Law Founding fathers rolling over in their graves

Thomas and Alito absolutely would.

It kills @BFoe how John Roberts struts around in that god damn robe, thinking his court has any institutional integrity whatsoever. šŸ¤£ Delusional Motherfucker. šŸ˜­ Alito is a straight-up goof and weirdly invested in things he should be way above the fray on, like Bud Light protests and shit. Wtf, lol. Thomas doesn't watch the news, and I've actually got a strange soft spot for him tbh, even with all the sugar daddy stuff. Oh god, I love America.


The other conservatives aren't quite as gung-ho about it, that's true.

It didn't go over well.


 
It kills @BFoe how John Roberts struts around in that god damn robe, thinking his court has any institutional integrity whatsoever. šŸ¤£ Delusional Motherfucker. šŸ˜­ Alito is a straight-up goof and weirdly invested in things he should be way above the fray on, like Bud Light protests and shit. Wtf, lol. Thomas doesn't watch the news, and I've actually got a strange soft spot for him tbh, even with all the sugar daddy stuff. Oh god, I love America.




It didn't go over well.


You have a soft spot for Thomas???

Talk about a guy that any psychologist would love to try their hand at cracking.

This is a dude who openly admits he probably would never have been a SCOTUS justice without affirmative action, yet he killed it. Rather than understanding that he always had the aptitude, intelligence, and talent (as much as I disagree with him) to make it but racism stood in the way, needing affirmative action filled him with self doubt.
And so he killed it, lest anyone else benefit.

He also enjoys his marriage due to the Equal Protection Clause, but refuses to apply it to everyone equally. Sorry @Deorum , only Thomas can benefit. Fuck everyone else, right?

Another weird thing is, he rarely rarely asks questions during arguments. Do you know why? Itā€™s because he grew up dirt ass poor in GA, and his first language was Gullah Geechee. That used to be called ā€œpigeon english,ā€ by racist whites, but today we know it has an amazing culture and heritage. His accent is long gone, but the self doubt remains.
Interestingly, Obamaā€™s 2nd inaugural parade had a float dedicated to Gullah heritage and culture, because Michelle Obama grew up just like Thomas. But unlike him, sheā€™s not full of self-hatred and self-doubt.


Sorry for the ramble, pretty sure thereā€™s a hailstorm and possible tornado outside so Iā€™m having a whiskey :)
 
I mean, what would have happened if anti-abortion activists had thrown in the towel at Roe?
They wouldn't have to live with the pain and disappointment of it being overturned...
 
100%. Anti abortion and anti gay marriage are religious, not political positions.

Unfortunately in America, religion and politics are joined at the hip with republicans generally being Christian and democrats generally being lgbt/climate doom culters.
You have some very unusual definitions of political if you think abortion and marriage are not political issues. What is the definition of political in your book?
 
They wouldn't have to live with the pain and disappointment of it being overturned...
...anyhoo, point being that activism doesn't, or shouldn't, just stop at the point of an SC decision (because they are reversible)
 
...anyhoo, point being that activism doesn't, or shouldn't, just stop at the point of an SC decision (because they are reversible)
They certainly are, and it goes both ways. Imagine if the anti-abortion people quit, amirite?
 
It's a secular country. We can have laws without bringing Jesus up and proclaiming that there's one true God and his day should be honored and his name shouldn't be taken in vain. If it was Jewish or Muslim scripture being presented in schools would you treat it just as nonchalantly?


Both Jefferson and Madison were deeply opposed to a state church or to any state recognition of religion. They also knew that their views against religion were unpopular and had no chance of prevailing on principle.

Instead, Madison set out to terrify Virginiaā€™s Presbyterians, Baptists, and other rival sects into fearing that the state church would be an oppressive Anglican one. To this end, he wrote a broadside: the Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments (1785). The Memorial succeeded since most Virginia Christians wanted their own church to be the state church, and if not theirs, then nobody elseā€™s.

ā€˜The mutual hatred of these sects has been much inflamed,ā€™ Madison wrote to Thomas Jefferson in 1785, and ā€˜I am far from being sorry for it.ā€™ Virginiaā€™s disestablishment, or separation of church and state, came to be the model for national separation. But it was made possible only by a combination of parliamentary legerdemain and elite manipulation of sectarian hatred.



<{Heymansnicker}>

JM.jpg
 
You have some very unusual definitions of political if you think abortion and marriage are not political issues. What is the definition of political in your book?
Whether they are or not, they shouldn't be.
 
I said the anti positions are religious.
Those positions are about as religious as arguing that Jesus was a socialist because he hated moneylenders. American churches were neutral, even supportive, of abortion for most of the 20th century.
Whether they are or not, they shouldn't be.
If we're defining political as "who gets what, when, where and how," yeah, those are political issues for better or worse.
 
Those positions are about as religious as arguing that Jesus was a socialist because he hated moneylenders. American churches were neutral, even supportive, of abortion for most of the 20th century.

If we're defining political as "who gets what, when, where and how," yeah, those are political issues for better or worse.
They're only political because of partisan fearmongering. And I think when you talk of American churches supporting abortion, I presume you mean Catholics. If you wish to claim evangelicals ever supported abortion I'll want to see a sauce for that, please.
 
It's a secular country. We can have laws without bringing Jesus up and proclaiming that there's one true God and his day should be honored and his name shouldn't be taken in vain. If it was Jewish or Muslim scripture being presented in schools would you treat it just as nonchalantly?
The majority is free to do as they please at home, just like anyone else, but they can't force their beliefs on everyone else. That's the point of being secular. It seems a lot of the division in our country is due to people fearing the country ceasing to have a White Christian majority.
The 10 commandments don't "bring Jesus up" because they're older than Jesus and already are part of "Jewish scripture". Yes, if someone lived in a state or country that was 90% Muslim, it would be pretty ridiculous for them to complain about having to see Muslims pray or something from the quran on the wall, and even more ridiculous to complain about it in a place you don't even live.

Really don't know where you pulled "white" from other than some attempt to virtue signal to your cult, as black people are Christian at much higher rates than whites, and Lousiana has one of the highest black populations in the country, and also one of the highest rates of Christianity in the country.

Lol at "you can be Christian as long as you do it at home and don't tell anybody in public". Meanwhile, who you want to fuck is everybody's business and everybody needs to come together in public displays to celebrate your sexual urges.
 
The 10 commandments don't "bring Jesus up" because they're older than Jesus and already are part of "Jewish scripture". Yes, if someone lived in a state or country that was 90% Muslim, it would be pretty ridiculous for them to complain about having to see Muslims pray or something from the quran on the wall, and even more ridiculous to complain about it in a place you don't even live.

Really don't know where you pulled "white" from other than some attempt to virtue signal to your cult, as black people are Christian at much higher rates than whites, and Lousiana has one of the highest black populations in the country, and also one of the highest rates of Christianity in the country.

Lol at "you can be Christian as long as you do it at home and don't tell anybody in public". Meanwhile, who you want to fuck is everybody's business and everybody needs to come together in public displays to celebrate your sexual urges.

Lol@throwing out "black people are more Christian than whites" when only one of those two became Christian under the threat of execution by the other
 
Last edited:
They're only political because of partisan fearmongering. And I think when you talk of American churches supporting abortion, I presume you mean Catholics. If you wish to claim evangelicals ever supported abortion I'll want to see a sauce for that, please.
I think you misunderstand what I mean by political. I mean the literal, intro to politics definition, not he common term people use but can't really define.

As for abortion, yeah, there have been many evangelical movements that supported it up to about the 80s and 90s.
 
Lol@throwing out "black people are .ore Christian than whites" when only one of those two became Christian under the threat of execution by the other
What are you babbling about? Where does this bill say anything about executing anybody?
 
I think you misunderstand what I mean by political. I mean the literal, intro to politics definition, not he common term people use but can't really define.

As for abortion, yeah, there have been many evangelical movements that supported it up to about the 80s and 90s.
Sure, I get that and thanks for the factual correction, but again, that points directly to its politicization as a deliberate move to obtain political power. There's no inherent reason it's a political issue. Same with LGBTQ2A+ stuff, or the COVID vaccine. It's all about scaring conservatives and triggering "the libs".

I was about to say I can't understand how people don't see through this tactic but they don't care to try because it fulfills their expectations.
 
Sure, I get that but again, this points to its politicization as a deliberate move to obtain political power. There's no other inherent reason it's a political issue.
Marriage and abortion are inherently political issues, they weren't "made political." They have been as long as the government has tied benefits or penalties to these matters, which is effectively since the dawn of time.

I'm not using political as a pejorative term, I posted what I meant earlier.
 
Marriage and abortion are inherently political issues, they weren't "made political." They have been as long as the government has tied benefits or penalties to these matters, which is effectively since the dawn of time.

I'm not using political as a pejorative term, I posted what I meant earlier.
I said nothing about marriage. And abortion is a medical issue.

I think it's you that's not getting my point. These issues (again, not talking about marriage) need not be political but they became political either for partisan gain or because peoples' rights needed protecting from attackers.


Edit: except in as much the medical profession is regulated by the government, there's no reason for abortion to be a political issue. It has become a political issue because people feel the need to interfere in the personal decisions of others (usually) because of religious beliefs. That's what causes it to be political. The government needs to step in and either support the attackers or protect the rights of those whose rights are attacked. Otherwise it would not be necessary.
 
Last edited:

Forum statistics

Threads
1,239,565
Messages
55,637,259
Members
174,866
Latest member
john_k47
Back
Top