collapse

* Recent Posts

JAMAL!!! by NCMUFan
[Today at 03:48:16 PM]


Marquette Madness Cancelled by Hards Alumni
[Today at 12:16:14 PM]


@ Butler game by MUpugnacity
[Today at 09:40:26 AM]


Stupid on NIL by lawdog77
[Today at 07:36:00 AM]


Our coach isn't "top tier," but he ain't half bad by Newsdreams
[Today at 07:02:08 AM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!


Author Topic: Protecting the Constitution  (Read 10265 times)

Mutaman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 706
  • "Technically this is true."
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #125 on: June 24, 2022, 07:24:26 PM »
49 years of 'settled law' up in smoke determined by an unelected body.

What this has shown us is that there is no such thing as stare decisis and any ruling can be overturned based on the make up of the Supreme Court.



Bingo. Aside from the miserable effect this ruling is going to have on American women, the total disregard for concepts of jurisprudence is pretty unsettling. Thomas and his crowd are really a disgrace to the legal profession. Ignoring stare decisis is what lazy judges and political hacks do.

Dickthedribbler

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 151
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #126 on: June 24, 2022, 07:45:31 PM »
Who says? Well most pro-abortion politicians for one.

It doesn't have to be. Yet so many who who fight for the unborn seem very happy to fight against certain populations of born people despite claiming to be Christian.



As a disclaimer I am both Christian and believe life starts at conception. I just recognize that my belief shouldn't be forced onto others.

Christians for Abortion????

I don't believe I've ever heard of that group. Do you guys have a website so I can check you out. And where do you meet, a phone booth???

ZiggysFryBoy

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4688
  • MEDITERRANEAN TACOS!
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #127 on: June 24, 2022, 07:54:54 PM »
Christians for Abortion????

I don't believe I've ever heard of that group. Do you guys have a website so I can check you out. And where do you meet, a phone booth???

They meet in the cafeteria.

TSmith34

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3967
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #128 on: June 24, 2022, 07:57:20 PM »
The Onion has it correct again.

Pooba of Biggot Buffons

Hards Alumni

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5670
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #129 on: June 24, 2022, 07:58:14 PM »
Christians for Abortion????

I don't believe I've ever heard of that group. Do you guys have a website so I can check you out. And where do you meet, a phone booth???

You do realize that you Christian Fundies are to the right of Islamic Fundies on this subject... don't you?

Dickthedribbler

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 151
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #130 on: June 24, 2022, 08:02:20 PM »
Ah, the false equivalency to Plessy again raises its ugly head.
A few problems with this argument.

The first a is that Plessy - unlike Roe - was never explicitly overturned by the court. We didn't have one group of justices arrive on the scene decades later and say "You know, I don't like that ruling. Let's flip it." Now, Brown did have the effect of weakening it in schools specifically, but unlike Dobbs, Brown wasn't written solely to reverse a prior court's decision.

Second, unlike Brown and most other instances in with a latter court decision had the effect of weakening or changing a prior court ruling, Dobbs wasn't written to protect or extend a Constitutional right. It was written to eliminate one. I may be wrong here, but I'm not aware of any other instances in which a court threw out a prior court's decision with the express purpose of taking away a right.

And third, while Brown reflected the vast change in American law, culture and society when it came to race since Plessy and was reflective of popular sentiment, Dobbs is the opposite. The American public overwhelmingly supports abortion rights, and certainly moreso than 50 years ago. Unlike Brown, this court is cutting against the grain. 

So, sorry, but your attempt to equate the two is a failure.

No "false eqivelency whatsoever.

The Plessy court read into the Constitution something that never existed i.e. a Constitutionally protected right to discriminate against Blacks.

The Roe court read into the Constitution something that never existed i.e. the right to an abortion.

It took 58 years for the court to decide they had made a mistake thus the Brown decision IMPLICITLY overulling Plessy. And it took the court 49 years to realize and correct their.

If you're going to venture into areas you obviously know little about, you should do your homework first.

Uncle Rico

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4668
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #131 on: June 24, 2022, 08:04:44 PM »
No "false eqivelency whatsoever.

The Plessy court read into the Constitution something that never existed i.e. a Constitutionally protected right to discriminate against Blacks.

The Roe court read into the Constitution something that never existed i.e. the right to an abortion.

It took 58 years for the court to decide they had made a mistake thus the Brown decision IMPLICITLY overulling Plessy. And it took the court 49 years to realize and correct their.

If you're going to venture into areas you obviously know little about, you should do your homework first.

Just wait
Tis a shame, 'tis a rotton shame, for if ye can enjoy the walkin’ ye can probably enjoy the other times in yer life when ve're in between. And that's most o' the time; wouldn't ye say?

Pakuni

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9490
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #132 on: June 24, 2022, 08:06:25 PM »
No "false eqivelency .

Pretty much everything you wrote is wrong.

Dickthedribbler

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 151
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #133 on: June 24, 2022, 08:09:10 PM »
Pretty much everything you wrote is wrong.

Source?

Dickthedribbler

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 151
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #134 on: June 24, 2022, 08:12:53 PM »
You do realize that you Christian Fundies are to the right of Islamic Fundies on this subject... don't you?

Thanks for the insight, Hard. That oughta move a lot of hearts and minds.

Uncle Rico

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4668
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #135 on: June 24, 2022, 08:18:09 PM »
The lesson to be learned is, religion is a crutch for the feeble-minded.  The world is full of thousands of religions, none of which withstand any rational scrutiny. 

They are built to control and rule by fear, the same things they tell you the government do.  They don’t understand their hypocrisy because they don’t understand humanity.

Religion has destroyed this planet tenfold.  It is relentless in its quest to control.  Free yourselves before you’re worm food.
Tis a shame, 'tis a rotton shame, for if ye can enjoy the walkin’ ye can probably enjoy the other times in yer life when ve're in between. And that's most o' the time; wouldn't ye say?

Hards Alumni

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5670
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #136 on: June 24, 2022, 08:20:15 PM »
Thanks for the insight, Hard. That oughta move a lot of hearts and minds.

Don't worry, you're not worth saving.

Mutaman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 706
  • "Technically this is true."
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #137 on: June 24, 2022, 08:22:28 PM »
No "false eqivelency whatsoever.

The Plessy court read into the Constitution something that never existed i.e. a Constitutionally protected right to discriminate against Blacks.

The Roe court read into the Constitution something that never existed i.e. the right to an abortion.

It took 58 years for the court to decide they had made a mistake thus the Brown decision IMPLICITLY overulling Plessy. And it took the court 49 years to realize and correct their.

If you're going to venture into areas you obviously know little about, you should do your homework first.

A very foolish analogy. And throw a little ad hominem in there for good measure.

Pakuni

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9490
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #138 on: June 24, 2022, 08:34:29 PM »

TAMU, the Wizard of MU Basketball

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 20135
  • SPELLS! MAGIC!
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #139 on: June 24, 2022, 08:54:55 PM »
Christians for Abortion????

I don't believe I've ever heard of that group. Do you guys have a website so I can check you out. And where do you meet, a phone booth???

You realize that most Christian denominations, including Catholics, have more members who are pro choice than pro life, right?

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/views-about-abortion/.

It is possible to believe one thing but also believe that your belief shouldn't be mandated on others by the government.
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference.

~Prayer of the Scooper

TAMU, the Wizard of MU Basketball

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 20135
  • SPELLS! MAGIC!
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #140 on: June 24, 2022, 09:03:10 PM »
Outside of that, you make a sexual decision, you live with it. Period.

I see this sentiment a lot,  but you realize this means that you are telling people that they should be 100% abstinent unless they are prepared to have a baby. Abstinence is the only 100% effective way to prevent pregnancy.  Condoms break,  birth control fails,  and without natural family planning I wouldn't be here today.

If you're going to advocate to abolish abortion,  the least you can do is advocate for comprehensive sex Ed and increased access to birth control to try to mitigate some of the negative impacts.
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference.

~Prayer of the Scooper

muwarrior69

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4164
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #141 on: June 24, 2022, 09:08:13 PM »
Ah, the false equivalency to Plessy again raises its ugly head.
A few problems with this argument.

The first a is that Plessy - unlike Roe - was never explicitly overturned by the court. We didn't have one group of justices arrive on the scene decades later and say "You know, I don't like that ruling. Let's flip it." Now, Brown did have the effect of weakening it in schools specifically, but unlike Dobbs, Brown wasn't written solely to reverse a prior court's decision.

Second, unlike Brown and most other instances in with a latter court decision had the effect of weakening or changing a prior court ruling, Dobbs wasn't written to protect or extend a Constitutional right. It was written to eliminate one. I may be wrong here, but I'm not aware of any other instances in which a court threw out a prior court's decision with the express purpose of taking away a right.

And third, while Brown reflected the vast change in American law, culture and society when it came to race since Plessy and was reflective of popular sentiment, Dobbs is the opposite. The American public overwhelmingly supports abortion rights, and certainly moreso than 50 years ago. Unlike Brown, this court is cutting against the grain. 

So, sorry, but your attempt to equate the two is a failure.

...but SCOTUS' opinion matters more than yours so your point is moot. Now that Roe is reversed it IS the settled law of the land.

ChitownSpaceForRent

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5856
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #142 on: June 24, 2022, 09:28:54 PM »
...but SCOTUS' opinion matters more than yours so your point is moot. Now that Roe is reversed it IS the settled law of the land.

What makes this court’s decision more right than the one 50 years ago?

MUBurrow

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #143 on: June 24, 2022, 09:30:02 PM »
"In his opinion concurring with the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the constitutional right to abortion established in Roe v. Wade, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the high court should revisit all cases built on similar legal footing—including cases that guarantee the right to contraception, same-sex consensual sexual relations, and same-sex marriage.

For folks that lean right, the evolution of the Clarence Thomas-Ginny Thomas plot has to make you feel kinda gross, right?

TSmith34

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3967
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #144 on: June 24, 2022, 09:31:18 PM »
The lesson to be learned is, religion is a crutch for the feeble-minded.  The world is full of thousands of religions, none of which withstand any rational scrutiny. 

Hold on, you're saying Xenu didn't fly people to Earth in a DC-8, drop them near volcanoes, and blow them up with hydrogen bombs?

Or that a Jewish zombie had to fix people's souls because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat a magic apple?

Huh. This changes things.
Pooba of Biggot Buffons

pbiflyer

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1138
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #145 on: June 24, 2022, 09:38:27 PM »
So, the pro birth crowd now has a chance to prove the rest of us wrong, that they are truly pro life, by advocating for free pre natal care, enhanced post birth family leave time, enhanced food programs for these new kids that go hungry, etc.
I’m not holding my breath. A leopard doesn’t change its spots.

rocket ALM surgeon

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3018
  • NA of course
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #146 on: June 24, 2022, 10:14:47 PM »
Hold on, you're saying Xenu didn't fly people to Earth in a DC-8, drop them near volcanoes, and blow them up with hydrogen bombs?

Or that a Jewish zombie had to fix people's souls because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat a magic apple?

Huh. This changes things.

was this supposed to be funny?  i can't believe some of you even attended marquette...or if ya did...why?  trying to feel sorry for some of you too and how lonely you have got to be without some kind of spiritual foundation to appreciate the sanctity of life rather than a "clump of cells"  the "clump of cells" analogy is intellectually lazy, overly simplistic and honestly quite sad.  but carry on, sleep well, but some of this was really hard to read
"I got hairy legs that turn blonde in the sun. The kids used to come up and reach in the pool & rub my leg down so it was straight ..i learned about kids jumping on my lap and i've loved kids jumping on my lap"

GB Warrior

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1807
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #147 on: June 24, 2022, 10:18:40 PM »
For folks that lean right, the evolution of the Clarence Thomas-Ginny Thomas plot has to make you feel kinda gross, right?

No, why would it. The right gets to see more babies born so the right can subsequently murder them in schools

Jockey

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1618
  • “We want to get rid of the ballots"
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #148 on: June 24, 2022, 11:51:37 PM »
Then don't force me to call someone by their preferred pronoun.

Whiny mediocre white person claims victimhood.

Jockey

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1618
  • “We want to get rid of the ballots"
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #149 on: June 24, 2022, 11:58:40 PM »
For folks that lean right, the evolution of the Clarence Thomas-Ginny Thomas plot has to make you feel kinda gross, right?

Clarence Thomas has said he supports everything his wife does.

She worked hard for the overthrow of our gov't. Was intimately involved in pushing Trump to that end. Curiously, Thomas was then the ONLY justice of nine that voted that Trump did not have to turn over documents.

What a coincidence!!!

And now he wants go ban contraception. Let him be the 1st man in line to get his d*** cut off.