With Our Victory Of Roe Being Overturned, Next Target--Same Sex Marriage!

[MAGA Macho Man]

A simple majority cannot vote to take away your constitutionally guaranteed rights.

If it's on the ballot it can, like before.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I lost that sense of right and wrong in the SC in 2000

It's been political since then...maybe it always was

The Court has been political longer than that – Eisenhower regretting appointing Earl Warren Chief Justice, who was instrumental in a unanimous Brown decision ending segregation.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

A simple majority cannot vote to take away your constitutionally guaranteed rights.

Wrong.

In Republican-controlled states simple majorities are taking away a woman’s constitutionally guaranteed right to privacy – that the courts no longer defend that right doesn’t mean the right no longer exists.

In time a simple majority in Republican-controlled states will take away gay Americans’ constitutionally guaranteed right to equal protection of the law.

 

[scruffy]

My body, my right. God gave ME, free will. No man has the right to take it away.

Oh I see. The man can put it there, but he can't take it away. Fucktard hypocrite control freak much?

I live in a country where abortion is a medical decision I make with my doctor. There are no laws governing it.

You live in a country where the government seizes your bank account if they don't agree with you.

There are no laws governing that either

You live in a country which enslaves women to their biology and removes the right of free will. You are neither the home of the brave, nor the land of the free.

This is shameful.

We are not interested in your foreign opinion.

If you want to kill your kids, go right ahead. We cherish ours.

 

[scruffy]

I am telling myself that nothing is permanent and in time this too can and will be overruled. It rests on far weaker foundations than the original Roe. But I don’t like to see out pr finest institution politicized like this. Established rights and law overturned regardless of consequences. Not just this, but other rulings too. Never for a moment did I think a fundamental right, established by the time I came of age, would be taken away. Dark times

You lefties are going to experience dark times FOREVER if you don't stop rioting, looting, and threatening children.

If you keep behaving like animals we will strip you of ALL your rights and put you in cages along with the rest of the wildlife. Is that what you want?

You goddamn lefties have been MURDERING BABIES cause you're too goddamn lazy to walk down to the 7/11 and buy a condom.

And you're trying to call that a "right"?

That's no more of a right than a racist lynching.

You fucking leftard asswipes need to GROW UP and become real human beings.

 

[WinterBorn]

If it's on the ballot it can, like before.

And then it can be overturned for being unconstitutional.

If a simple majority voted to remove 1st amendment rights from any group, whether the simple majority voted for it or not, it is still unconstitutional.

The use of the 14th amendment was sound and the Oberfell ruling should remain.

 

[Dragonlady]

Abortion is not a human right, you dumb fucking ****.

It is an ELECTIVE medical procedure. Except in very, very rare cases.

Now STFU, and ask your boy Trudy to give you some morning after pills

Abortion is fully legal in Canada. It is entirely a matter between a woman and her doctor. There are no laws governing abortion in Canada. It’s a medical procedure.

 

[Mac1958]

 

[Care4all]

Unfortunately for you, the opinion of the majority is irrelevant.

We don't have mob rule in this country.

We have a little thing called a Constitution, that you are required to adhere to, because it's the highest law in the land

Where in the constitution does it give power to the government to ban ones personal decision or a couple's personal and private decision on when or when not to have a child???

Can you point to the spot in the constitution that gives that power to them?

 

[scruffy]

Where in the constitution does it give power to the government to ban ones personal decision or a couple's personal and private decision on when or when not to have a child???

Exactly.

WTF have the righties been telling you for 50 years now?

Exact same thing you just said.

It's NONE OF FEDGOV'S BUSINESS.

Can you point to the spot in the constitution that gives that power to them?

"RESERVED TO THE STATES, AND TO THE PEOPLE"

It's right there in front of you in black and white, if you:d bother to read.

 

[Mac1958]

And then it can be overturned for being unconstitutional.

If a simple majority voted to remove 1st amendment rights from any group, whether the simple majority voted for it or not, it is still unconstitutional.

The use of the 14th amendment was sound and the Oberfell ruling should remain.

Well, that's a perfectly valid point in normal times, but I'm not so sure with this SC.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Law 101. The government is not party to the marriage contract.

who gives you the marriage license?

 

[Meathead]

who gives you the marriage license?

It ain't the federal government.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I am not and was not in favor of SSM. However, I am and was in favor of civil unions which conferred all the same rights on same sex couples.

Why?

 

[rightwinger]

Thomas wants to overturn Loving as well – he wants to destroy 14th Amendment jurisprudence in its entirety, giving the states free rein to do as they please.

Thomas would vote to overturn Miranda v. Arizona, Gideon v. Wainwright, and Brown v. Board of Education – ‘justified’ by “states’ rights” dogma.

This radical, extreme, activist Court wants to eliminate the Constitutional safeguards that protects the rights of minorities living in Republican-controlled states.

Clarence Thomas’ white wife might be upset if he overturns Loving

It may be cheaper than a divorce

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It ain't the federal government.

Nope, but it is the Fed Govt that gives a mountain of benefits that non-married couples cannot receive.

 

[rightwinger]

It could be 30 or 40 years before the Supreme Court overturns Dobbs, and the courts again defend the right to privacy – and that’s not certain given the unpredictable, capricious process of who is in the WH when a vacancy manifests on the Court.

During that time some red states will turn blue, repealing or no longer enforcing anti-privacy rights measures, but women will continue to suffer in the remaining ban states.

Yes, dark times indeed, and the worst is yet to come as the Nation grows more divided, with repressive, authoritarian red states at odds with free blue states; we haven’t seen such division since before the Civil War.

The Supreme Court has opened up a partisan battle of abortion rights as states swing back and forth on abortion rights according to current political whims

 

[rightwinger]

Well, that's a perfectly valid point in normal times, but I'm not so sure with this SC.

Three members of the current court voted against Oberkfell. Roberts, Thomas and Alito

I have no faith that the Trump judges would rule differently

 

[Care4all]

Exactly.

WTF have the righties been telling you for 50 years now?

Exact same thing you just said.

It's NONE OF FEDGOV'S BUSINESS.



"RESERVED TO THE STATES, AND TO THE PEOPLE"

It's right there in front of you in black and white, if you:d bother to read.

It's none of any government's business scruffy, not just the federal gvt.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

They can never answer that.

Yes it is stupid! Animals and children cannot consent.Yes, dumb ass, it really is that simple