Roe V Wade has been repealed

[LainaGabranth]

Grrrrrrrrr Trump, I bet that's what you say every day, or maybe you blame Putin.

The relaity is that the Dems are wrecking your country, in less than 2 years in power they have managed to run it into the ground. I wonder what it will be like in another 2 years?

Dude. Come on. "Relaity?" Don't bother insulting me if you can't spell a seven letter word.

 

[mrdude]

Dude. Come on. "Relaity?" Don't bother insulting me if you can't spell a seven letter word.

Grrrrrrrrrr, it's Trumps Putins fault.

 

[LainaGabranth]

Grrrrrrrrrr, it's Trumps Putins fault.

Get new material, NPC. You're boring.

 

[mrdude]

Get new material, NPC. You're boring.

Grrrrrrrrrrr

 

[Valwinz]

Is funny really the hypocrisy of Europe

 

[LainaGabranth]

Grrrrrrrrrr, it's Trumps Putins fault.

Just because you're as smart as a dog doesn't mean you should growl like one.

 

[DKAngel]

Mmmm nah, all feminism is evil, plain and simple.


You wanna first? I'll do it after I had a few kids if necessary. But

Guns have holes like women, and I fuck 'em lol


Fuck around and find out biatch! Guns are used for protection against psychos and criminals who want to do harm, plain and simple. The places with the most gun control have the most gun violence because surprisingly, criminals don't follow the law. Who would've thought?

guns used for protection.....well where i live i don't have crazy people shooting up schools and i don't feel unsafe enough that i have to carry a gun on the streets where i live. Americans cant even follow their own laws lol guns for protections...not killing innocent kids

 

[LainaGabranth]

guns used for protection.....well where i live i don't have crazy people shooting up schools and i don't feel unsafe enough that i have to carry a gun on the streets where i live. Americans cant even follow their own laws lol guns for protections...not killing innocent kids

I like firearms and I believe that with openly fascist rhetoric and ramping up genocidal policies against trans people, I should own a firearm to protect myself against an increasingly hostile state and their followers.

And I still think we need to increase security and control on firearms because it's clear that too many bad people are getting them.

 

[Xzi]

It’s the opposite of an activist court, they’re reversing an activist decision on the basis of interpreting text as it is written, which is the only interpretation that should ever be used when it comes to law.

A court that makes rulings based on dogma has outlived both its usefulness and its integrity. I say burn the motherfucker down before it strips us of all our other individual liberties. They've already signaled that's the plan.

 

[LainaGabranth]

A court that makes rulings based on dogma has outlived both its usefulness and its integrity. I say burn the motherfucker down before it strips us of all our other individual liberties. They've already signaled that's the plan.

Precisely. I think it's funny that people claim this court is just "reversing an activist decision" given that one of the members was EXPLICITLY CHOSEN because he is as anti-abortion as a SCOTUS judge comes.

Give me a break, does anyone actually believe shit like this when they say it??

 

[MariArch]

A court that makes rulings based on dogma has outlived both its usefulness and its integrity. I say burn the motherfucker down before it strips us of all our other individual liberties. They've already signaled that's the plan.

Yes, dogma. As in the constitution. They follow the constitution.
There's no right to non-traditional marriage or a right to sodomy or a right to contraceptives laid out in the constitution.
Thus they're not actual rights, or at least shouldn't be under the current constitution.
If you wanted them as rights, you pass an amendment, not rely on "a court that makes rulings based on dogma" to make it a right. That's exactly how any of those became rights in the first place, because the left wing activist court made up shit thats wasnt on the constitution, nor is on the constitution today.
If we had a court that did their job, they'd overturn all these phony rulings not in the constitution and tell our legislators to pass them as amendments if they really want them.

But we can go with your idea of "burning it down" If you want. We can quicken the national divorce and not delay the inevitable

 

[Xzi]

Yes, dogma. As in the constitution. They follow the constitution.

As in the bible. The decision cites ACB's cult-like religious beliefs multiple times throughout. Meaning the decision is invalid as far as I'm concerned.

Thus they're not actual rights, or at least shouldn't be under the current constitution.

As long as the court is willing to wipe their asses with the constitution, we have no actual rights. Or rather, the only individual rights and freedoms we'll have from now on are those that we can defend ourselves. Nothing is guaranteed with the tide of fascism on the rise.

 

[MariArch]

As in the bible. The decision cites ACB's cult-like religious beliefs multiple times throughout. Meaning the decision is invalid as far as I'm concerned.


As long as the court is willing to wipe their asses with the constitution, we have no actual rights. Or rather, the only individual rights and freedoms we'll have from now on are those that we can defend ourselves. Nothing is guaranteed with the tide of fascism on the rise.

1. No, no it doesn't lol. Coney Barrett didn't write the decision nor did she write a concurrence. Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion. And if you actually read it, youd know that a fuck ton of it was tearing apart bad law that just doesn't make any fucking sense.

2. The court just reaffirmed an actual right in the constitution the day before. That being the right to bear arms lol. As far as I'm concerned, the left seeks to pack the courts with their activists so they can continue a long legacy of making up shit that's not in the constitution. And I'll be happy when they do, because once that happens, conservative states will just ignore the corrupt courts and go by the actual constitution.

The funny part is that this recent overturning and any of the other ones you mention doesnt require left wing states to do anything, it just allows right wing states to do what they want to do lol.

 

[Foxi4]

A court that makes rulings based on dogma has outlived both its usefulness and its integrity. I say burn the motherfucker down before it strips us of all our other individual liberties. They've already signaled that's the plan.

What makes you think that the decision is based on dogma? The justification for the repeal is perfectly adequate, the constitutionality of Roe was always questionable, and hotly debated for decades. The reasoning is very simple. Right to Privacy is not enumerated. Even if it was enumerated, or otherwise justified via substantive due process, it would have no consequence on whether or not a patient can get access to a procedure - that has nothing to do with privacy. Either a treatment is restricted or it isn’t - privacy concerns only arise when a patient’s information is publicly disseminated. Doctor-patient confidentiality does not enable prescribing otherwise restricted treatments. How is all that “based on dogma”? It’s based on the Constitution, or more specifically on the way the 14th Amendment was misinterpreted in the Roe case.

 

[Xzi]

1. No, no it doesn't lol. Coney Barrett didn't write the decision nor did she write a concurrence. Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion. And if you actually read it, youd know that know that fuck ton of it was tearing apart bad law that just doesn't make any fucking sense.

I'm worried that if I read the whole thing it'll give me a brain tumor, shit is a fucking dumpster fire like conservative justification for authoritarianism always is.

2. The court just reaffirmed an actual right in the constitution the day before. That being the right to bear arms lol.

Guns > human beings, amirite? Too bad Ford wasn't packing heat the night Kavanaugh got all handsy.

 

[Deleted member 571007]

I think it's a little ridiculous to shy away from calling yourself a feminist because people would be upset to hear it, knowing that any ideas you spout that aren't as monogamous and heterosexual as possible will get pushback either way.

Like, shit, I'm a feminist and I own that shit. If someone thinks all feminists = radfems, then they're either stupid, or not worth debating the idea with because they get all their info from psychotic youtubers. The number of radfems is astronomically low in comparison to actual feminists that I think even acknowledging them beyond "they exist by law of numbers" is overstating them.

Sorry for late the response, but you are correct. The number of radfems is the minority of the actual group, such as the extremists of any group are usually the minority; like from my example before - if someone in a group of people murders another person, that doesn't make every single person in the group a murderer thus that's not what people should associate the original group with.

Also yes I can see how it'd be ridiculous to shy away from something because it upsets other people - which is true for most people but I guess it's just a me thing. I hate upsetting people even if they're blatantly in the wrong; however it's something I've been trying to work past with it being an anxiety problem and such, but anyways that wasn't really the topic, furthering the original topic; I fully support actual feminists and people pushing for equal rights.

 

[Foxi4]

Guns > human beings, amirite? Too bad Ford wasn't packing heat the night Kavanaugh got all handsy.

Slander. Ford had 40 years to contact the police.

 

[MariArch]

I'm worried that if I read the whole thing it'll give me a brain tumor, shit is a fucking dumpster fire like conservative justification for authoritarianism always is.


Guns > human beings, amirite? Too bad Ford wasn't packing heat the night Kavanaugh got all handsy.

I urge you to read it and tell me what's not following the constitution lol.

It wouldn't have mattered if she was packing heat because she'd have noone to shoot because theres no evidence that happened lol. But please keep going off on your schizo witch-hunts like the left does.

 

[Xzi]

Slander. Ford had 40 years to contact the police.

And many women never do, for any number of reasons. That's beside the point though, I'd highly recommend they all arm up now. I've said it before and I'll say it again: force is the only language fascists understand, and they won't settle for abortion being banned in only half the country.

 

[MariArch]

And many women never do, for any number of reasons. That's beside the point though, I'd highly recommend they all arm up now. I've said it before and I'll say it again: force is the only language fascists understand, and they won't settle for abortion being banned in only half the country.

Why stop at women? I can get behind a national firearm ownership mandate for all lawful citizens.

Now you're speaking my language