Jump to content

Amy Coney Barrett

Anastasis

By Anastasis
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9,973

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Anastasis said:


would still love to see some actual analysis here wash. Be best. 

 

Would you like to talk about her "super-precedents" analysis?

Note (from here law journal article linked above) - ACB wrote some things are unconstitutional yet cannot be overturned by the Supreme Court at this stage." ". . . in the case of so-called “super precedents”—decisions that no serious person would propose to undo even if they are wrong—an originalist justice will not have to choose between fidelity and faint-heartedness." 

"No one is likely to ask the Supreme Court to rethink arguably nonoriginalist decisions like the constitutionality of the Social Security Administration, paper money, or segregated public schools—and if anyone did ask, the Court would deny certiorari."

Stated another way - originalists question the constitutionality of SS, paper money and forced segregation of school districts. What's left out of her super-precedents - the right to privacy.

Why?

Edited by washparkhorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

ousuxndallas
ousuxndallas

Will the left come up with a liar like Blasey Ford accusing her off rape at an undisclosed location and undisclosed date /time?

Continental Op
Continental Op

Everyone's answer to the question of "Am I in favor of the death penalty?" should be the same as the answer to the question of "Would I feel really good about being tried by a Williamson County jury f

Tom
Tom

Oh go fuck yourself, you intellectual pussy and your both sides bullshit.  Your party coalesced around the idea that a supreme court judge shouldn't be confirmed in an election year just a few years a

Posted Images

Anastasis

Anastasis 23,720

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

You don’t care about actual legal analysis and you know it. Waste of time. 

We know that you are not capable of articulating anything persuasive, but posters like wash know that there is a vein of libertarian pro-life perspective rooted in the non-aggression principle. Me personally, I think that the government needs to stay out of the issue generally. It is not a legal ruling or government mandate that will have a substantive impact, rather it is a society and culture that rejects barbarism and values every human being that will move the needle. Abortion is used as a wedge political issue to manipulate people. The issue need to be divorced from politics, imo.  Politicians just spin the wheels. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12,271

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

We know that you are not capable of articulating anything persuasive, but posters like wash know that there is a vein of libertarian pro-life perspective rooted in the non-aggression principle. Me personally, I think that the government needs to stay out of the issue generally. It is not a legal ruling or government mandate that will have a substantive impact, rather it is a society and culture that rejects barbarism and values every human being that will move the needle. Abortion is used as a wedge political issue to manipulate people. The issue need to be divorced from politics, imo.  Politicians just spin the wheels. 

Fair enough. So why are you supporting Amy so much? Or are you not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29,579

Posted
Posted (edited)

This is for all of the non-fascists on the board: pretending that liberal opposition to Amy Coney Barrett is rooted in anti-religious or misogynistic bigotry and pretending to be angry at liberals for that is a fascist tactic employed by fascists. You don’t need to get angry about it and stoop to their level, just don’t respond. Nobody has ever spent a single productive minute attempting to debate fascists because all they care about is riling you up. Focus on convincing anyone you know that’s on the fence to vote Dem and let’s toss these fuckers out of power. 

Besides, Biden promised me a position in his administration and the chance to enact my “internet trolls get gibbets” policy. They’ll get theirs.

Edited by wildcat09
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, pyrohornIII said:

 

 

In cases of rape, it actually does overwhelm the individual.  But then I suppose they were asking for it, huh?   They always are.

In cases of rape, the unborn wear the guilt...

Edited by slorch
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23,720

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

pretending that liberal opposition to Amy Coney Barrett is rooted in anti-religious or misogynistic bigotry and pretending to be angry at liberals for that is a fascist tactic employed by fascists.

Reading this thread and the anti-religious and misogynistic bigotry on display makes you a fascist!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12,271

Posted
Posted

The only thing I’ve really actually said about Amy Coney Barett is that she will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade and Anastasis has gone a little berserk attacking me on that. I’m not even taking a position on abortion one way or the other, which I am ambivalent on,  I’m simply stating a fact. She will. If you are ok with that, then by all means proceed. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9,973

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

there is a vein of libertarian pro-life perspective rooted in the non-aggression principle

No question. Science has not yet conquered the problem (it will). Until then, we have a life totally dependent on an independent human. Is it the state's role to make the decision for the independent human on what can be done with the completely dependent human being? Or is that up to the individual and her right to be left alone in making that decision. 

No easy answers here - only a nominee that threatens that delicate balance on an issue decided 47 years ago. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23,720

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Science has not yet conquered the problem (it will)

What problem. The science and biology are clear. It is the politicians and the people like you dissembling on the science that are unconquered. 

I am not really interested in an(other) abortion argument, but some of you will not be denied your precious. 

Edited by Anastasis
Link to comment
Share on other sites
elfenix

elfenix 34,751

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Is there anything about her Catholicism that makes her different from some shithead like Ted Cruz or Tom Cotton?

it means she's pro-life from a long-standing and deeper tradition, not from being whipsawed by a bunch of racists upset they had to let black kids into their schools back in the 70s. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9,973

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

What problem. The science and biology are clear. It is the politicians and the people like you dissembling on the science that are unconquered. 

I am not really interested in an(other) abortion argument, but some of you will not be denied your precious. 

You cannot fathom science solving unwanted pregnancies?  
 

that is a dark view. I have faith in science to light the way. But skepticism is warranted and required. Birth control is a human right. bymmv. 
 

Hook ‘em. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23,720

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, washparkhorn said:

You cannot fathom science solving unwanted pregnancies?  
 

that is a dark view. I have faith in science to light the way. But skepticism is warranted and required. Birth control is a human right. bymmv. 
 

Hook ‘em. 

I am kinda sad that you are devolving into straw men and deflection. I honestly thought that you were capable of better. Apparently barbarism is where you draw a line in the sand. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, elfenix said:

imagine if republicans put as much effort into stopping covid-19 as they're about to put into making sure ACB gets seated on the Court. 

Because fighting a highly contagious respiratory virus with multiple hot spots in multiple jurisdictions is the same thing as scheduling some hearings. Yawn. 

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
elfenix

elfenix 34,751

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Because fighting a highly contagious respiratory virus with multiple hot spots in multiple jurisdictions is the same thing as scheduling some hearings. Yawn. 

from politicians all they had to do was fucking lead, and they didn't fucking do that.  200,000+ dead but pRo LiFe!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23,720

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Ana - I think I am correct you respect privacy as a right.

Chopping up a fetus and vacuuming it out of a uterus isn't at it's core a privacy issue imo.  

I think that we agree that the government should not be involved in this. 

I would hope that we could agree that a modern society should not normalize such barbarism. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, washparkhorn said:

Ana - libertarian-leaning - simping for a nominee who gives nary a fuck about the Constitutional right to be left alone = sad face

Ok.  I’m an average Joe with minimal legal knowledge and honestly I don’t care to get in legal weeds on these opinions.  For someone like me (most people), the fact that she views an originalist like Scalia as a mentor is a positive. I generally feel like the law as it is written is how it should be upheld. It shouldn’t be interpreted otherwise by people with lifetime appointments. The laws should be changed by Congress who are held to account by elections.  I believe the power should lie with them like the founders intended. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13,524

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, slorch said:

In cases of rape, the unborn wear the guilt...

No, it's the overactive imaginations of moralizing grandstanders who wear the guilt. The little crosses they build to hang themselves on. A fetus doesn't know shit from shinola and has all the self-awareness of a tadpole.

Let's be honest in our terms here, buckaroo.

Also, fuck Tech.

Just now, Anastasis said:

Chopping up a fetus and vacuuming it out of a uterus isn't at it's core a privacy issue imo.

What does this even mean?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23,720

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, washparkhorn said:

I certainly do not want to normalize it. Prevention is key. And the solution for individuals. 

See I agree with this. I also think that there is an opportunity to address the significant number of abortions (~20-30% IIRC) that are women on their 3+ go with it. I don't think that any well intended person thinks that such a situation is healthy or reflects a morality that they want to be associated with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...