Guest Posted March 1, 2022 Share Posted March 1, 2022 26 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said: Showing child porn and printing out an anti abortion pamphlet are not the same thing, and an excellent question dodge from you. What you should have asked, "If you owned a print shop and some pedos wanted to print up some kiddie porn pictures, would you do it despite your personal convictions on the matter?" I would print anything that is legal to print without care about my personal convictions. Similarly, I’d sell the cake to anybody for any event. My standard is pretty simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted March 3, 2022 Share Posted March 3, 2022 On 2/19/2022 at 4:54 PM, b_m_b_m_b_m said: Oh look they keep breeding at elite institutions To follow up here: HLR will publish these notes from current law students and recent grads anonymously. Because HLR isn’t a tight ship the author has been leaked and he is a clerk for the Reagan appointed Judge Smith on the 5th circuit court of appeals. So in probably less than 20 years this dipshit who argues against free and fair elections, despite the nearly 150 unbroken years of somewhat free elections to determine the president, will probably be a federal judge. This was his anti democratic batsignal to the Republican legal establishment. more here: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 These freaks ducking love killing people Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 1 hour ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said: These freaks ducking love killing people The decision was written by Thomas so you know it's probably some really freaky shit in there. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal-El814 Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 Abolish the death penalty. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 2 hours ago, Kal-El814 said: Abolish the death penalty. Cancel culture run amok! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 2 minutes ago, Jason said: Cancel culture run amok! The original cancel culture is the death penalty 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSpreader Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 Reverse cancelism Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSpreader Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 Are you a cancelist!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwinIon Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 I read most of that Harvard note referenced above, and more than anything it cemented my feelings that the constitution needs a serious overhaul and that anyone seeking to follow any kind of original textual argument should be immediately dismissed. This line in particular sums up why: Quote This Note concludes that, though a hands-off approach carries risks for democracy, it is nonetheless required as a matter of textual fidelity. OH! So we should risk democracy itself in order to better follow (what we think the) text of this old document intended. Just insanity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 34 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said: The original cancel culture is the death penalty fake news, all they had to do to not get cancelled was not do whatever they did that deserved the death penalty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 And speaking of cancel culture run amok: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 1 hour ago, TwinIon said: I read most of that Harvard note referenced above, and more than anything it cemented my feelings that the constitution needs a serious overhaul and that anyone seeking to follow any kind of original textual argument should be immediate dismissed. This line in particular sums up why: OH! So we should risk democracy itself in order to better follow (what we think the) text of this old document intended. Just insanity. The constitution, read simply at face value, is not a good document for establishing the rules of governance in a modern nation. It is only remotely workable due to more than a century of jurisprudence that has re-wrote a ton of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar SFLUFAN Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 8 minutes ago, sblfilms said: The constitution...is not a good document... There we go! 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 1 hour ago, sblfilms said: The constitution, read simply at face value, is not a good document for establishing the rules of governance in a modern nation. It is only remotely workable due to more than a century of jurisprudence that has re-wrote a ton of it. Also conservatives largely reject the application of the 14th and 15th amendments in letter and in spirit. It’s a decent statement of rights but there are many who want to ignore developments since 1861 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewhyteboar Posted March 6, 2022 Share Posted March 6, 2022 Area Man Passionate Defender Of What He Imagines Constitution To Be WWW.THEONION.COM ESCONDIDO, CA—Spurred by an administration he believes to be guilty of numerous transgressions, self-described American patriot Kyle Mortensen, 47, is a vehement defender of ideas he seems to think are enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and principles that brave men have fought and died for solely in his head. Still a classic. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted March 7, 2022 Share Posted March 7, 2022 What an absolute embarrassment. and the wholly made up Purcell principle is such a joke in this application, same as the Alabama decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricofoley Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 The groundwork is very, very obviously being laid to let state legislatures directly overturn the vote in 2024. Seems like it depends on what ACB does between now and then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 1 minute ago, Ricofoley said: The groundwork is very, very obviously being laid to let state legislatures directly overturn the vote in 2024. Seems like it depends on what ACB does between now and then. In retrospect it will probably look like the lead up to the Russian invasion of Ukraine 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 11, 2022 Share Posted March 11, 2022 Quote A lawmaker in Missouri has already been working this winter to get her state to pass legislation that purports to make it illegal for people from Missouri to go anywhere — Missouri, Illinois, New York, anywhere — to get an abortion. Legislation across the country restricting people’s ability to obtain abortions and obtain transgender-related healthcare, among many other topics, could be headed through a legal system with an increasingly reactionary Supreme Court setting legal rules for the nation. Republican Missouri State Rep. Mary Elizabeth Coleman has been introducing an amendment into the state’s House bills that would ban abortions in Missouri and bar people from providing abortions to Missouri citizens or residents or even helping them get abortions out of state, as first reported earlier this week by the Washington Post. The enforcement of this proposed ban, like Texas’ S.B. 8, would be through private lawsuits. The amendment serves as perhaps the starkest example yet of the changes the new Supreme Court majority has unleashed. Although Coleman’s provision would seem to violate a lot of key constitutional principles — including the right to travel, federalism principles and traditional rules that states respect the laws of other states — a trio of law professors examining what the legal landscape would look like should the Supreme Court overturn Roe by June have concluded it’s entirely possible that such restrictions could be upheld by a majority of the current justices. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted March 11, 2022 Author Share Posted March 11, 2022 I mean...that can't be legal. A state has no power to dictate what can be done in another state. Can states charge you for crimes committed in a place outside that state where the actions are legal? Edit - obviously the end-game here is to pass unconstitutional laws and then have SCOTUS baldly along partisan lines say they are constitutional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal-El814 Posted March 11, 2022 Share Posted March 11, 2022 Pretty sure the Missouri bill also bans terminating ectopic pregnancy, so if there’s any lingering doubt about whether or not these people are “pro-life” that should be the end of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted March 11, 2022 Share Posted March 11, 2022 2 hours ago, Kal-El814 said: Pretty sure the Missouri bill also bans terminating ectopic pregnancy, so if there’s any lingering doubt about whether or not these people are “pro-life” that should be the end of it. It does this explicitly! These idiots and freaks want to kill women and think you can just move the fetal cells from the Fallopian tube. Nope! You just kill the mother and the fetus! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricofoley Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 Justice Thomas slams cancel culture, 'packing' Supreme Court | AP News APNEWS.COM SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said he's concerned efforts to politicize the court or add additional justices may erode the institution's credibility, speaking Friday in Utah at an event hosted by former Republican U.S. Quote “I’m afraid, particularly in this world of cancel culture attack, I don’t know where you’re going to learn to engage as we did when I grew up,” he said. “If you don’t learn at that level in high school, in grammar school, in your neighborhood, or in civic organizations, then how do you have it when you’re making decisions in government, in the legislature, or in the courts?” There's a lot that really clicks into place about why the world is the way it is once you figure out that the most elite-educated, impeccably credentialed conservatives, are still all at the their core exactly the same as any other Fox News brain-poisoned grandpa. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 I hope Biden gets to replace him on the bench with a good Black jurist 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 17, 2022 Share Posted March 17, 2022 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 20, 2022 Share Posted March 20, 2022 The first part of this tweet really got my hopes up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted March 21, 2022 Share Posted March 21, 2022 On 3/12/2022 at 2:19 PM, b_m_b_m_b_m said: I hope Biden gets to replace him on the bench with a good Black jurist To follow up: I hope he ducking dies 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneticBlueprint Posted March 21, 2022 Share Posted March 21, 2022 1 hour ago, Jason said: The first part of this tweet really got my hopes up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted March 21, 2022 Share Posted March 21, 2022 You see the problem with griswold is that it was poorly written, this line of thought is not a cover for an ideological crusade at all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted March 21, 2022 Author Share Posted March 21, 2022 What we know about Justice Clarence Thomas' hospitalization | AP News APNEWS.COM Justice Clarence Thomas remains hospitalized after being diagnosed with an infection but does not have COVID-19. Here's what we know and don't know about Thomas' hospitalization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uaarkson Posted March 21, 2022 Share Posted March 21, 2022 1 minute ago, CitizenVectron said: What we know about Justice Clarence Thomas' hospitalization | AP News APNEWS.COM Justice Clarence Thomas remains hospitalized after being diagnosed with an infection but does not have COVID-19. Here's what we know and don't know about Thomas' hospitalization. Die, fucker 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69los Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 2 hours ago, Uaarkson said: Die, fucker And take your fucking wife with you! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 22, 2022 Share Posted March 22, 2022 2 hours ago, Uaarkson said: Die, fucker the, fucker, the Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.