| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
FrozenLVFan
Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 3511
Back to top |
 Posted: 06/25/22 9:49 am ::: |
Reply  |
|
| toad455 wrote: |
| This country is failing in so many ways, but this just set us back 50 years. The Supreme Court is coming for same sex marriage next. What's next after that? All the more reason to #VoteBlue this November. |
We've managed to impress our allies again too. The leaders of the UK, Canada, France, Spain, Norway, Belgium, NZ, the UN, et al. have made scathing remarks about this decision, calling it "appalling" and saying we're taking a big step backwards. Demonstrations and protests are happening throughout Europe.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/25/22 10:47 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| When the GOP sweeps the House, Senate, and White House in 2024 they'll institute a national abortion ban.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8942
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/25/22 11:42 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Well, we sure don't have any standing to tell China, NK, or any other country about human rights now, do we?
I say:
Fuck Trump.
Fuck Pence.
Fuck McConnell.
Fuck Thomas.
Fuck ACB.
Fuck Alito.
Fuck Gorsuch.
Fuck Roberts.
Fuck Beer-boy.
Fuck 'em all!!!
And fuck anyone who voted for any of the above (I know that includes some in my family too), whether directly or indirectly. I hope that they all go to hell and take a long, painful road to get there.
Side note:
What are the chances that interracial marriage is struck down? Sent back to the states to decide?
How would Clarence Mother Fucking Son of a Bitch Bastard Thomas vote?
_________________
"Women are judged on their success, men on their potential. It’s time we started believing in the potential of women." —Muffet McGraw
“Thank you for showing the fellas that you've got more balls than them,” Haley said, to cheers from the crowd.
|
|
FrozenLVFan
Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 3511
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/25/22 1:41 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
Side note:
What are the chances that interracial marriage is struck down? Sent back to the states to decide?
How would Clarence Mother Fucking Son of a Bitch Bastard Thomas vote? |
Thomas has already threatened to go after same-sex marriage, contraception, and sodomy.
| Quote: |
| Justice Clarence Thomas joined the majority opinion. But he also wrote a separate concurrence arguing that the logic behind today's ruling should also apply to previous Supreme Court decisions on same-sex marriage, sodomy, and the right to access contraceptives. |
https://reason.com/2022/06/24/clarence-thomas-calls-to-reconsider-gay-marriage-sodomy-rulings/
|
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8942
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/25/22 6:05 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| FrozenLVFan wrote: |
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
Side note:
What are the chances that interracial marriage is struck down? Sent back to the states to decide?
How would Clarence Mother Fucking Son of a Bitch Bastard Thomas vote? |
Thomas has already threatened to go after same-sex marriage, contraception, and sodomy.
| Quote: |
| Justice Clarence Thomas joined the majority opinion. But he also wrote a separate concurrence arguing that the logic behind today's ruling should also apply to previous Supreme Court decisions on same-sex marriage, sodomy, and the right to access contraceptives. |
https://reason.com/2022/06/24/clarence-thomas-calls-to-reconsider-gay-marriage-sodomy-rulings/ |
Right, so why did he leave out interracial marriage? Is it really untouchable? Or, oh wait, THAT would make HIS marriage unlawful. Prick.
_________________
"Women are judged on their success, men on their potential. It’s time we started believing in the potential of women." —Muffet McGraw
“Thank you for showing the fellas that you've got more balls than them,” Haley said, to cheers from the crowd.
|
|
Stonington_QB
Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 756
Location: Siege Perilous
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/26/22 1:05 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| FrozenLVFan wrote: |
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
Side note:
What are the chances that interracial marriage is struck down? Sent back to the states to decide?
How would Clarence Mother Fucking Son of a Bitch Bastard Thomas vote? |
Thomas has already threatened to go after same-sex marriage, contraception, and sodomy.
| Quote: |
| Justice Clarence Thomas joined the majority opinion. But he also wrote a separate concurrence arguing that the logic behind today's ruling should also apply to previous Supreme Court decisions on same-sex marriage, sodomy, and the right to access contraceptives. |
https://reason.com/2022/06/24/clarence-thomas-calls-to-reconsider-gay-marriage-sodomy-rulings/ |
I read the article in your link, and it pretty much confirmed everything I was already thinking: Would the SCOTUS actually consider any of the things you mentioned to be overturned? No. That article did a very good job explaining why this case is different: because human life is considered. These other issues? Not so much.
|
|
FrozenLVFan
Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 3511
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/26/22 1:43 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Stonington_QB wrote: |
| FrozenLVFan wrote: |
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
Side note:
What are the chances that interracial marriage is struck down? Sent back to the states to decide?
How would Clarence Mother Fucking Son of a Bitch Bastard Thomas vote? |
Thomas has already threatened to go after same-sex marriage, contraception, and sodomy.
| Quote: |
| Justice Clarence Thomas joined the majority opinion. But he also wrote a separate concurrence arguing that the logic behind today's ruling should also apply to previous Supreme Court decisions on same-sex marriage, sodomy, and the right to access contraceptives. |
https://reason.com/2022/06/24/clarence-thomas-calls-to-reconsider-gay-marriage-sodomy-rulings/ |
I read the article in your link, and it pretty much confirmed everything I was already thinking: Would the SCOTUS actually consider any of the things you mentioned to be overturned? No. That article did a very good job explaining why this case is different: because human life is considered. These other issues? Not so much. |
In his concurring opinion, Thomas said that yesterday's case shouldn't be taken to invalidate other rulings involving substantive due process, but that Griswold, et al, should be reviewed by the court separately because they are erroneous and the error should be corrected by overruling them. The full text of the opinion is here, and the relevant part on pages 118-119.
https://www.newsweek.com/read-supreme-court-ruling-overturning-roe-v-wade-1716972
|
|
Stonington_QB
Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 756
Location: Siege Perilous
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/26/22 8:27 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Thomas is certainly entitled to his legal opinion. However, overturning Griswold, Obergefell, etc., etc... it's never gonna happen. It won't ever be a consideration on behalf of the court as a whole. Especially given that those rulings took power AWAY from the government.
|
|
Queenie
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18029
Location: Queens
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/26/22 9:10 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Like people thought overturning Roe wasn’t going to happen?
_________________
Ardent believer in the separation of church and stadium.
|
|
Queenie
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18029
Location: Queens
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/26/22 9:17 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
| FrozenLVFan wrote: |
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
Side note:
What are the chances that interracial marriage is struck down? Sent back to the states to decide?
How would Clarence Mother Fucking Son of a Bitch Bastard Thomas vote? |
Thomas has already threatened to go after same-sex marriage, contraception, and sodomy.
| Quote: |
| Justice Clarence Thomas joined the majority opinion. But he also wrote a separate concurrence arguing that the logic behind today's ruling should also apply to previous Supreme Court decisions on same-sex marriage, sodomy, and the right to access contraceptives. |
https://reason.com/2022/06/24/clarence-thomas-calls-to-reconsider-gay-marriage-sodomy-rulings/ |
Right, so why did he leave out interracial marriage? Is it really untouchable? Or, oh wait, THAT would make HIS marriage unlawful. Prick. |
My assumption is that he’ll magically add Loving to that list about a day before Ginni Thomas gets popped for her role in the January 6th attempted coup.
_________________
Ardent believer in the separation of church and stadium.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/26/22 9:19 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Stonington_QB wrote: |
| Thomas is certainly entitled to his legal opinion. However, overturning Griswold, Obergefell, etc., etc... it's never gonna happen. It won't ever be a consideration on behalf of the court as a whole. Especially given that those rulings took power AWAY from the government. |
Roe v Wade took power away from the government...
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8942
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/26/22 10:17 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Queenie wrote: |
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
| FrozenLVFan wrote: |
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
Side note:
What are the chances that interracial marriage is struck down? Sent back to the states to decide?
How would Clarence Mother Fucking Son of a Bitch Bastard Thomas vote? |
Thomas has already threatened to go after same-sex marriage, contraception, and sodomy.
| Quote: |
| Justice Clarence Thomas joined the majority opinion. But he also wrote a separate concurrence arguing that the logic behind today's ruling should also apply to previous Supreme Court decisions on same-sex marriage, sodomy, and the right to access contraceptives. |
https://reason.com/2022/06/24/clarence-thomas-calls-to-reconsider-gay-marriage-sodomy-rulings/ |
Right, so why did he leave out interracial marriage? Is it really untouchable? Or, oh wait, THAT would make HIS marriage unlawful. Prick. |
My assumption is that he’ll magically add Loving to that list about a day before Ginni Thomas gets popped for her role in the January 6th attempted coup. |
He is the best example for why lifetime appointments to SCOTUS need to be changed to term-limited appointments.
Should be the first thing that a newly elected president does is to make an appointment to SCOTUS. And again after mid-terms. The senate would be REQUIRED to hear the appointment within whatever would be a reasonable time - 1 month, maybe 2?
This would update the court at least every 2 years. Eighteen years is long enough to be on a power-trip. I haven't decided whether a former justice would be re-appointed or not. I'm thinking not. Like I said, 18 years is enough.
This would keep the court more balanced to what the voters want. Of course if justices die, resign, become incapacitated they will need to be replaced, but this would at least give the voters a chance to have the court more closely reflect their wishes.
Another change that needs to be made is the McConnell Rule. Any appointment MUST be heard within 3 months, or whatever is reasonable.
_________________
"Women are judged on their success, men on their potential. It’s time we started believing in the potential of women." —Muffet McGraw
“Thank you for showing the fellas that you've got more balls than them,” Haley said, to cheers from the crowd.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/26/22 10:48 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
| He is the best example for why lifetime appointments to SCOTUS need to be changed to term-limited appointments. |
The Supreme Court shouldn't be a standing court at all. Every year randomly select one judge from each circuit. Those selected will serve as the Supreme Court for that year. When their term is over they return to their circuit. Once a judge serves on the SC they can't be chosen again for a few years.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15734
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/26/22 3:54 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Queenie wrote: |
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
Right, so why did he leave out interracial marriage? Is it really untouchable? Or, oh wait, THAT would make HIS marriage unlawful. Prick. |
My assumption is that he’ll magically add Loving to that list about a day before Ginni Thomas gets popped for her role in the January 6th attempted coup. |
My thoughts precisely. 
Clarence is THE BIGGEST STAIN on Biden's political career, imo: I credit Biden with essentially shutting down Anita Hill's opposition to Thomas' seating. Unforgivable. And Clarence had the temerity to defend his appointment by likening the acceptance of Anita's testimony to a "modern day lynching". His parents lived in the south when things like THIS weren't defended by the scotus. I'd not protest a bit if both he AND his heifer of a drag queen wife ran into a lynch mob somewhere.
Very sadly, I DID think this outcome was inevitable: the drums for its demise were beating with increasing vigor during Orange Turd's reign, and the miserable timing of giving him 3 appointments to the court did not bode well. I'm hoping this all will have a negative impact on GOP candidates outcomes, but undoubtedly it'll cut both ways, in the end.
Re: gay marriage, I don't see such a clear path to its undoing. Roe has always been about the definition/valuation of "life". Gay marriage (and interracial marriage, for that matter) is about denying a particular classification of people a right that's securely in place for all other people.
HOWEVER....IFF judges do not adhere to objective legal interpretations, it all can be diced 'n sliced any which way, by any given set of judges, and Allah only knows, there's enough ardent Good Christians that'll try to impose their will on The People once again - I still say that Christianity in its entirety has been the biggest detriment to true democracy that people have ever invented.
_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8225
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/26/22 4:33 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| FrozenLVFan wrote: |
| Stonington_QB wrote: |
| FrozenLVFan wrote: |
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
Side note:
What are the chances that interracial marriage is struck down? Sent back to the states to decide?
How would Clarence Mother Fucking Son of a Bitch Bastard Thomas vote? |
Thomas has already threatened to go after same-sex marriage, contraception, and sodomy.
| Quote: |
| Justice Clarence Thomas joined the majority opinion. But he also wrote a separate concurrence arguing that the logic behind today's ruling should also apply to previous Supreme Court decisions on same-sex marriage, sodomy, and the right to access contraceptives. |
https://reason.com/2022/06/24/clarence-thomas-calls-to-reconsider-gay-marriage-sodomy-rulings/ |
I read the article in your link, and it pretty much confirmed everything I was already thinking: Would the SCOTUS actually consider any of the things you mentioned to be overturned? No. That article did a very good job explaining why this case is different: because human life is considered. These other issues? Not so much. |
In his concurring opinion, Thomas said that yesterday's case shouldn't be taken to invalidate other rulings involving substantive due process, but that Griswold, et al, should be reviewed by the court separately because they are erroneous and the error should be corrected by overruling them. The full text of the opinion is here, and the relevant part on pages 118-119.
https://www.newsweek.com/read-supreme-court-ruling-overturning-roe-v-wade-1716972 |
The Dobbs dissent and especially the superficial media are trying to click bait fears about Thomas's concurring opinion. These fears are way overblown because no other judge is known to share Thomas's extreme views about "substantive due process."
It's too complicated to explain fully, but Thomas for decades has rejected the 14th Amendment interpretation doctrine called substantive due process, which has been used by the Supreme Court numerous times over the past 150 years to invalidate legislation that deprives persons of rights to "life, liberty or property." Thomas believes the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment only speaks to procedural due process, and that all cases that have been decided under the substantive due process doctrine should be re-reviewed, not just the contraception, gay sex and same sex marriage cases.
This doesn't mean, however, that Thomas would change the end result of those rulings. He just thinks they all should be analyzed by a different clause of the 14th Amendment from the Due Process Clause—namely, the Privileges and Immunities Clause. It's very possible that a re-analysis under the P&I Clause would produce the same result in all those cases as the original analysis under the DP Clause.
However, no other judge is known to share Thomas's views on substantive due process and the P&I Clause. Even Scalia admitted that substantive due process analysis was too established in the Supreme Court to change. Moreover, no other judge in Dobbs signed on to Thomas's concurrence, which is a mighty strong hint that they all disagree with it. Finally, the majority opinion, which Thomas himself fully joined, expressly states more than once that Dobbs is not precedent for overruling any other cases, specifically including the contraception, gay sex and same sex marriage cases.
Anything is possible in the future universe, of course, but it is highly unlikely that Thomas's views of substantive due process would ever command a majority of the Supreme Court, much less overcome the doctrine of respecting precedent. That's because all those other "personal autonomy" cases involved voluntary choices by adult persons with no physical harm to anyone else—whereas Roe, uniquely, in the moral or religious opinions of roughly half the country, has resulted in the barbaric slaughter of 63 million innocent human babies, the majority of whom were racial minorities. |
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15734
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/29/22 12:10 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Well, when you have morons like Lauren Boebert out there saying the quiet part out loud, you can see how the right truly thinks
| Quote: |
The church is supposed to direct the government. The government is not supposed to direct the church. That is not how our Founding Fathers intended it...I’m tired of this separation of church and state junk that’s not in the Constitution. It was in a stinking letter, and it means nothing like what they say it does |
.
But it shouldn't surprise anyone. This shit has been going on since the first time someone pointed at the sun and demanded obedience/money or else. Religion is the world's oldest con.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/28/lauren-boebert-church-state-colorado/
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15734
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
|
FrozenLVFan
Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 3511
Back to top |
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8942
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/02/22 5:32 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
OH 10 year old gets abortion in IN.
| Quote: |
On Monday, three days after the Supreme Court issued its groundbreaking decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Dr. Caitlin Bernard, an Indianapolis obstetrician-gynecologist, took a call from a colleague, a child abuse doctor in Ohio.
Hours after the Supreme Court action, Ohio had outlawed any abortion after six weeks. Now, this doctor had a 10-year-old patient in the office who was six weeks and three days pregnant.
Could Bernard help? |
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2022/07/02/10-year-old-ohio-indiana-abortion-roe/7795409001/
_________________
"Women are judged on their success, men on their potential. It’s time we started believing in the potential of women." —Muffet McGraw
“Thank you for showing the fellas that you've got more balls than them,” Haley said, to cheers from the crowd.
|
|
FrozenLVFan
Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 3511
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/07/22 12:17 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Quote: |
The White House informed Kentucky Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear's office in late June -- the day before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade -- that President Joe Biden intended to nominate an anti-abortion Republican as a federal judge in Kentucky, according to emails obtained by CNN on Wednesday through an open records request...
Beshear, a Democrat, strongly criticized Biden, saying in a recent news conference: "If the President makes that nomination, it is indefensible."...
When asked more broadly whether Biden would ever appoint a judge who doesn't support abortion rights to the federal bench, Jean-Pierre said that was a "hypothetical" scenario that she couldn't speak to. |
https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/06/politics/anti-abortion-judicial-nominee-joe-biden-kentucky/index.html
|
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8942
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/10/22 3:30 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Texas woman says that her fetus is a passenger and should allow her to drive in the HOV lane. Her $215 ticket says otherwise.
| Quote: |
| “An officer peeked in and asked, ‘Is there anybody else in the car?’” Bottone told the outlet. “I pointed to my stomach and said, ‘My baby girl is right here. She is a person.’" |
She has a court date on July 20.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2022/07/10/pregnant-woman-says-fetus-count-hov-lanes/10023847002/
_________________
"Women are judged on their success, men on their potential. It’s time we started believing in the potential of women." —Muffet McGraw
“Thank you for showing the fellas that you've got more balls than them,” Haley said, to cheers from the crowd.
|
|
FrozenLVFan
Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 3511
Back to top |
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8942
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/16/22 4:30 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I thought that I had a post about these, but I can't find it. About the dumbass OH AG and equally dumbass IN AG saying hold my rosary.
Todd Rokita is a lowlife. Total and complete lowlife. I wish I could say what I really think about him, but he'd probably start an investigation on me.
| Quote: |
| "We have this abortion activist acting as a doctor with a history of failure to report,” Rokita said on the show. “So, we're gathering the information, we're gathering the evidence as we speak and we're going to fight this to the end.” |
So now, the attorney for Dr. Bernard has filed a cease and desist order against Rokita.
| Quote: |
| The cease and desist order sent by the law firm of DeLaney & DeLaney stated, “Please cease and desist from making false and misleading statements about alleged misconduct by Dr. Bernard in her profession, which constitute defamation per se. Moreover, to the extent that any statement you make exceeds the general scope of your authority as Indiana’s Attorney General, such a statement forms the basis of an actionable defamation claim.” |
My understanding is that as IN AG there is really nothing that he can do about this.
https://www.wthr.com/article/news/local/indiana/attorney-sends-cease-and-desist-letter-to-indiana-attorney-general-todd-rokita/531-49991c85-624c-49b3-b516-494b1b8ad6db
_________________
"Women are judged on their success, men on their potential. It’s time we started believing in the potential of women." —Muffet McGraw
“Thank you for showing the fellas that you've got more balls than them,” Haley said, to cheers from the crowd.
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15734
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/16/22 5:06 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I'm beginning to think Indiana is the Mississippi of the North.
An Indiana attorney shines here:
| Quote: |
The 10-year-old Ohio girl who crossed state lines to receive an abortion in Indiana should have carried her pregnancy to term and would be required to do so under a model law written for state legislatures considering more restrictive abortion measures, according to the general counsel for the National Right to Life.
Jim Bopp, an Indiana lawyer who authored the model legislation in advance of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade, told POLITICO on Thursday that his law only provides exceptions when the pregnant person’s life is in danger.
“She would have had the baby, and as many women who have had babies as a result of rape, we would hope that she would understand the reason and ultimately the benefit of having the child,” Bopp said in a phone interview on Thursday. |
This is so tragically telling:
| Quote: |
“She’s my daughter,” the mom, who refused to give a name, confirmed to Telemundo of the girl who would have been just 9 when she was abused and impregnated.
“She’s fine. Everything that they’re saying against him is a lie,” she insisted of Fuentes, who confessed during police interviews to raping the youngster at least twice, according to court records and officials.
The defensive mom, who hid her face when speaking to Telemundo in Spanish, insisted that she had not been the one to file charges against her young daughter’s abuser. |
_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
|
|
|
|
)
