's just increased in its blatantness to the point where it's threatening to implode. The image of SCOTUS is meant to be a scholarly repository of legal genius, not something nakedly partisan. It is meant to be an impartial tool of justice, not a biased political cudgel the far-right uses to mould a theocratic agenda.
The anti-voice brigade are squealing, but they're too blinkered by a theocratic wet dream to understand they'll all be inevitably impacted by the implications of Roe v Wade.
The SCOTUS is meant to be the exemplar and the image of a non-partisan institution. This isn't a stand-alone issue but an exclamation point to a long pedigree of tarnishing. There was Merrick Garland's nomination obstruction; then the pushing through of contentious nominations and rushed appointees moments before the national election.
Then in 2001, conservative judges stopped the democratic process when they allowed the brother of a conservative candidate to determine the outcome of a national election.
So see, it's not exactly a standalone issue. There are decades of partisanship behind the court, but it's just increased in its blatantness to the point where it's threatening to implode. The image of SCOTUS is meant to be a scholarly repository of legal genius, not something nakedly partisan. It is meant to be an impartial tool of justice, not a biased political cudgel the far-right uses to mould a theocratic agenda.
The anti-voice brigade are squealing, but they're too blinkered by a theocratic wet dream to understand they'll all be inevitably impacted by the implications of Roe v Wade.
And negged because you eat shiit.
It's a hot night. The mind races. You think about your knife: the only friend who hasn't betrayed you, the only friend who won't be dead by sunup. Sleep tight mates, in your quilted chambray night shirts.
05-04-2022, 07:55 AM
-
#269
- MoeBettuh
- Golden boy
-
- MoeBettuh
- Golden boy
- Join Date: Aug 2012
- Location: United States
- Posts: 17,468
- Rep Power: 142304
-
-
Originally Posted By Shysty021⏩
If “by their standards” you mean “according to the nature of our legal system”, I agree.So much for that argument
By their standards they can go ahead and ban interracial marriages even after we established it as law
By their standards they can go ahead and ban interracial marriages even after we established it as law
MFC
drum, it holds fifty, uh
05-04-2022, 08:05 AM
-
#270
- Pterodactyl314
- See you tomorrow
-
- Pterodactyl314
- See you tomorrow
- Join Date: Apr 2015
- Location: Dirty South
- Posts: 19,745
- Rep Power: 163712
-
-
I’m betting Roberts leaked this to influence Kav/Barrett
He’s a Bush appointment and changed his vote last minute on Obama care.
He’s a Bush appointment and changed his vote last minute on Obama care.
See you tomorrow
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-
- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts