Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

[Skinny Tire AH]

@nganga Ok, I'm an idiot for living in Narnia in my head believing people aren't actually promoting to kill two SCJ's because of their views on abortion and possibility for Jao to appoint two more of the lefts brainwashed dipshits to the highest positions in our judicial system.


View attachment 1113147

It’s just who they are. The ends always justify the means.

Political power is the ultimate aphrodisiac to the hard left

 

[USMC2010]

Ginsburg who was pro abortion said Roe vs Wade was a bad ruling on shaky ground that would eventually be overturned.

Although it's likely to be close to the final, it was only a draft decision from February.

Don't want an abortion? Close your legs, most are from unwanted pregnancies not the exceptions always being pointed out.

 

[clarence]

@nganga Ok, I'm an idiot for living in Narnia in my head believing people aren't actually promoting to kill two SCJ's because of their views on abortion and possibility for Jao to appoint two more of the lefts brainwashed dipshits to the highest positions in our judicial system.

 

[bonesfab]

@nganga Ok, I'm an idiot for living in Narnia in my head believing people aren't actually promoting to kill two SCJ's because of their views on abortion and possibility for Jao to appoint two more of the lefts brainwashed dipshits to the highest positions in our judicial system.


View attachment 1113147

the movie "The Pelican Brief" comes to mind.

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

Now, the HOME addresses of the 6 Conservatives on the court have been made public.

I hope you filthy liberal pricks rot in hell

And Raggedy Ann won’t speak against it.

 

[94Nautique]

@nganga Ok, I'm an idiot for living in Narnia in my head believing people aren't actually promoting to kill two SCJ's because of their views on abortion and possibility for Jao to appoint two more of the lefts brainwashed dipshits to the highest positions in our judicial system.


View attachment 1113147

How do people think killing millions of females in the uterus will save many “women” especially when they can’t even define what a women is? Dude, you are defending idiots that can not make sense of anything.

 

[regor]

@nganga Ok, I'm an idiot for living in Narnia in my head believing people aren't actually promoting to kill two SCJ's because of their views on abortion and possibility for Jao to appoint two more of the lefts brainwashed dipshits to the highest positions in our judicial system.


View attachment 1113147

Well done EV, well done!!!

That was a fucking MAN move that a whole lot of Covidians in this country and website could learn from. No butt hurt BS, just straight up acknowledgment.

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

Well done EV, well done!!!

That was a fucking MAN move that a whole lot of Covidians in this country and website could learn from. No butt hurt BS, just straight up acknowledgment.

Agree. Class move.

I’ll bet @caribbean20 will also come along shortly

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

I’m going think through my perspective on intimidation. Thank you

You did as you said you would. You looked at it objectively, looked at the available evidence and formulated a decision.

 

[evantwheeler]

How do people think killing millions of females in the uterus will save many “women” especially when they can’t even define what a women is? Dude, you are defending idiots that can not make sense of anything.

I know your first question is rhetorical, but listening to the left try and make logic of their views across the board can only be described like I've read here many times - pretzel logic. It's twisted and you cannot follow it, its not linear or logical.

To be clear on your second sentence, my intent was to question the REASON the media folks from the right (what I consider to be "my" side) were giving for the outrage of the leak and the way that the whole thing felt pre-meditated like a lot of events do this day in age. My intention/purpose was NOT to defend in any way that the leak made by the leftist piece of shit.

My thought was that the outrage for the leak should have been solely due to the fact a leak occurred because someone broke over a century of protocol. I did not think the SCJ's lives were are risk due to the leak, as their jobs are inherently risky due to the political nature of the decisions they make and the way they are front and center in the public eye/media. I was wrong on that as admitted above. I still believe SCJ's should be unintimadble before, during, after they are performing their duties deciding on cases, just as a police officers, fire fighters, and our military personnel are unintimiadble in the line of duty. Cowards need not apply. Even if this would not have been leaked, these fucks on the left would have likely had the same response when it was made public through normal means, no? Would they not still DOX and call for the assassination of SCJ's after the law was changed? That was my main point in questioning what the right was saying.

I could have just sunk back into the curtains, but I do not get to engage in this kind of discourse offline and enjoy civil discussions that challenge my own & others views. If I need to work on something, i want to do it, because it was a bit of a slap to be accused of being a leftist.

 

[t&y]

I know your first question is rhetorical, but listening to the left try and make logic of their views across the board can only be described like I've read here many times - pretzel logic. It's twisted and you cannot follow it, its not linear or logical.

To be clear on your second sentence, my intent was to question the REASON the media folks from the right (what I consider to be "my" side) were giving for the outrage of the leak and the way that the whole thing felt pre-meditated like a lot of events do this day in age. My intention/purpose was NOT to defend in any way that the leak made by the leftist piece of shit.

My thought was that the outrage for the leak should have been solely due to the fact a leak occurred because someone broke over a century of protocol. I did not think the SCJ's lives were are risk due to the leak, as their jobs are inherently risky due to the political nature of the decisions they make and the way they are front and center in the public eye/media. I was wrong on that as admitted above. I still believe SCJ's should be unintimadble before, during, after they are performing their duties deciding on cases, just as a police officers, fire fighters, and our military personnel are unintimiadble in the line of duty. Cowards need not apply. Even if this would not have been leaked, these fucks on the left would have likely had the same response when it was made public through normal means, no? Would they not still DOX and call for the assassination of SCJ's after the law was changed? That was my main point in questioning what the right was saying.

I could have just sunk back into the curtains, but I do not get to engage in this kind of discourse offline and enjoy civil discussions that challenge my own & others views. If I need to work on something, i want to do it, because it was a bit of a slap to be accused of being a leftist.

You were accused of being a leftist because you triggered some of the sensitive ones in here. Your point and position is still a valid one, and having a bit of experience in the area we are speaking, every single cop, lawyer, or judge out there knows full well the risks associated with their decisions or simple opinions and has since they took the job. I honestly think you are falling on a sword here that you do not need to fall on. The libturd crazy's would have suggested the same crazy shit regardless of leak, or affirmed decision. That is the reality, and threats against their lives are not a new thing. Hell.... just a few years back one of the crazy libturds had themselves a little mass shooting at a softball game practice over some senators who did nothing other than identifying as Republican.

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

I know your first question is rhetorical, but listening to the left try and make logic of their views across the board can only be described like I've read here many times - pretzel logic. It's twisted and you cannot follow it, its not linear or logical.

To be clear on your second sentence, my intent was to question the REASON the media folks from the right (what I consider to be "my" side) were giving for the outrage of the leak and the way that the whole thing felt pre-meditated like a lot of events do this day in age. My intention/purpose was NOT to defend in any way that the leak made by the leftist piece of shit.

My thought was that the outrage for the leak should have been solely due to the fact a leak occurred because someone broke over a century of protocol. I did not think the SCJ's lives were are risk due to the leak, as their jobs are inherently risky due to the political nature of the decisions they make and the way they are front and center in the public eye/media. I was wrong on that as admitted above. I still believe SCJ's should be unintimadble before, during, after they are performing their duties deciding on cases, just as a police officers, fire fighters, and our military personnel are unintimiadble in the line of duty. Cowards need not apply. Even if this would not have been leaked, these fucks on the left would have likely had the same response when it was made public through normal means, no? Would they not still DOX and call for the assassination of SCJ's after the law was changed? That was my main point in questioning what the right was saying.

I could have just sunk back into the curtains, but I do not get to engage in this kind of discourse offline and enjoy civil discussions that challenge my own & others views. If I need to work on something, i want to do it, because it was a bit of a slap to be accused of being a leftist.

I misread you and sincerely apologize. You’ve proven to be a solid guy.

 

[was thatguy]

Now, the HOME addresses of the 6 Conservatives on the court have been made public.

I hope you filthy liberal pricks rot in hell

And Raggedy Ann won’t speak against it.

You ready?
I’m ready.

 

[94Nautique]

I know your first question is rhetorical, but listening to the left try and make logic of their views across the board can only be described like I've read here many times - pretzel logic. It's twisted and you cannot follow it, its not linear or logical.

To be clear on your second sentence, my intent was to question the REASON the media folks from the right (what I consider to be "my" side) were giving for the outrage of the leak and the way that the whole thing felt pre-meditated like a lot of events do this day in age. My intention/purpose was NOT to defend in any way that the leak made by the leftist piece of shit.

My thought was that the outrage for the leak should have been solely due to the fact a leak occurred because someone broke over a century of protocol. I did not think the SCJ's lives were are risk due to the leak, as their jobs are inherently risky due to the political nature of the decisions they make and the way they are front and center in the public eye/media. I was wrong on that as admitted above. I still believe SCJ's should be unintimadble before, during, after they are performing their duties deciding on cases, just as a police officers, fire fighters, and our military personnel are unintimiadble in the line of duty. Cowards need not apply. Even if this would not have been leaked, these fucks on the left would have likely had the same response when it was made public through normal means, no? Would they not still DOX and call for the assassination of SCJ's after the law was changed? That was my main point in questioning what the right was saying.

I could have just sunk back into the curtains, but I do not get to engage in this kind of discourse offline and enjoy civil discussions that challenge my own & others views. If I need to work on something, i want to do it, because it was a bit of a slap to be accused of being a leftist.

Right on! Totally cool with it. Yes, the first statement was rhetorical and was not directed at you but rather to the nuts on the left. The fact that leftists have gone full fuckhead is the point. The right is arguing to protect the vulnerable while the left is at full blown war over their desire to kill the unprotected. They have no basis of logic to hang their arguments. They have no science to buttress their anger. They are fucking insane.

Sad state of affairs.

 

[clarence]

Your point and position is still a valid one...

LOL, no.

Roberts bowed to "external pressure" when he changed his mind on Obamacare.

REPORT: John Roberts Switched His Obamacare Vote At The Last Minute

www.businessinsider.com

 

[clarence]

John Roberts Is Why The Left Thinks It Can Bully and Extort SCOTUS

On Monday, Politico published an alleged leaked draft of a majority U.S. Supreme Court decision that would strike down Roe v. Wade.

thefederalist.com

 

[clarence]

This was undoubtedly directed to Roberts:

We do not pretend to know how our political system or society will respond to today's decision overruling Roe and Casey. And even if we could foresee what will happen, we would have no authority to let that knowledge influence our decision. We can only do our job, which is to interpret the law, apply longstanding principles of stare decisis, and decide this case accordingly.

I've Finished Reading The Apparent Dobbs Draft Opinion

After my spate of blog posts from Monday evening (1, 2, 3, 4), I took the time to read the apparent Dobbs draft opinion. It is a tour de force. Justice

reason.com

 

[t&y]

LOL, no.

Roberts bowed to "external pressure" when he changed his mind on Obamacare.

REPORT: John Roberts Switched His Obamacare Vote At The Last Minute

www.businessinsider.com

LOL, yes.

Unless of course you do not believe being a Supreme Court Justice comes with dangers from the get go, regardless of court decisions. If so, stay in your bubble and just keep telling yourself evil only exists part time in this world.

 

[Danger Dave]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1522909113226694657

 

[Wedgy]

Men have the all the power here, they just don't know it. If every man vowed with every pregnancy to carry their babies full term to birth, that would send a powerful message the left could not even begin to deal with. Only Lady Baby killers.
No intercourse? Fine. No mercy. "My Penis, my Choice!" Suk it. That's all you get. It all boils down to thinking outside the "Box."
Game over.

 

[HTTP404]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1521582360311042054

Hitler in drag! LOL

 

[500bbc]

LOL, no.

Roberts bowed to "external pressure" when he changed his mind on Obamacare.

REPORT: John Roberts Switched His Obamacare Vote At The Last Minute

www.businessinsider.com

More likely a pressure that will never be made public...

 

[rmarion]

 

[530RL]

The whole abortion issue is not as interesting here as is the reasoning in the draft opinion written by Alito and concurred by the other 4 justices.

In it like in Obergefell v. Hodges, Alito argues and the other judges agree, that the only rights, liberties and privacy that any individual has are those that are explicitly outlined in the Constitution, all other control and allowance of an individuals access to any other right, liberty or privacy not explicitly outlined in the Constitution belongs not to the individual but to the Government.

That is an interesting Constitutional interpretation of the balance between whether the individual or the government controls our rights, liberties and privacy, one that will be greatly exploited by those that wish to further limit individual freedoms.

Sometimes people get what they asked for, without even knowing they asked for it.

 

[Wedgy]

"Objection. Reaching." "Sustained..."

Amber Heard has a better defense.

Regardless of where anyone stands on the issue. Miracles, are. Life will find a way.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

 

[Wedgy]

There's a lot more to say, I told some of it back a ways above. Ultrasound is way cool. Kudos to SD Children's Hospital. Dr's Ivan Harwood, O.W. Jones, all Staff UCSD University Medical Center. Brandon recognized my voice at a very early age in the womb. I played guitar and sang to him all the time. I would walk into the ultrasound talking, he would get excited at the sound of my voice. Alive and Kicking.
Simple Minds with the assist.

 

[94Nautique]

Men have the all the power here, they just don't know it. If every man vowed with every pregnancy to carry their babies full term to birth, that would send a powerful message the left could not even begin to deal with. Only Lady Baby killers.
No intercourse? Fine. No mercy. "My Penis, my Choice!" Suk it. That's all you get. It all boils down to thinking outside the "Box."
Game over.

But the reality is the number of “men” that like abortion due to the lack of responsibility is massive.

Having said that, a real man does not shirk responsibility.

Any male that is ok with baby murder, or especially those that are in favor of it, are nothing more than worthless misogynist pigs. Which is a logical conundrum that must really piss off the militant feminist Nazis to no end, that is if they even had the brains to actually think this whole thing through. Which they don’t.

 

[530RL]

"Objection. Reaching." "Sustained..."

Amber Heard has a better defense.

Regardless of where anyone stands on the issue. Miracles, are. Life will find a way.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Unfortunately your phrase above is in the Declaration of Independence and not the Constitution.

And as such the new conservative majority has outlined in their draft opinion that an individuals pursuit of such inalienable rights are not in fact protected by the constitution as it is not explicitly stated in the constitution.

Maybe that explains why Roe was originally decided by five Republican appointed conservative justices. For they understood the individual should hold more sway over their own privacy, liberty and freedom than should the government.

Pretty amazing how current “conservative” ideals are antithetical to those just a few decades ago.

 

[94Nautique]

Unfortunately your phrase above is in the Declaration of Independence and not the Constitution.

And as such the new conservative majority has outlined in their draft opinion that an individuals pursuit of such inalienable rights are not in fact protected by the constitution as it is not explicitly stated in the constitution.

Maybe that explains why Roe was originally decided by five Republican appointed conservative justices. For they understood the individual should hold more sway over their own privacy, liberty and freedom than should the government.

Pretty amazing how current “conservative” ideals are antithetical to those just a few decades ago.

The individual in the womb?

 

[Spectra18]

Just to clarify y’all know today’s abortion is just a pill called plan C. If ones okay with it they ought to have the right , shit happens. But the late term abortions are u holy.

 

[JUSTWANNARACE]

Unfortunately your phrase above is in the Declaration of Independence and not the Constitution.

And as such the new conservative majority has outlined in their draft opinion that an individuals pursuit of such inalienable rights are not in fact protected by the constitution as it is not explicitly stated in the constitution.

Maybe that explains why Roe was originally decided by five Republican appointed conservative justices. For they understood the individual should hold more sway over their own privacy, liberty and freedom than should the government.

Pretty amazing how current “conservative” ideals are antithetical to those just a few decades ago.

A true "conservative" from decades ago wouldn't even have considered abortion, being they would take responsibility for their actions!

So your point is moot..

And I think abortion is absolutely necessary in certain cases.. but it seems to be becoming the "new" birth control which is a whole different story..


At that point.. why is Dr assisted suicide not ok? Same same right?

 

[JUSTWANNARACE]

Just to clarify y’all know today’s abortion is just a pill called plan C. If ones okay with it they ought to have the right , shit happens. But the late term abortions are u holy.

Plan C? Never heard of it..

Plan B.. yes, but it only works for 72 hours after ejaculation. And it just alters the menstrual cycle. And hell if you made a "mistake" spend the $45 on "plan B" I'm all for that.. even hand that shit out for free instead of tax payers paying for a "medical procedure" as "birth control"

 

[was thatguy]

The individual in the womb?

Took the words….

 

[Wedgy]

Unfortunately your phrase above is in the Declaration of Independence and not the Constitution.

And as such the new conservative majority has outlined in their draft opinion that an individuals pursuit of such inalienable rights are not in fact protected by the constitution as it is not explicitly stated in the constitution.

Maybe that explains why Roe was originally decided by five Republican appointed conservative justices. For they understood the individual should hold more sway over their own privacy, liberty and freedom than should the government.

Pretty amazing how current “conservative” ideals are antithetical to those just a few decades ago.

The individual in the womb?

If I am not mistaken, it is a crime in 30 states to murder a mother and her baby in the womb. There are 2 victims if the unborn baby dies, the mother, and the unborn child. Perpetrator will be charged with 2 murders. Apparently one of those truths we hold to be self evident.
No matter where you stand. In 30 states.

"And as such the new conservative majority has outlined in their draft opinion that an individuals pursuit of such inalienable rights are not in fact protected by the constitution as it is not explicitly stated in the constitution."

Spitballing here, but put down the Big Brother Pom Poms. Mr. Dietz let me out of History for Drivers Ed, but in reference to L L & the P of H, Sir, Are not the powers not specifically enumerated to the Federal government in the Constitution, reserved unto the states?
Self evident, is...

 

[HST4ME]

Roe vs Wade was based upon a fallacy. End of story.

 

[Wedgy]

Roe vs Wade was based upon a fallacy. End of story.

Exactly. All Man. Created equal. Key word created. There is no Right to kill babies in the U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, Amendments. Period. End of Convo.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

 

[94Nautique]

Unfortunately your phrase above is in the Declaration of Independence and not the Constitution.

And as such the new conservative majority has outlined in their draft opinion that an individuals pursuit of such inalienable rights are not in fact protected by the constitution as it is not explicitly stated in the constitution.

Maybe that explains why Roe was originally decided by five Republican appointed conservative justices. For they understood the individual should hold more sway over their own privacy, liberty and freedom than should the government.

Pretty amazing how current “conservative” ideals are antithetical to those just a few decades ago.

Hey 529.5DK,

if the shoe fits…

 

[530RL]

Spitballing here, but put down the Big Brother Pom Poms. Mr. Dietz let me out of History for Drivers Ed, but in reference to L L & the P of H, Sir, Are not the powers not specifically enumerated to the Federal government in the Constitution, reserved unto the states?
Self evident, is...

That is certainly the view of “conservatives”today as well as you.

Specifically the government whether it be federal or the states is best to regulate, determine and oversee any and all individuals freedoms, rights and liberty not specifically enumerated in the constitution.

I guess the new conservative view as well as yours is the government is the solution as opposed to an individuals own judgement and self reliance.

Interesting change in conservative philosophy.

 

[regor]

That is certainly the view of “conservatives”today as well as you.

Specifically the government whether it be federal or the states is best to regulate, determine and oversee any and all individuals freedoms, rights and liberty not specifically enumerated in the constitution.

I guess the new conservative view as well as yours is the government is the solution as opposed to an individuals own judgement and self reliance.

Interesting change in conservative philosophy.

Says the clown that hosts politicians who introduced a carbon tax on businesses!!

 

[Spectra18]

Plan C? Never heard of it..

Plan B.. yes, but it only works for 72 hours after ejaculation. And it just alters the menstrual cycle. And hell if you made a "mistake" spend the $45 on "plan B" I'm all for that.. even hand that shit out for free instead of tax payers paying for a "medical procedure" as "birth control"

No more vacs and scalpels.
I’m all seriousness I feel like there’s a difference between the pill and these after birth abortions

 

[was thatguy]

 

[snowhammer]

Regulate, determine, and oversee is not how it works. The Constitution limits the power of gov, not adds power to it. The part that gets difficult for many is acknowledging the fact that men "are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights". Unalienable: “not capable of being taken away or denied” as well as “not transferable to any other.”

 

[t&y]

Regulate, determine, and oversee is not how it works. The Constitution limits the power of gov, not adds power to it. The part that gets difficult for many is acknowledging the fact that men "are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights". Unalienable: “not capable of being taken away or denied” as well as “not transferable to any other.”

Yes, and I will add that far too many people feel there needs to be a rule for everything. In life it is real simple, if it is not specifically prohibited, then it is NOT prohibited. Super simple concept that most can't wrap their head around.

 

[Wedgy]

That is certainly the view of “conservatives”today as well as you.

Specifically the government whether it be federal or the states is best to regulate, determine and oversee any and all individuals freedoms, rights and liberty not specifically enumerated in the constitution.

I guess the new conservative view as well as yours is the government is the solution as opposed to an individuals own judgement and self reliance.

Interesting change in conservative philosophy.

"Objection." "Speculation. Sustained..."

"The," Powers. Not ALL Powers, Sir. WE the People call that Freedom...

You can tell yoreself and others what yore views are, and you can do that all you want. However. Right or wrong, Your view of my view, or the view of others is just an opinion, which you have the freedom to be entitled too. IMO

Re, government, Less is best. Let freedom ring!

Some Folks really should just lay off the Crooked Penis. Stay Strong! "One Day at at Time..."

 

[Sandlord]

That is certainly the view of “conservatives”today as well as you.

Specifically the government whether it be federal or the states is best to regulate, determine and oversee any and all individuals freedoms, rights and liberty not specifically enumerated in the constitution.

I guess the new conservative view as well as yours is the government is the solution as opposed to an individuals own judgement and self reliance.

Interesting change in conservative philosophy.

Good pretzel.
Overturning a law is now considered More Government.

 

[Wedgy]

A fuckup's no longer a fuckup after you fix it...

 

[530RL]

Regulate, determine, and oversee is not how it works. The Constitution limits the power of gov, not adds power to it. The part that gets difficult for many is acknowledging the fact that men "are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights". Unalienable: “not capable of being taken away or denied” as well as “not transferable to any other.”

Exactly as it should be and was once interpreted.

Unfortunately Alito and the other four justices take the exact opposite position. That the government has power over all and the only rights, liberties and expectation for privacy the individual has are those explicitly outlined in text in the Constitution. All other rights are reserved to the government to regulate as they see fit.

An unfortunate interpretation for sure as it greatly expands the ability for the government to further expand their control over the individual.

 

[regor]

$100 says the CONservative has stock in pharma...............................that depends on aborted babies for research.

 

[regor]

Exactly as it should be and was once interpreted.

Unfortunately Alito and the other four justices take the exact opposite position. That the government has power over all and the only rights, liberties and expectation for privacy the individual has are those explicitly outlined in text in the Constitution. All other rights are reserved to the government to regulate as they see fit.

An unfortunate interpretation for sure as it greatly expands the ability for the government to further expand their control over the individual.

Okay, let's do murder and my rights and liberties.

If you're good with murdering babies and keeping the .gov out of it, you support my right to murdering who I see fit, correct? You know, since the Constitution only mentions treason, piracy and counterfeiting.

 

[pronstar]

Anyone who says this is a just an unfeeling mass of cells, and not a human, isn’t being genuine.