Jump to content

The Supremes

tx 3 putt

By tx 3 putt
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Popular Post
aggie08

aggie08 21496

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

Even if you're anti-abortion--and that's your prerogative--imagine taking as much joy in this decision as Johnny is and spiking the football, knowing full well how devastating this is to women's rights. What a sad little man.

  • Hook 'Em 16
  • Like 5
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 12.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Brisketexan
Brisketexan

Some people and posts above see this for the incredibly dangerous thing it is.  See the whole forest, not just the tree.  Roe is built on the bedrock of the 14th amendment and the inherent right to pr

Ghost of LL
Ghost of LL

The whole episode is pretty bad for the Court.  The leak is embarrassing.  But the decision is catastrophic. You've got a 5-4 decision to get rid of a something that has been settled as a constit

sidis
sidis

in one of the many instances in which i debunked your oversimplified, unsupported bullshit and you simply never responded, i addressed your absolutist contention that religious are more charitable tha

Posted Images

Johnny Sack

Johnny Sack 8397

Posted
Posted

Alito dunking on the dissent with stone cold facts:

The dissent is very candid that it cannot show that a constitutional right to abortion has any foundation, let alone a “‘deeply rooted’” one, “‘in this Nation’s history and tradition.’” Glucksberg, 521 U. S., at 721; see post, at 12–14 (joint opinion of BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ.). The dissent does not identify any pre-Roe authority that supports such a right—no state constitutional provision or statute, no federal or state judicial precedent, not even a scholarly treatise. Compare post, at 12–14, n. 2, with supra, at 15–16, and n. 23. Nor does the dissent dispute the fact that abortion was illegal at common law at least after quickening; that the 19th century saw a trend toward criminalization of pre-quickening abortions; that by 1868, a supermajority of States (at least 26 of 37) had enacted statutes criminalizing abortion at all stages of pregnancy; that by the late 1950s at least 46 States prohibited abortion “however and whenever performed” except if necessary to save “the life of the mother,” Roe, 410 U. S., at 139; and that when Roe was decided in 1973 similar statutes were still in effect in 30 States. Compare post, at 12–14, nn. 2–3, with supra, at 23–25, and nn. 33–34.47

The dissent’s failure to engage with this long tradition is devastating to its position. We have held that the “established method of substantive-due-process analysis” requires that an unenumerated right be “‘deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition’” before it can be recognized as a component of the “liberty” protected in the Due
Process Clause. Glucksberg, 521 U. S., at 721; cf. Timbs, 586 U. S., at ___ (slip op., at 7). But despite the dissent’s professed fidelity to stare decisis, it fails to seriously engage
with that important precedent—which it cannot possibly satisfy The dissent attempts to obscure this failure by misrepresenting our application of Glucksberg. The dissent suggests that we have focused only on “the legal status of abortion in the 19th century,” post, at 26, but our review of this Nation’s tradition extends well past that period. As explained, for more than a century after 1868—including “another half-century” after women gained the constitutional right to vote in 1920, see post, at 15; Amdt. 19—it was firmly established that laws prohibiting abortion like the Texas law at issue in Roe were permissible exercises of state regulatory authority. And today, another half century later, more than half of the States have asked us to overrule Roe and Casey. The dissent cannot establish that a right to abortion has ever been part of this Nation’s tradition. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 20
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnny Sack

Johnny Sack 8397

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

Even if you're anti-abortion--and that's your prerogative--imagine taking as much joy in this decision as Johnny is and spiking the football, knowing full well how devastating this is to women's rights. What a sad little man.

It is not devastating to the females in utero that are being dismembered.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 16
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Goofyboy

Goofyboy 3277

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
It is not devastating to the females in utero that are being dismembered.

That you really don’t give two shits about. It just hurts your feelings. You want some bullshit moral high ground, yet you don’t actually care. It doesn’t affect you at all. You’re just another power hungry asshole that wants to impose his will and ideals on others. Get fucked.
  • Hook 'Em 16
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, royiv said:

But 19 kids being dismembered by an assault weapon is cool with you?

But there are already laws against that! Just not on obtaining the weapon without licensure, gathering 2,000 rounds of ammunition, body armor, and carrying that weapon in public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105095

Posted
Posted
No.

Yet it’s going to happen, because it’s the inevitable result of the underlying disingenuous reasoning applied by the majority. It will happen, and you own it.

Also, there’s a long history of US jurisdiction banning the carrying of weapons (check your guns in with the sheriff, you get them back when you leave). Funny how some long-standing practices matter, and some don’t.
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr. Teeth

Dr. Teeth 5844

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

How is taking power from the federal government and returning it to the states less/smaller government?

Let’s see what happens when someone in California sues the state and they take it up on their docket. And what happens when Rs get full control and put in a National ban? Who rules on it? This is the first step. They play the long game. This is all about putting more power in the hands of the federal government. They don’t want to stop at only half of the states. That doesn’t help their base. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45673

Posted
Posted

Don't worry guys!  I just got an email that should start the ball rolling in the right direction!

Quote

**10,000 SIGNATURES NEEDED BY MIDNIGHT**

We agree with President Biden – the only way for us to save abortion rights is to codify Roe v. Wade, so we’re starting a 50-state campaign to pressure the Senate to PASS Elizabeth Warren’s plan.

I'm sure they can get 10 R Senators on board because 10,000 signatures!  WTF.  

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aqua Buddha

Aqua Buddha 14589

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

At least we know that this ruling is largely toothless when it comes to preventing women in America from terminating a pregnancy.

It will become more difficult, especially for poor women, but abortion isn't going anywhere. 

Cruelty is the point.

 

I viewed women getting abortions as middle/upper middle class type with college educations for some reason.  Maybe because that's how it was back in the day, I don't know.  However, it's largely poor, working class women and a lot of them already have at least one kid.

But yes, this will not effect middle class and above women.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mdhorn

Mdhorn 5948

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

Y'all stop responding to Johnny. He's going to troll all day if you fuckers let him.

If it's not just asking questions, it's defending with their interpretation of what's not in the constitution.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnny Sack

Johnny Sack 8397

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


Yet it’s going to happen, because it’s the inevitable result of the underlying disingenuous reasoning applied by the majority. It will happen, and you own it.

Also, there’s a long history of US jurisdiction banning the carrying of weapons (check your guns in with the sheriff, you get them back when you leave). Funny how some long-standing practices matter, and some don’t.

I disagree.  Thomas is on an island on that one.  And he is wrong.  I agree with the majority.  Thomas would need four justices to join him.  They declined to do so.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Firemans4Horn

Firemans4Horn 18046

Posted
Posted
Just now, David Dennison said:

Does everyone see how worthless the Democratic Party is now?


We live in an anti-democratic country. 
 

Gerrymandering, the senate, the filibuster, the electoral college, collapse of voting rights. I can go on.
It’s much more structural fuckery than one parties failings. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Gap03

Gap03 3304

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
1 minute ago, Jive Turkey said:

 

So he's going to vote to abolish the filibuster and expand the Court now, right?  No??? Well, then Joe can, once again, go fuck himself. 

  • Hook 'Em 9
  • Like 6
  • Haha 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmokeyTheBear

SmokeyTheBear 5562

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

Does everyone see how worthless the Democratic Party is now?

This isnt on the Dems. This is on McConnell and this is on the local Rs willing to bend and break the rules to run the system from a minority. I'm not going to blame people for not having a nefarious mind in how to gain power. Sadly those with a nefarious, win at all costs, mindset have power and probably locked in their power to the detriment of our democracy. We are now firmly in a Cold Civil War, on the precipice of a hot one. 

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

Mdhorn 5948

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

I viewed women getting abortions as middle/upper middle class type with college educations for some reason.  Maybe because that's how it was back in the day, I don't know.  However, it's largely poor, working class women and a lot of them already have at least one kid.

But yes, this will not effect middle class and above women.

Mexico vacations just got a lot more interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Michael Knight

Michael Knight 12977

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

This isnt on the Dems. This is on McConnell and this is on the local Rs willing to bend and break the rules to run the system from a minority. I'm not going to blame people for not having a nefarious mind in how to gain power. Sadly those with a nefarious, win at all costs, mindset have power and probably locked in their power to the detriment of our democracy. We are now firmly in a Cold Civil War, on the precipice of a hot one. 

Tyranny of the minority

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85310

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Firemans4Horn said:


We live in an anti-democratic country. 
 

Gerrymandering, the senate, the filibuster, the electoral college, collapse of voting rights. I can go on.
It’s much more structural fuckery than one parties failings. 

No no no, it's much easier to blame the Dems/Pelosi/Schumer, because they obviously put Kav/Gorsuch/ACB on the court and are forcing Sinema/Manchin to keep the filibuster it's all their fault! 

The fastest and easiest way to absolve the GOP and their fuckery of democracy/legislating of all sins.  Dennison is doing their work - Dems are bad bc they didn't stop this so voting is worthless! 

Edited by Js1
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29349

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

No no no, it's much easier to blame the Dems/Pelosi/Schumer, because they obviously put Kav/Gorsuch/ACB on the court and are forcing Sinema/Manchin to keep the filibuster it's all their fault! 

They're not primarily to blame, but they're completely unequipped and inadequate for the moment. Clyburn is already saying it's no big deal!

  • Rage+1 2
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...