And yet the old bag didn't retire when Obama was in office....even Ruth Bader Ginsburg knew it would eventually be overturned.
And yet the old bag didn't retire when Obama was in office....even Ruth Bader Ginsburg knew it would eventually be overturned.
She probably should have, but it’s hard to say how that would have changed history. If the bench still has the other two recent Justices, it still overturns 5-4.And yet the old bag didn't retire when Obama was in office....
RBG should've retired and Obama should've told Mitch to go fuck himself and brought in Garland....who wasn't even a liberal.She probably should have, but it’s hard to say how that would have changed history. If the bench still has the other two recent Justices, it still overturns 5-4.
Clarence Thomas doesn't share that opinion and he seems to be the majority leader of the Supreme Court at the moment.They didn’t. The 14th already rules you can’t stop a group of people doing something that’s legal for other groups based on their immutable characteristics. And there’s plenty of laws I cited that only embolden that law.
Roe isn’t the same. They ruled that based off privacy and even Ruth Bader Ginsburg knew it would eventually be overturned.
He’s the oldest living member of the Bench and from a different era. I wouldn’t hold out hope he’s gonna sway a majority opinion on that from this bench.Clarence Thomas doesn't share that opinion and he seems to be the majority leader of the Supreme Court at the moment.
I wouldn't bet on it.
I am not calling for any rights to be taken away.Like I didn’t call you a name, I didn’t say anything other than I was nice to you when I probably PROBABLY shouldn’t have. That’s it. I could have said way worse, but I won’t because I’m not sinking to name calling. But for once I’m not gonna tell others not to do it like I normally would.
I would argue it does not apply the way you are attempting to apply it.He’s the oldest living member of the Bench and from a different era. I wouldn’t hold out hope he’s gonna sway a majority opinion on that from this bench.
Because it’s not just an opinion. The equal protections clause is written there in plain English.
It’s not this. Me and Smark disagree on what to do with guns. I don’t think badly of him. But yeah you do want rights taken away. You forgot you’ve told me point blank before in the chat that gay marriage should be illegal because of your religious beliefs. Nothing about it when I asked after you first got here had anything to do with what you’re claiming now. You’re just using it to hide behind your views. If someone wants to take rights away from just a certain group, then yeah. I’m not gonna think you’re a good person. Sorry.I am not calling for any rights to be taken away.
You think I don't deserve niceness because of a different opinion.
It is as simple as that.
I just find it quite sad that is what we have came to in this country.
Basically, "Disagree with me and you are a piece of shit."
I don't think any of you deserve people being mean to you. I don't think you are bad people. We just simply disagree. It makes me and people who share my opinions not want to participate because of being attacked.
Is that a good atmosphere to foster?
Will it help the issues in this country to further divide?
Roe was always being threatened. Like I said earlier it’s a drastically different story. Read RBG’s comments at the time. Even as an avid women’s rights activist she felt the decision came from the wrong precedence and would be fallible.I would argue it does not apply the way you are attempting to apply it.
We'll just have to wait and see I suppose.
Even 6 months ago most people wouldn't have thought Roe v. Wade could have ever been overturned.
What you mean when you say rights and what I mean when I say rights is completely different.It’s not this. Me and Smark disagree on what to do with guns. I don’t think badly of him. But yeah you do want rights taken away. You forgot you’ve told me point blank before in the chat that gay marriage should be illegal because of your religious beliefs. Nothing about it when I asked after you first got here had anything to do with what you’re claiming now. You’re just using it to hide behind your views. If someone wants to take rights away from just a certain group, then yeah. I’m not gonna think you’re a good person. Sorry.
Some people warned that it faced potential danger. But the vast majority of people didn't really believe it.Roe was always being threatened. Like I said earlier it’s a drastically different story. Read RBG’s comments at the time. Even as an avid women’s rights activist she felt the decision came from the wrong precedence and would be fallible.