The Supreme Idiocy
What kind of deranged Judiciary can rule that it's acceptable to deprive American women of their rights in the 21st Century, whilst mentally unbalanced teenagers are at liberty to slaughter schoolchildren and their teachers?
This post may contain Mildly Adult content.
Top | Newest First | Oldest First
helenS · 36-40, F
If US supreme court judges were appointed by at least a 2/3 majority in the Congress (!), things like that would not happen, because judges would be above political divisions.
At the moment the court is hijacked by a political party, to push their political agenda through. When the tide turns, the other party will do the same.
Poor America. 😐
At the moment the court is hijacked by a political party, to push their political agenda through. When the tide turns, the other party will do the same.
Poor America. 😐
View 32 more replies »
helenS · 36-40, F
@SW-User Thank you 😏
SomeMichGuy · M
@SW-User
No.
As one shining example, Trump's Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, was a woman rich through Amway money who understood nothing about public education, but worked hard in my own state to try to undermine it by working to get public tax dollars to go to private/parochial institutions.
She had no experience with public schools; she wanted to destroy them.
She said that the new Obama guidelines for dealing with sexual harassment in school sports were unfair to the boys playing, e.g., football...apparently because girls are supposed to be sexual playthings for the boys who will be boys...
The appointing of rich dilettantes to positions of their uninformed passion was a hallmark of the Trump Cabinet.
Please do elaborate.
Did you say Trump’s cabinet were extremists and fools. ... At least President Trump’s picks were competent.
No.
As one shining example, Trump's Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, was a woman rich through Amway money who understood nothing about public education, but worked hard in my own state to try to undermine it by working to get public tax dollars to go to private/parochial institutions.
She had no experience with public schools; she wanted to destroy them.
She said that the new Obama guidelines for dealing with sexual harassment in school sports were unfair to the boys playing, e.g., football...apparently because girls are supposed to be sexual playthings for the boys who will be boys...
The appointing of rich dilettantes to positions of their uninformed passion was a hallmark of the Trump Cabinet.
Have you noticed how utterly unqualified nearly all in Biden’s cabinet are!?!
Please do elaborate.
SomeMichGuy · M
@helenS
So all political parties should have to agree to every appointment?
That's crazy, because it gives more power to tiny parties (it exacerbates the asymmetric power of the small already in our Senate). If 2/3 is the bar and a single party comprises 2/3 of the Senate, so be it.
The Republicans have power primarily as the party of "No", and Sens. Manchin & Sinema have gotten power in the same fashion.
By forcing the Senate to have real, in-person filibusters, we'd have a month or so of that and then it would break. That & allowing 5-10 Senators to force bringing a bill to the floor for open debate & a voice vote wouls bevfar preferable to what we now have.
No political party should be able to install a judge without the other party's consent.
So all political parties should have to agree to every appointment?
That's crazy, because it gives more power to tiny parties (it exacerbates the asymmetric power of the small already in our Senate). If 2/3 is the bar and a single party comprises 2/3 of the Senate, so be it.
The Republicans have power primarily as the party of "No", and Sens. Manchin & Sinema have gotten power in the same fashion.
By forcing the Senate to have real, in-person filibusters, we'd have a month or so of that and then it would break. That & allowing 5-10 Senators to force bringing a bill to the floor for open debate & a voice vote wouls bevfar preferable to what we now have.
Carissimi · F
What kind of idiot doesn’t understand 1. It’s not a constitutional matter. 2. Abortion is still available in states that want it. It’s not a ban. It has just gone back to the States, where it should have always been. Abortion is not Constitutional law, and that’s why the Supreme Court sent it back to the States. The Supreme Court only deals with Constitutional law.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
SW-User
@Carissimi Thank you for pointing out what is so obvious!
SW-User
That’s not what happened. Women have all their rights. Abortion isn’t banned, it’s back with the states where they belong. Killing unborn babies wasn’t exactly a right. As for unbalanced teenagers shooting people, we’ll that’s not a laws problem, but an upbringing and law enforcement problem.
You badly mischaracterized both situations.
You badly mischaracterized both situations.
This message was deleted by its author.
Graylight · 51-55, F
Oh, it's totally fair. After all, why wouldn't a piece of undeveloped and unviable fetal tissue - which could be aborted spontaneously for any reason by the body - have more rights, nay, more value than a full-grown woman.
It's as it always has been. Anyone but a white male is a 2nd class citizen. It's unspoken and it's well-hidden, but it's there.
It's as it always has been. Anyone but a white male is a 2nd class citizen. It's unspoken and it's well-hidden, but it's there.
pdqsailor1 · 61-69, M
@Graylight extraordinarily well put.. Orthodox Judaism views the fetus as "potential" life not actual life... and while a fetus has value it is viewed clearly as of lessor value than that of the Mother... To the point that abortion is not only permitted it is mandated if it threatens the life of the Mother... and this holds to the very moment of birth.. (late term abortion) ... Western law is based upon a foundation of biblical law... Those seeking to enact laws should be better educated...
pdqsailor1 · 61-69, M
@Graylight it is far more practical than it is spiritual. The life of the Mother - actual life supersedes that of a fetus potential life.. Beyond the obvious that she is already alive while the Fetus until it is born is potential life not actual life.. comes the practical answer that she can go on to give birth to additional children AND to raise them... The Fetus is of lower status than the Mother and does not gain the status of a living being until born.. When I hear the "right to life" crowd chant their mantra - I shake my head, when they decide that the fetus has a beating heart.. I shake my head.. NOT until the MOMENT it is born - and that means has exited the birth canal... and draws breath... is it alive. This is not MY opinion it is that of the sages... this is not a legislators opinion or a judges.. it is far more fundamental than this and ... they do not get to decide differently.. the temerity of all these people with opinions slays me.. What is the basis - the foundation for the opinion? Did they pull this out of their backsides? Here is one summary of the sources for the argument because I did not pull this out of MY backside... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaism_and_abortion
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
pdqsailor1 · 61-69, M
Deranged and also LIARS - you know when they were asked point blank about the ruling at their confirmation hearings and then did the diametric opposite? They have BESMIRCHED the independence, authority and integrity of the office they serve... They have turned America into a backwards laughing stock - a proud nation that has NOTHING to be proud about with respect to how their citizens will be forced to live... Anyone who dares vote Republican now - are traitors to their own nation...
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
SW-User
@pdqsailor1 Dude you already lost the argument. Quit while you still have your head above water. You should know that as a "sailor"... but hey, your ignorant in general it seems.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
DeWayfarer · 61-69, M
@sunsporter1649 and which the parties switched points of view which you wish to ignore!
You want a civil war no less!
You want a civil war no less!
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
DeWayfarer · 61-69, M
@sunsporter1649 I won't need a tooth pick.
Your doing fine on your own by constantly replying the same thing over multiple posts. You are your own worst enemy! 😆
Your doing fine on your own by constantly replying the same thing over multiple posts. You are your own worst enemy! 😆
carpediem · 61-69, M
They didn't do that. Liberal media can't get it right. Try a few facts:
"We end this opinion where we began. Abortion presents a profound moral question. The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. We now overrule those decisions and return that authority to the people and their elected representatives"
"We end this opinion where we began. Abortion presents a profound moral question. The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. We now overrule those decisions and return that authority to the people and their elected representatives"
carpediem · 61-69, M
@DeWayfarer No. I completely disagree. The constitution is clear. It’s NOT a living changing document based on the whims of the few. In my opinion, that’s a crazy idea. We have a set of guidelines. Let’s live by them. Simple.
Thanks for the discussion and your opinions.
Thanks for the discussion and your opinions.
DeWayfarer · 61-69, M
@carpediem see the rules for changing amendments. The civil war was the most major.
A similar reoccurrence will happen over many issues. And will happen if the constitution will not change.
I have talked to both conservatives and liberals alike.
He see above for a more conservative POV though he claims to be neither. He has ALWAYS responded as conservative to me anyway.
A similar reoccurrence will happen over many issues. And will happen if the constitution will not change.
I have talked to both conservatives and liberals alike.
He see above for a more conservative POV though he claims to be neither. He has ALWAYS responded as conservative to me anyway.
BetweenKittensandRiots · 36-40, MVIP
@SW-User Oh I do. I think Rapist and Pedophile are better souls than the conservative members of our supreme court and it's time for Joe Manchin and Susan Collins to retire because they have shown their judgement is lacking in that neither of them believed Kavaunaugh would perjure themselves as they testified under oath they felt Roe vs wade was settled law.
There are political prediction services but I don't think they would let me bet on the idea that Kavauanagh would commit perjury, but I would have bet my lifes saving and any inheritence on it. I'm not remotely suprised, and would like to remind everyone that Manchins political instincts are lacking especially because he trusted the republican nominees during their confirmation hearing.
There are political prediction services but I don't think they would let me bet on the idea that Kavauanagh would commit perjury, but I would have bet my lifes saving and any inheritence on it. I'm not remotely suprised, and would like to remind everyone that Manchins political instincts are lacking especially because he trusted the republican nominees during their confirmation hearing.
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@BetweenKittensandRiots The dumb voters keep electing dummies and then whine about the dummies they elected.
DownTheStreet · 56-60, M
I support abortion to a point; the ruling however simply speaks to if getting one is a constitutionally protected right. The groups you might want to direct your complaints to are the lawmakers in the states that ban it. The Supreme Court does not make laws - they are to assess the constitutionality of existing ones.
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
@DownTheStreet You are gonna get hammered for stating the obvious
Natasha9696 · 26-30, F
Loving your new profile pic Ant.
The problem with America is there is no middle ground. Should women be allowed to abort a healthy baby at 20 plus weeks gestation? Hell no they shouldn’t. It’s just wrong.
Should a woman that finds out her baby is not compatible with life be able to have a Termination for Medical Reasons? Of course she should. This is called a compassion induction not an abortion. These are just two scenarios and there are millions more.
Please find a middle ground on all your issues America cause the rest of the world is very tired of all this. I wish you could all go and live in another country for a couple of years so you can see what it’s like to live without the anger that you all seem to have towards one another.
Blessed be the fruit!!!!
The problem with America is there is no middle ground. Should women be allowed to abort a healthy baby at 20 plus weeks gestation? Hell no they shouldn’t. It’s just wrong.
Should a woman that finds out her baby is not compatible with life be able to have a Termination for Medical Reasons? Of course she should. This is called a compassion induction not an abortion. These are just two scenarios and there are millions more.
Please find a middle ground on all your issues America cause the rest of the world is very tired of all this. I wish you could all go and live in another country for a couple of years so you can see what it’s like to live without the anger that you all seem to have towards one another.
Blessed be the fruit!!!!
ArtieKat · M
@Natasha9696 Thank you x
pdqsailor1 · 61-69, M
When EVERY man proven responsible by DNA testing for an unplanned pregnancy are then summarily surgically emasculated (slicing off both their testicles and penis) without pain control medication and forced to pay child support until the child has finished its education THEN we can discuss if men wish to have a say in the reproductive rights of Women. Lets make THIS the law of the land and then perhaps we can discuss abortion rights for Women.. MEN, nor courts or legislatures nor a constitution has ANY say in the reproductive rights of a Woman... this is strictly a matter between that Woman and her doctor full stop zero discussion...
SomeMichGuy · M
CuriousCutie · F
ArtieKat · M
@CuriousCutie A skewed belief in the right to life
CuriousCutie · F
@ArtieKat Okay.
SW-User
The Supreme Court is just as political and partisan as any other aspect of government. It's not a sacred entity that bestows truths on us lowly mortals. Activist judges are more than happy to roll back rights. SSM is next, then contraception...kinda like how abolishment of slavery or integration should've been left up to the states?
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
Well... protection of the unborn.
DeluxedEdition · 26-30, F
Thank you for speaking for us ♥️👏
Fukfacewillie · 56-60, M
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment