Next, according to Clarence Thomas: same-sex relationships as well as same-sex marriage, AND contraception

I think he's tremendous!

I think Clarence is tremendous!

gotta make sure to have as many babies around as possible so they can be future school mass shooting victims

Shithole country.

Mein pubic hair Fuhrer.

SOMEONE get this man a six pack of coke!

Thomas has basically declared that the Court's gay marriage decisions were wrong and need to be reversed:

[quote]For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any substantive due process decision is “demonstrably erroneous,” Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U. S. ___, ___ (2020) (THOMAS, J., concurring in judgment) (slip op., at 7), we have a duty to “correct the error” established in those precedents, Gamble v. United States, 587 U. S. ___, ___ (2019) (THOMAS, J., concurring)

Any gay man who votes republican is voting against gay rights, and against his own life.

But you know, a lot of gays will still vote republican because they hate themselves so much they'll go along with any action straight people take against them.

Anti-miscegenation laws can't come too soon.

Not to mention that pesky CONSTITUTIONAL 3/5 of a citizen law.

R8, No. They'll vote Republican because of tax laws in their favor.

Blow me, R5.

Then when little Emmaleigh gets knocked-up at age 13 and gets a discreet D&C, put her and her parents in jail for murder. Fair is fair.

The stink of Donald Trump will linger on us forever

[quote]Blow me, [R5].

You'll get 5-10 in the pen for that soon.

He wants Sodomy criminalized.

He conveniently didn't mention interracial marriages. Just goes to show you. They only care about things when it affects them.

Why do a few people get so much power over so many others.

It's time to revolt.

This coon wastes no time!

I hope this fucker gets some kind of painful stage 4 cancer.

[quote]But you know, a lot of gays will still vote republican because they hate themselves so much they'll go along with any action straight people take against them.

No, they will vote republican because they think it will protect their money and give them power.

Here's how Politico evaluates how the conservatives on the court feel about Thomas's opinion concerning reexamining other cases:

[quote] The court’s majority opinion released Friday, written by Justice Samuel Alito, repeatedly insists that the justices’ decision to abandon Roe poses no threat to other precedents.

[quote] “None of the other decisions cited by Roe and Casey involved the critical moral question posed by abortion. They are therefore inapposite. They do not support the right to obtain an abortion, and by the same token, our conclusion that the Constitution does not confer such a right does not undermine them in any way,” Alito wrote. “Our decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right. Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.”

[quote] However, the court’s liberals said that assurance wasn’t worth much, given Thomas’ simultaneous invitation Friday to open up numerous other precedents for review.

[quote] “The first problem with the majority’s account comes from Justice Thomas’s concurrence — which makes clear he is not with the program,” Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan wrote. “At least one Justice is planning to use the ticket of today’s decision again and again and again.”

[quote] Still, no other justice joined Thomas’ concurrence, which largely reiterated his longstated views on the legal theories behind many of those decisions. It seems doubtful that many of Thomas’ conservative colleagues would be eager to revisit issues like contraception and same-sex marriage anytime soon, given the claims in Alito’s opinion that the court’s ruling Friday casts no doubt on those decisions.

[quote] On the other hand, by declining to explicitly repudiate Thomas’ stance, his conservative colleagues gave fodder to the court’s liberal members and left-leaning critics to warn that more overrulings of precedent are on the way.

He and Ginny should get anal cancer.

When he dies he should be buried with a dildo up his ass. He'll have eternal pleasure.

He and Ginni ARE anal cancer

Only straight people can engage in anal sex.

Fuck cancer, they can cure that. I need a quick acting aneurysm.

I fear this is just the beginning.

Of course it is, R28. As for what r22 posted, it's clear the Taliban arm of SCOTUS has no consensus and are not to be trusted with any of the rights of people they hold in contempt. WHY when they have a supermajority would they stop with abortion? They're religious zealots, and they hate gay people. Hate. And they're also shameless liars. They lied about abortion when they had their confirmation hearings, and they're lying now when they say they won't systematically overturn everything else. Anyone who wants to believe otherwise is more gullible than Susan Collins claims to be.

I agree that to understand this, and the urgency with which they’ve taken up the issues, you must see it through the eyes of religious zealotry; Gog & Magog, much of conservative Christianity’s interpretation of Revelation prophesies that the U.S. must be destroyed, along with Russia as part of the Great Tribulation that will herald the Apocalypse. To prevent this, Thomas is of the belief that ridding the nation of the sins of abortion and homosexuality will spare our country of it’s fate, but this is conceit and not scripturally sound.

This summon-a-bitch would vote to bring back slavery. His filthy soul is too evil for hell itself!

TERFs who love BBC are safe. I've made sure of that, gals!

The ending we want to see.

Every gay organization should be fighting to have Thomas removed from the SC. Oh, wait, they don’t care about gays. Just transWOC and sex workers.

Let’s start with Interracial Marriage by overturning Loving vs. Virginia. Then we can lynch Uncle Clarence for have sexual relations with a White woman or farm animal (depending on your opinion of Ginni).

[quote] Every gay organization should be fighting to have Thomas removed from the SC. Oh, wait, they don’t care about gays. Just transWOC and sex workers.

Exactly. HRC and GLAAD aren’t concerned with GAY and LESBIAN rights anymore.

Someone needs to put a fast moving projectile directly into his noggin.

We can prevent any further destruction by Clarence, the Handmaid, and the frat boys by expanding the court. Put 10 more people on there and make them irrelevant.

One justice by himself means nothing.

Yet Thomas supports men marrying bovines??

[quote] Put 10 more people on there and make them irrelevant.

Do you not think the other side will then do the same ad infinitum? We’ll have 101 Supreme Court justices before you know it.

[quote]HRC and GLAAD aren’t concerned with GAY and LESBIAN rights anymore.

Oh, they'll definitely fundraise over Thomas' threat to end Lawrence and Obergefell. The first emails have probably already gone out.

R36 = Log Cabinette who wants to blame trans people for everything they don't like

And I'll give them nothing because they'll just spend it on trans abortion rights.

Clarence wants to get back at us because Lesbian Anita gave him some trouble awhile back.

Is he ready to agree that his vote only counts as three-fifths of one?

He's nuts.

But why isn't interracial marriage on the list?

They've been announcing their intentions for YEARS, and still liberals find new reasons to stay home on election day, vote third-party, or even vote GOP as 40%-45% of ALL female voters do in every election!

I am not tolerating women bitching about "old white men" taking away their autonomy when nearly HALF of them voted for this!

Uncle Clarence is saying it nice and loud for the idiots in the back! It's all going away fuckers because you won't vote the STRAIGHT DEM ticket in every election! You fucking abandoned Hillary in 2016, and that just cannot be fixed by Pussy Posse demonstrations! Even now that is bothering some of you because it's "too binary' and "there's no difference"...Really bitch?

Hillary won the popular vote!

So the black sexual predator married to a white insurrectionist thinks gays are icky?

He really is a cunt.

And he should be booted off the court for failing to recuse himself in the Dump case.

Churchy people don't usually publicly advocate for more homosexuality.

[quote]It's all going away fuckers because you won't vote the STRAIGHT DEM ticket in every election!

I've been doing EXACTLY that since 1972.

That fat, gross bastard…can we have a quiet word with Covid to take him out?

Don't most black men get hypertension and die in their 70s?

Soon, R55? Too late for women, at any rate.

Every time Clarence Thomas' name comes up, Pats comes to mind.

No Joke....Who the hell is going to pay for all these fucking kids?.

Won't they need to block interracial marriage, as well. This pos is married to a white woman.

The problem with democrats is that they are passive. These Supreme bitches and the republicunts need to die in a massive grease fire. Sometimes fire is required, in order to fight fire. True dat.

So this is his revenge for the Wash Post and NYT reporting on his wife's activities on behalf of Trump?

BREAKING.....OHIO just banned abortions....NO exceptions for rape or incest................."The Heartbeat Law prohibits a woman from getting an abortion once a fetal heartbeat is detected, which could be as early as six weeks. The bill does not make any exceptions for pregnancies caused by rape or incest"

Given her own history with her lack of support for gay marriage, pretty bold of Bette Midler to be so flippant.

I'm going to watch for the long term. How many Republicans are going to react when their married offspring are denied the ability to use contraception to plan their families? When their long-term same-sex married friends are forced to split? When their teenage daughters are raped and they are forced to manage a pregnancy their daughters are not mature enough to handle?

And their friends do tell tales...

Oh, honey, when they come for the gays the gays will get guns! Trust.

And guns will protect gays from Supreme Court decisions, R65?

For shame, r20.

Surely you mean.........MONKEYPOX!

This is BS news reporting. Insane

What is, R68?

If they outlaw inter-racial marriage than both Thomas and McConnell will be bachelors again! Too funny😂 I feel little sympathy for them. Women been warned ever since Dump stole the Presidency in 2016 and I guess women didn’t believe the reversal of Roe could ever happen. Especially those droves of white women who voted for Trump. I wouldn’t mind if it strikes them that they can be raped by a big black dick and be forced to carry his baby. Stupid bitches.

r66 No, but it should protect them from the loony protestors that are more likely to target minorities in their blind outrage and seek to harm any and all... enemies and allies alike... while they continue their privileged public tantrums, remaining blissfully unaware of the world around them or the consequences of their actions upon the very people they alleged they want to protect. Always with strings attached.. which is no wonder why so many of their boy toys seek out hookups with men.

r70 because wishing sexual assault upon people is the most feminist thing a person can do.

You type idiot, R70.

Uh-huh. Meanwhile, R71, the SCOTUS will repeal same-sex marriage and sodomy laws. But at least we'll have our guns because guns are always the answer.

r74 You see, tho, you're not actually outraged... you're lashing out, hoping it will make me empathetic to you because hey, maybe I'll realize they're coming for me to. But I don't want you anymore than I want them... we've had too many experiences of your types throwing us under the bus for their own issues. These kind of alliances cannot be made on mutual enemies, they have to start with a pathway towards trust.

Sure, R75. Have another drink, darling.

it's funny how the women attacking gay men right now, claiming they've carried the entire gay movement, that we diseased predatory faggots owe our very existence to them... allegedly need us to fight their battles or even want us to?

you don't have to look very far to the histronic screams of where they tell us we don't have a right to even discuss those issues.

So, it's a lose-lose either way.

But I will be supporting the protest of women to stop having sex until abortion is a national right again.

[quote] For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.

It's hilarious he somehow omits Loving.

incidentally, if you want to attract people to your cause.. then do something attractive.

presenting yourselves as the ugliest versions of yourselves doesn't attract people to your cause, no matter how many people wish your parents had.

Have you thought about a rave, maybe?

"the histronic screams"

Oh, dear, R77.

"I will be supporting the protest of women"

Oh, dear, R77.

Clearly, English isn't your mother tongue.

"incidentally, if you want to attract people to your cause.. then do something attractive." 😂😂

r80 Suppose not. I guess you've got a lot pull with the xenophobes. Except most of the organized xenophobes don't support abortion, do they?

No, I don't know any xenophobes, R82. What does that have to do wth your abysmal English?

Gays will fightback and violence is the only ting Americans appreciate.

You all sound like obedient Christians being fed to the lions. Not me Mary!

the only ting

Oh, dear, R84.

r83 The women most at risk have even worse english than mine. No doubt you'll readily use them as props in your endeavors, but then your messaging ventures too closely to racism and xenophobia more than choice.

r83 So, will you be taking up the ESL brigade with your militancy?

Clarence and Ginny should be sprayed with gasoline and lit on fire.

Me talk pretty one day.

Militancy, R87?

r83 Imagine how many women you could turn into more effective advocates by offering just a few ESL courses.

r90 If you're unwilling to call yourself militant in times of war, then maybe you're too much of a snowflake for the battlefield... there are many other areas where there's a dearth of support and could use the skills of the more sensitive types. Not everyone needs to be or should be a social justice warrior. Perhaps a healer, maybe a dashing rogue?

Sure, Mary, R91. Have another nightcap, why don't you.

Barbra Streisand @BarbraStreisand

The Court uses religious dogma to overturn the constitutional right to abortion. This Court is the American Taliban. 1:13 PM · Jun 24, 2022·Twitter for iPhone

GOP AMERICA = 5 years from now = CHILDREN will allowed to open carry guns to school (to protect themselves). Women will be forced to co-parent with their rapists. All Muslim Religions will be banned. Gay marriage will be illegal and all gays will have to register themselves on the GOP GROOMER DATABASE. Slavery will no longer be taught in ANY school forum. The Democratic Party will be disbanded....No Joke...wait and see..

I don't know what's worse, reality or the fever dreams of late-night Dataloungers.

R96 = You are blind.

R97 you are drunk.

R98 = You are going to hilarious at the Gay Concentration Camps. Practice your "I cannot believe this really happened" speech.

I hate him.

I really don't want to live anymore. 'Take two aspirin and call me in the morning' ain't exactly working anymore.

Would the reliance doctrine protect Obergefell, Griswold and Loving?

Loving v Virginia hasn't been forgotten. At least one Republican Senator has suggested it.

This is why I don't sleep with republicans. And, by the third date, any guy I'm dating knows that I won't stay with anyone who doesn't vote (in other words, they need to get registered if they're not already).

People need to have higher standards than simply not being republican themselves. How on earth can you hit the sheets with ignorant, regressive trash.

Have some self-respect.

The hyperbole and hysteria on this thread and the scores of others on this topic are understandable, being shrieked by those who don't understand what a democracy is. It's not you dictating according to your world view. It's not them dictating according to their world view. You believe laws are passed that you agree with and therefore it's over. No more fighting. You won. But then, so do they. You believe their way leads to authoritarianism, but then so does yours.

That's democracy. They push. You push back. And so it goes. And on and on.

As a bi guy I’ll just go back to dating girls then.

This is why they hate us, R106!

R105

But the united states isn't a democracy. Poorly educated, religious, rural whites receive political representation wildly disproportionate to their raw numbers--due to the electoral college, the senate, and gerrymandering.

This shit is not the majority will of the people. The SC majority came about from undemocratic processes and is in the beginning stages of pursuing an explicitly christofascist authoritarian agenda that's been planned for decades.

You think people are *over*-reacting??? That's... one way to look at it...

This ugly mother fucker needs to drop dead.

I think it is time to bring back slavery

R107 What do you mean?

These justices seem so pleased with themselves for putting out decisions that will make peoples’ lives worse and less happy. How damaged do you have to be to want to pass laws to make women into breeding stock, deny gay people the equal right to marry the person they love, and from the looks of it make illegal certain sex acts between consenting adults and all the rest. Sociopaths who take pride in hurting people. Unfortunately it looks like the United States is broken beyond repair and will get worse from now on.

I don't associate with republicans. If I find out you are one, you're cut off immediately.

I was fucking some dude last year and after pounding his tight hole the third time, I realized we had matched on bumble a few months before and it said, "conservative." Ghosted.

[quote]I think it is time to bring back slavery

He thinks he’s white, so he would probably be OK with that.

[quote] But the united states isn't a democracy.

R108 Yes, it is. Your prejudices notwithstanding. You might want to look up what democracy means. And compare that to countries such as Saudi Arabia or Somalia, which most certainly are NOT democracies. You might also want to consider that pejoratives such as "christofascist authoritarian agenda" are indeed over-reacting.

[quote]R115: You might also want to consider that pejoratives such as "christofascist authoritarian agenda" are indeed over-reacting.

No, it's not.

R115

Pardon me, I should have written, the united states isn't a *pure* democracy. Obviously, it features a (limited) form of democratic representation.

And, yes, thank you, PoisonedDragon in R116. I'm sure as hell going to describe christofascism as what it is--christofascism.

This lowlife pig needs to be destroyed. We all k now his grifter family has been taking bribes for his votes for decades.

[quote] it features a (limited) form of democratic representation.

R117 So it is indeed a democracy. Simple not one that you wish to acknowledge at the moment because it's not going the way you think it should. Then get involved, changed it. THAT'S the beauty of democracy.

R116 You post a definition from Wikipedia which means what exactly? Validation of assertion? Uh, no. Validation of personal prejudice. Think about how long those "fascists" said the EXACT same thing about "liberal fascists".

A "Pro-Life" woman on NBC News this evening----(no joke)-----"This is wonderful because people need the babies"..............................WTF?......WHO needs the babies?? WHO?...I want NAMES!!.....We live in a country where affordable housing is scarce and hunger is in every major city....WHO the FUCK is going to feed all these mouths because you know the GOP isn't expanding ANY foodstamps...

R116 R117 Oh, and by the way, gentlemen, I can find a definition for Nigger in Wikipedia. That doesn't mean it's a valid assertion.

RAPIST rejoice at knowing the women they rape will be forced to carry their Rape Baby to full term. And then be able to CO-Parent with their rapists. It's coming...wait and see....The GOP is going to make sure Daddy has rights!!

Clarence Thomas is Rape culture

R121

I was going to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you're clearly a conservative, arguing in bad faith.

Any excuse to slip a racial slur into the conversation without it seeming overtly racist too... Classic. *chef's kiss*

Trumper Governor in Ohio just signed the "Heartbeat Bill"---in effect BANNING Abortion.....He also supports Ohios version of "Don't Say Gay" and will sign it when it hits his desk...DO NOT move to Ohio. It is a septic tank of Right Wing Nuts...

Most of the country is. Liberals act like this is abnormal in Most of the country

R124 "Clearly a conservative" because I don't subscribe to or rather challenge your way of thinking. More personal bias. To say nothing of your hypocritical assessment of what constitutes a "slur". No surprise.

Not most of the country. Most of the rural areas, and only because they've had a monopoly of talk radio since the 80s. Kansas used to be a liberal beacon. Conservatves in America are revolutionary filth and t traitors without exception

Most states

R99, you'll be right there, too.

R106. So you’re going back to girls. How quaint. We’ll restrict your dick and just play patty cake or you’ll knock her up and pay 18 years of child support. You’re utter stupidity is why they hate YOU.

I've always thought Clarence Thomas was a grifter. That's really all he is. Peter Thiel could probably buy him off. Andit's not because I'm stuck on Anita Hill. She taught at Oral Roberts U., a joke university and the only reason she was in a position to observe Thomas is they thought she was one of them.

And, R132, Anita Hill has been both a visiting scholar and a professor at Brandeis University (very much NOT a joke university) since 1998. Thomas was her supervisor at the Department of Education and the EEOC. That's how she was affiliated with Thomas, and where he sexually harrssed her.

Let's get Clarence Thomas to put mescegenation back on the list of crimes, since people of different races should not marry. He might be sick of that fat fuck Ginni by now.

R134

I could actually see him over-turning the interracial marriage ruling in a manner in which it was allowed on a state-by-state basis. Only if Ginnie supported that though.

He is the Uncle Ruckus of the supreme court.

I wonder if he ever realized that the only reason he is on the court is because of affirmative action? He rarely asks questions during trials, and he seems too dim-witted for that position.

R131 *Your. Love that you’re calling me stupid while making grammatical errors. Also, who are “they” you are referring to? And why do they hate bi guys?

Actual affirmative action didn't get him elevated to the Supreme Court, R136. He was put forward by the first Bush. Whether he was Bush's choice because Thomas was black and it looked good for Bush, probably. And they're not trials the justice sit and weigh in on. Thomas does appear quite dim and almost never speaks, because he has nothing to contribute, so he keeps his mouth shut and then just votes the arch-conservative regardless. As a legal intellect, he's a nonentity.

[quote]Trumper Governor in Ohio just signed the "Heartbeat Bill"

Mike DeWine is certainly not a "Trumper." He's an establishment Republican, and banning abortion has long been a goal of mainstream Republicanism.

Clarence is a 100% str8 fishfucking tunatasting stinkholestuffing heterosexual real man!

Will be interesting to see if nominally gay rights organizations will take this looming threat as a wake-up call and pivot back to fighting for same-sex (oh excuse me, "same-gender") marriage or if they are gonna be stuck with TRANS IN SPORTS! TRANS IN PRISONS! TRANS IN RESTROOMS! TRANS IN LOCKER ROOMS! TRANS IN YOUR KITCHEN! TRAAAAAANS!

All this because some freaks in positions of high power have some really warped views on human sexuality. Religion strikes again.

r109, he is an ugly mother fucker.

I posted this on another thread, and believe that this is an even more appropriate thread to post this on:

All of us here MUST accept that the facts are, these Supreme Court justices say one thing, then turn around and release opinions that are counter to the words they previously spoke.

Do not let yourself fall for any of it.

I grew up in the Evangelical movement these people are a part of. Half of my family on my father’s side are all hardcore Catholics, so I was exposed to that as well.

Evangelicals and Catholics hate, and I emphasize HATE the LGBTQ community with the fire and heat of a thousand suns.

As far as they are concerned, gays and lesbians are 1 million percent responsible for the immorality of America. They blame the gays for EVERYTHING that’s wrong in our country. Catholics aren’t as crass or vulgar as evangelicals, hence do not pound the pulpit with bibles, using incendiary language, so know that this is more of an evangelical message than a Catholic one. But here is the repeated message from hundreds of thousands of pulpits in America, and worldwide, every Sunday:

Devastating earthquakes in California: God is punishing us because of the gays.

Devastating hurricanes: The gays.

Devastating wildfires: The gays.

Crime: The gays.

Poverty: The gays.

Monumental plane crash: The gays.

Inflation:Recession: The gays.

Teen pregnancies: The gays.

You name it, whatever it is, if it’s happening in America or internationally, it’s due to God’s wrath being wielded upon us all, because of the gays.

I challenge any of you to quietly walk into and sit though any church service at any evangelical church in the United States, and listen to what these pastors have to say. I will bet you 1,000 bucks that eventually, something is blamed on the gays before the service is over.

You guys need to get a grip and realize that there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever, that marriage rights will be overturned and SOON. That’s not hyperbole, or even a worthy of a MARY!

It’s what is next on the chopping block.

These people do NOT think like us, have ZERO common sense, and FULL HEARTEDLY BELIEVE THAT THEY OUR CARRYING OUT THE WILL OF GOD.

Forget anything that makes you believe otherwise.

The driver wasn't arrested because cars have more rights than women.

If I open carry, can I shoot drivers who run red lights because I feel threatened?

Now that they have put women in their place, it’s open season on LGBTQs.

God these people are sick. But hey, they say the same about fornicators and gay men and lesbians, so there you go.

R136, and the irony being that they call KBJ an affirmative action hire, meanwhile, she's more qualified than at least 2-3 of her white counterparts.

It's like when they put Sarah Palin out there simply because she was a woman and thought that was enough to get the female vote. No matter that the idiot took six years and five shitty schools to get a communications degree.

They think the left doesn't actually look for substance when they are the ones who allow abject failures to rise to the top - like Trump.

Too many Catholics on the court. THey need to be thinned.

R144 would have us believe the vast majority of the country is made up of Catholics and Evangelicals, and they control everything, which is, of course not true. To understand the threat they pose is not to minimize it by saying no, I don't believe in the apocalyptic scenario R144 is espousing, and I have a very clear sense of where they're headed in dismantling the decisions previously made by SCOTUS. To leap to a doomsday Taliban scenario from that lacks credibility.

You really don't get it, do you? It's not just the SC. Fanatics are taking over local election and school boards. It doesn't happen in one night. These people are both organized and rabid. They will not stop. What happened yesterday isn't merely about "religion," it's about complete control over what you read, what you teach, how you live, who you love.

And it's ironic that the same people trying to claim this is no big deal are the first assholes to go berserk over the most innocuous "woke" crap and treat that as the threat.

A shithole like Alabama will never see eye-to-eye with NY. The more the minority population (who are also leeches with no fucking $) tries to control the overwhelming majority, the more likely this country ends up like the Balkans.

R150, I don’t believe the majority of us are evangelicals or Catholics. But I know that six out of nine Supreme Court justices are. Which is why Roe v. Wade was overturned yesterday.

If you think same sex marriage isn’t next, you are living in a dreamworld.

I really do get it, R151. Just because I don't see Taliban rule, I see that really sticks in your craw. I certainly never said it was "no big deal," asshole. I'm the one who started this thread and stated quite clearly what I thought would be things next to go, based on Thomas's own words.

As for you, R152, what I just said--I already said same-sex marriage AND same-sex relationships AND contraception were next. Fuck's sake--people really hear what they want to hear.

R153, I don’t believe we are headed into an extreme, Taliban rule scenario, but just like you, I do believe same sex marriage is next on the SCOTUS hit list.

That said, I am attempting to give others here who have never set foot in one of these fanatical churches, a perspective on how these people think.

It’s an accurate perspective, btw. It’s one of the main reasons I left the church as soon as I was a legal adult and could no longer be forced to attend these churches. It’s why I became the black sheep of my family. It’s why I eventually evolved and became an atheist. And it’s probably one of the main driving factors as to why I vehemently support LGBTQ rights and advocate so much for these rights.

Some of these Supreme Court justices were raised in these environments, and still are firmly entrenched in them, as our their spouses.

I’m not being a dram queen. These things are happening right before our eyes. Ginni Thomas actively engaged in activities which are considered to be treasonous. Kava ugh’s wife is fully dedicated to a Catholic pro-life movement. Amy Comey-Barrett is part of what I’s legitimately described as a fringe-Catholic cult.

Please explain to me how me pointing these things out, indicates I’m suggesting we’re headed toward Taliban rule?

And btw, everything I’ve pointed out in this post is already unacceptable and bad enough; wouldn’t you agree?

Also, please excuse my typos.

Autocorrect sucks

I love how any cartoon mocking them must include Kav's love of libations.

"If they outlaw inter-racial marriage than both Thomas and McConnell will be bachelors again!"

Overturning Loving won't outlaw gay marriage; it will send it back to the states, so an individual state would have to pass a new law banning interracial marriage. Not sure one would, but I wouldn't say it would never happen, as seemingly anything can happen now.

They’re not going to reverse the same-sex marriage decision because there are so many gays in positions of influence. Every Fortune 500 company have gays in position of leadership or on board memberships. Congressional offices are staffed by many gay men. The SCOTUS reversed the abortion rights decision because women have no power. Men let them run things but women’s influence has only been lent to them.

"Would the reliance doctrine protect Obergefell, Griswold and Loving?" I don't think so.

Any new law passed if these precedents were to be undone could always just be prospective and not retroactive - essentially gays who were married when it was legal and interracial couples that were married when it was legal would be grandfathered in. Of course that creates a whole host of new problems.

R159, I'm not saying it's destined to happen by any means, but you think it's totally out of the realm of possibility just because gays are "in positions of influence"?? There's also a shit ton of straights in positions of influence.

He and his strapping white wife have no kids. So, they never had sex.

Sorry, R152/R153, the Taliban remark was actually meant not for you but some nut who sees the US going the way of the Taliban, and it looks like that was on another thread--at any rate, not intended for you.

I come from a Catholic background myself, but not fanatical by any means. Still, it drove me to think for myself, and soon I was an atheist. I see religion as the number-one poison that's destroying this country. This pretty much proves it.

I think the SCOTUS will not stop until they've overturned all the advances gay people have made, because they're a fanatical majority. The only chance it might not all go away is one vote other than Roberts. Alito has been running off his mouth that, of course, the Roe ruling is not a precedent. I believe none of them at this point.

R159's take might be one of the stupidest I've ever seen. We literally had a closeted gay man (Ken Mehlman) involved in the attempt to ban gay marriage.

Are you really so stupid that you think there aren't countless Republican gays who proactively work to have it overturned?

R148 The only affirmative action hire in the Supreme Court is Clarence Thomas, a woefully unqualified individual (the A.B.A. didn't give him a "well-qualified" endorsement) whose ENTIRE career, from Yale all the way to the SCOTUS, has revolved around suckling from the teat of affirmative action and then decrying anyone who asks for a couple drops.

.,.,

I'm much more concerned about Lawrence than Obergefell, though obviously either being overturned would be awful. Lawrence essentially legalizes gay sex and gay relationships as legal based on privacy. The law overturned a sodomy law aimed at same-sex relationships. There absolutely would be states or jurisdictions that would pass new sodomy laws. And, "sodomy laws" is a broad concept. I've heard people claim that such laws wouldn't be passed because they would sweep in oral and anal by straight people. They wouldn't necessarily have to - they could be more targeted to same-sex relationships, as they were in the past. And, there might even be super conservative jurisdictions where they wouldn't mind sweeping in straight folks so that they can control people's sex lives.

Oklahoma’s abortion law which starts at fertilization sets up an immediate battle over Griswold.

Hi, ElderLez--how so? Btw, I'm a big fan of your posts!

Thanks R169.

The morning after pill, regular birth control pills and IUDs all work by stopping a fertilized embryo from implanting into the side of the uterus rather than stopping fertilization itself.

What happens to same-sex couples with children when Lawrence is repealed? Will children be taken away from their families?

R170, I would imagine that pill is going to be mighty popular now. I wonder how the fascist red states plan on regulating what comes through the mail.

R154, my post at R163 was for you. Sorry.

When Uncle Clarence gets the Emancipation Proclamation overturned, I intend to purchase him and put him to work scrubbing toilets and picking cotton.

The reason Thomas referenced gay marriage, gay sex, and contraception in his opinion is because those cases and Roe are all based on the constitutional right to privacy, which Thomas thinks does not exist because it is not stated explicitly in the Constitution.

Loving was not, it was based on equal protection, which is an explicitly stated Constitutional right.

Some legal scholars have argued the right to privacy cases were a tactical error, and that all of those cases should have been based on equal protection grounds instead due to gender disparity in regulating the gender of sex partners or the denial of medical services in a gendered manner.

Maybe if Roe comes back through a later court, that’s how they’ll do it?

And despite all of his efforts, the kind of people he tries to please will still hate him for being married to a white woman.

Lawrence is far more of a vulnerability than Obergefell.

If Obergefell gets overturned, states would still have to perpetually honor gay marriages they already performed, as well as gay marriages performed in other states. Even pre-Obergefell, if two Texan guys flew to Boston or San Francisco & had a fabulous gay wedding' they were as legally-married back in Texas as a straight guy & his blushing (and probably already-pregnant) Baptist preacher's-daughter bride.

If Lawrence falls, a state like Texas could pass laws declaring open season on gay sex, married or not (and possibly even allow prosecutors to use a gay couple's marriage as a partial admission of guilt, unless they were both Catholic priests who'd publicly taken vows of celibacy).

At the very least, a state like Texas could make it absurdly easy for almost anyone to claim an act of gay sex was 'rape' to save their own ass if they were caught in the act by police (this happens in Iran all the time... two guys get caught & face long prison terms, one changes his story to 'rape' so he gets off & the other guy gets the death penalty).

The above notwithstanding, I think Roe's overturning will tear the Republican Party apart in "Purple" states. With Roe in place, Republicans could say they oppossed abortion almost without consequence as a team-building exercise. Guaranteed, within 12 months, we're going to start seeing REPUBLICANS back laws liberalizing abortion laws, and the RP's right wing is going to go completely nuclear when they do.

[quote] If Obergefell gets overturned, states would still have to perpetually honor gay marriages they already performed, as well as gay marriages performed in other states. Even pre-Obergefell, if two Texan guys flew to Boston or San Francisco & had a fabulous gay wedding' they were as legally-married back in Texas as a straight guy & his blushing (and probably already-pregnant) Baptist preacher's-daughter bride.

Never underestimate the republican's ability to think outside the box and come up with solutions around this.

And never forget that the democrats have done nothing for the past 40 years except watch the republicans come up with ways to work around the laws, to get what they want

The republicans want to turn America into Afghanistan. And the democrats are letting them. One law at a time

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

They are pretty much all affirmative action hires, R165. The proportion of Catholics on the court has no relation to American demographics.

[quote]Every gay organization should be fighting to have Thomas removed from the SC.

[bold]There are no gay organizations left in America[/bold]. How very convenient for conservatives...

"If Obergefell gets overturned, states would still have to perpetually honor gay marriages they already performed, as well as gay marriages performed in other states."

Are you sure about that, R177? Why would they have to?

r182, the Constitution's "full faith & credit" clause (and its applicability to out of state marriage) is about as close to "settled law" as it gets.

Worst-case, our hypothetical Texan couple might have to declare legal residency in another state long enough to get married, which could have substantial tax implications. But once they're married, Texas couldn't refuse them (as US citizens) residency, nor refuse to recognize their marriage (at least, in court... there are countless petty ways Texas could inconvenience & annoy them, like wording on printed forms that might be unenforceable, yet empowering to bigoted bureaucrats).

Still, I doubt most states would bother to go that route, because it would likely be as short-term futile as passing anti abortion laws was 10-25 years ago. They'd get far more "bang per buck" by attacking the legality of gay sex itself.

r178, short of pushing for a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the legality of abortion (itself a dangerous strategy, since up until yesterday Roe v. Wade was settled law, and abortion foes could and would have used both efforts to pass such an amendment and its likely failure to be ratified by 75% of states in a timely manner as legal arguments against abortion), what, exactly, should or could "the Democrats" have done that wouldn't have undermined abortion rights even faster?

The unfortunate fact is, right-wing Christians successfully played "the long game" and eventually won (at least, for a generation or two). All the Democrats can really do at this point is double-down on protecting women's right to birth control (including methods that indirectly result in abortion), and work on a new long game of their own to re-establish the legality of surgical abortions.

Like, if someone writes software to enable a surgical robot to semi-autonomously perform a D&C, pass a federal law prohibiting states from blocking a woman's ability to receive one in the mail & have a telemedicine doctor in another state perform the abortion while a local doctor sedates the patient & performs some allegedly independent simultaneous procedure that's legal (pretending the abortion isn't the whole reason FOR the sedation & other procedure).

Republican politicians are cynical assholes who understand that gay sex and gay marriage are of no threat to society. However, their brainwashed, evangelical base do, making gay rights an effective wedge issue to divert attention from the Republican’s latest number 1 task of destroying public schools.

Religious freedom legislation is already being passed in anticipation of Brown V. Board of Education being overturned. Think of how Republicans weaponized the trans issue to divert attention from their dismantling of of abortion rights; several heartbeat bills were passed in red states back 2020 in anticipation of Roe V. Wade being overturned while the fools on the left were elevating the rights of .1 percent of the population above all else and the fools on the right were wringing their hands over that same .1 percent invading women’s spaces.

[quote]The unfortunate fact is, right-wing Christians successfully played "the long game" and eventually won (at least, for a generation or two).

Most of the credit/blame for the current situation is just luck, not some brilliant "long game" on the part of Republicans. If Hillary had beat Trump, she would have appointed three judges and abortion (and gay rights) would have been safe for a generation.

[quote]Not even birth control is safe.

Big Pharma will have something to say about that. Contraceptives are an $8 BILLION per year industry in the U.S (projected to reach $12 billion in 2030). That includes everything: pills, IUDs, condoms, spermicides, etc. (a graph at link breaks it down by product)

R181 is right. Formerly gay organizations are now captured. They don't give a shit about gays, it's all about trans 24/7.

Soon anyone who opposes Republican policies will an N-word.

[qiuote]Clarence is a 100% str8 fishfucking tunatasting stinkholestuffing heterosexual real man! —Mrs Patrick Campbell

Oh, go crawl back in your tomb you fat corpse.

Hear hear, R190.

[quote]Still, I doubt most states would bother to go that route, because it would likely be as short-term futile as passing anti abortion laws was 10-25 years ago. They'd get far more "bang per buck" by attacking the legality of gay sex itself.

banning gay marriage and then criminalizing homosexuality are the goals of the republicans

So is banning is banning birth control. You would know this if you were paying attention R184

They'll start by banning IUDs, but then they'll move on until they ban all forms of birth control. they've already said this

Another check-mate in the segregational culture / racial / political war they must perpetuate among us. This has nothing to do with women or babies.

R174, not acceptable for you to make that joke unless you are black.

Republican Passive Aggressive Bullshit = "Hours after the United States Supreme Court announced a ruling that overturns the nearly 50-year legal precedent of Roe v. Wade, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine urged Ohioans to "be kind, civil, and respect one another" in debating abortion."------>>THEN he signs a bill BANNING abortion even in cases of rape and incest, making abortion illegal in Ohio....wtf?

In Ohio it's now illegal even in rape and incest cases, a felony, and subject to 10 years in prison and a $100,000 fine.

How soon until Ohio put travel laws in place? Women will have to show negative pregnancy tests before they can leave the state

Hope this asshole turns to dust, soon.

Do NOT move to Ohio.....The Trumper Governor is ready to sign the "Don't Say Gay" bill too...Crime in the larger cities are out of control too..

[quote]In Ohio it's now illegal even in rape and incest cases, a felony, and subject to 10 years in prison and a $100,000 fine.

A few years ago, Republican politicians in states who were drafting Roe V. Wade trigger laws were also devising harsher penalties for “false rape allegations” on order to discourage rape victims from seeking abortion in the event that the new anti-abortion legislation would include rape exclusions. It’s stunning that they’ve gone straight to penalizing rape victims with no compromise whatsoever.

republicans eventually want to legalize rape.

There have been a lot of white republican activist judges that try to do that from the bench. They give very little jail time and some even give no jail time, even to serial rapists who rape underage girls.

More and more rapists are getting visitation/custody rights with the children created from their rape

when the republicans are done, America will be just like Afghanistan

Chase strangio says the Supreme Court will ban access to trans “health care” before they will touch rights of privileged cisfags

r197, you've obviously never been to northeast Ohio. It would be literally, utterly, and completely impossible to secure the Ohio-PA border against "unauthorized crossings". There are areas where the state line literally runs down the middle of a street.

More or less the same situation exists anywhere a state border is a straight line, including most of the Florida-Georgia & Florida-Alabama border.

Revolt.

[quote]Hope this asshole turns to dust, soon.

Oh you just know this asshole will live to be 100. He'll be on the Supreme Court for another 25 years. We need term limits. This lifetime appointment shit is from a time when people were lucky if they lived to be middle aged.

His sex workers need to come forward and spill the beans.

Does he know he's black. Is he blind or just evil.

Adding to r203, between Brookfield (Ohio) & Sharon (PA), the street is literally named "State Line Road"

Uncle Clarence Indeed

What an unhappy, miserable, angry gasbag he seems to be. Unfortunately and frighteningly, though, he's also a very influential and powerful one. 😔

[quote] Oh you just know this asshole will live to be 100.

Years ago in the 1990s, he told his staff he wanted to stay on the court for 43 years until 2034.

[quote] Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas told his law clerks he intended to serve on the highest court of the land to make the lives of liberals "miserable," according to a 1993 report from The New York Times.

[quote] In a conversation with his law clerks two years following his confirmation, The New York Times reported Thomas expressed his desire to serve on the court until the year 2034.

[quote] "The liberals made my life miserable for 43 years," a former clerk remembered Thomas – who was 43 years old when confirmed – saying, according to The New York Times. "And I'm going to make their lives miserable for 43 years."

That was years ago, though. So who knows? He may not want to retire now since he appears to be even more important/influential than Chief Justice Roberts. Some people are calling it the Thomas Court.

Whoops, I was kind of wrong about the Florida state line. It looks "straight" on a US-scale map, but meanders north and south by a few dozen feet, and it looks like Florida, Georgia, and/or Alabama went to great pains to avoid roads along the state line itself. Such roads DO exist, but nearly all of them are either dirt roads or ultra-ultra-rural, with nothing but farms on both sídes. In a few cases I saw, it looks Florida & the adjacent state literally did land-swaps to make sure100% of the road is in one state or the other. In a few cases, there were corridors defined on both sides of the border, but only one actual strip of pavement that's entirely in one state or the other.

If fish now refuse to pork men it will be a FEAST for us sisters , ready to 'assist'!

What would be the argument for overturning Obergefell. This is the most politically activist court in history.

Clarence Thomas is obviously suicidal.

Oh for fuck's sake. Push him into the Potomac and make sure he stays there. Use the Cawthorn cunt to weigh him down even more than Clarence's fat fucking ass does.

I know that it's the trend to treat everything he says as having equal weight across all the justices, but...

This reads more like he wants this, and he is inviting cases for it, but I would be surprised if the other justices went along with it. He has rather clearly identified himself the past ten years or so as the court's most extreme member, even beyond Gorsuch and Alito. The reason he wrote his long commentary on this was because HE wanted to provide his reasoning for overturning everything else and to try to prod the rest of the court along.

Curious if Civil Rights legislation also depends upon the reasoning used here?

R214 the general right to liberty and privacy that was established in Casey, which was just overturned.

We all in danger gurls!!!

Clarence is AANGGERRLYY right now since the 1/6 panel is about to hog tie and string Ginni up. Her white Fanny may be exposed to the public.

GINNI: “Why busing white supremacists to the “peaceful protest” is the mirror equivalent as busing them n*gger children to all- white schools. And DAMMIT! (heaves her great blossom) I’m just as proud!”

Notice the SC is no longer looking for the clerk who released the decision? Those reich-wing fuckers were screaming for someone's head thinking it was someone liberal.

I have no doubt it was a Thomas clerk who did it.

Did anyone watch Lawrence O' Donnell on Friday quoting an interview with Ginny's relatives from 1991? Holy Shit. Basically: "His other qualities were so good, we forgot he was black." Does that fucking Uncle Tom have ANY dignity or self-respect?

Clarence is stating his intent to throw out a bunch more civil rights. I don’t know if that’s intended as a warning or what but it is terrorizing by definition: create and maintain a state of extreme fear or anxiety in someone. I’m anxious as fuck over this. He’s such a piece of garbage.

Black people hate Clarence Thomas. He's the ultimate coon to them.

Coon = A black person who is subservient to whites and constantly seeks their approval.

No, R221, he doesn't, none. He wants to be white more than Michael Jackson did. And like a cat that thinks it's a dog, Uncle Clarence really seems to think he IS white--oh, except, of course, that time when he was accused of sexual harassment by Anita Hill, and he conflated the accusation to include those who thought he was being an "uppity" black. Then being black sure worked in his favor.

I didn't read many posts, so I apologize if I repeat what others have already said. Some thoughts:

1. Dems and Joe should go back to Mancin and Sinema again about more justices on the Supreme Court. Probably wouldn't work, but NOW is when it might; because they are very unhappy about how Gorsucks,etc voted after promising to respect the precedent as settled law. Manchin feels lied to. Maybe he can be motivated to work with the Democrat majority now.

2. Dems should Push hard to pass a universal Plan B health requirement. All private insurers and medical practices, pharmacies, etc should be mandated to provide free Plan B birth control (paid by government); because it will prevent unwanted pregnancies, and thus prevent abortions. SERIOUSLY!

3. Dems in Congress should push laws to protect the legal recognition of Gay marriages at every level (States and localities). Also, they should puslegislation to forcefully protect all of the Rights that Thomas said go.

Just some thoughts.

For anyone who thinks "trans" are why they hate gays. You think she's screaming because of trans?

"OAN Contributor"

R225. Excellent! I see you did your homework and Yes! Biden has issued an EO to make Plan B available by states. But has the Mr. Mealymouth ever brung up this act since? No. I’m guessing he has the raised wet figure technique to figure out his next steps regarding this matter to tell which way the wind is blowing.

He’s just not willing to go to the mattress on much anymore, if anything. He’s a Nostalgic InstitutionalIst Democrat, one who believes that the ship will automatically right itself on its own - if given time, months, years, decades,etc

Just dont expect much from him. The best tactic for pro-abortion groups is to go after the Supremes religious partiality in its R v. W ruling

i just talked to a friend who clerks at the court. He says that without question the 5 conservatives will overturn gay marriage, affirmative action, and most of the other issues that we've been fighting for since we were born.

What's with your "pro-abortion" phrasing, R227?

Knock it off.

R224, Candace Owens pulled the same thing. I forget all of the details, but she accused someone or there was some situation where she made an accusation of racism and the NAACP helped her. She now rails against others being able to defend themselves against discrimination.

These are really just awful people. Like the gay idiots on here and elsewhere who go off about liberals wanting to extend rights to others who are persecuted, so they now side with the GOP thinking gay rights were settled.

Let's all go to Clarence and Ginny's house or go to wherever they're hiding. Go to the Gorsuch's, the BeerKav's, the Handmaid's, the Alito's and the motherfucking Roberts' houses. Make their lives actual HELL. Accost them in restaurants and grocery stores. If they go jogging, run with them and tell them what fucking lowlifes they are, make sure they are unable to insulate themselves from the RAGE of the majority of the American people.

Seriously, it's to make "no justice, no peace" have some real teeth to it.

That'll make the reconsider, R231!

They may not reconsider but they'll be fucking miserable and they deserve that. They also may think longer and harder about fucking over the American people on Marriage Equality, Affirmative Action, etc.

Clarence wants to make US miserable? He doesn't know what misery is yet. Let's educate these fuckers about what it means to seriously piss off We the People. There are six of them and millions of us, I like our odds.

Happy holidays!

[quote]Clarence wants to make US miserable? He doesn't know what misery is yet.

Yeah, it's not like he'll hold a grudge or anything.

Start calling Thomas a HATER. He hates his fellow citizens, he is a disgusting Uncle Tom, he’s what that term is meant for!!!!! What a bitter fucking ASSHOLE. If you’re bitter, GET THE FUCK OUT OF PUBLIC SERVICE MOTHER FUCKER!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Impeach Clarence.

Indict Ginni.

^^^^^. Let’s do this. It will not be pleasant. Think of it as an enema being given to you by a crusty old nurse. It will be very traumatic while it’s happening, but we will feel soooooooo good after it’s all clean again.

[quote] Dems should Push hard to pass a universal Plan B health requirement. All private insurers and medical practices, pharmacies, etc should be mandated to provide free Plan B birth control (paid by government);

This isn't already part of American health care plans? Unbelievable.

Republicans don't want abortion. Republicans don't want contraception. Do they think human beings will just stop having sex?

They think they’re punishing women they see as “sluts”. Never mind all the men who have sex with them who don’t want a baby either. They really live in crazy town. The governors of these red states enacting these draconian laws are all mini-ayatollahs. It’s frightening.

I hope they overplay their hand.

I hope there's enough fight left in democracy as a concept in the U.S that if they overplay their hand it is enough to restore sanity.

[quote]Republicans don't want abortion. Republicans don't want contraception. Do they think human beings will just stop having sex?

That's exactly what they think and want. After Trump reinstated the Mexico City Policy, they defunded not only abortion access in developing countries, but all forms of birth control as well. No wonder then that abortion in those countries shot up by 70% under Trump. But the Vatican still applauded because back-alley abortions don't count.

I keep coming across deplorables on Reddit who say "is it that hard to just not have sex?" as an argument against abortion. I suspect these are highly repressed, sexless (probably also religious) people who have never experienced sex as a perfectly natural part of the human existence. They want the rest of us to suffer just as much as they do.

The sex drive is so powerful, nothing will stop it. People will continue to have sex whenever and wherever they want. It's simple biology.

Oh wait, these nutjobs don't believe in biology either.

[quote]I keep coming across deplorables on Reddit who say "is it that hard to just not have sex?" as an argument against abortion. I suspect these are highly repressed, sexless (probably also religious) people who have never experienced sex as a perfectly natural part of the human existence. They want the rest of us to suffer just as much as they do.

I agree. They're like all the principals and vice principals you had in school.

Glad R32 found a way to make it about trannies!

Can someone explain to me how this benefits the billionaires who fund all of this? I mean do they actually see feudalism as a realistic goal?

My one wish is that when the left has to fight for gay marriage/rights again, they include an exclusionary clause that those rights do not apply to any log cabinette scum Milky Loads and every gay asshole who pulled the "both sides" crap. Yeah, I'm talking to you feckless cunts on here.

R246 they get more sovereign-born children, usually born to poor mothers, which means they have workers for low skill jobs without having to import more from other countries. Although I think for some of them it is a religious thing.

And some of them, of course, want to overturn this stuff because they are addicted to the squeals of pain from liberals and progressives whenever they lose. I think Thomas is one of those people, as well as Gorsuch.

The thing that's bizarre is that Roe was a 7-2 case and the court had a majority of conservatives. They were sane conservatives though, not the extremists we have now.

Republicans back in those days were not the same as today's Republicans. The Reagan years changed everything.

In his concurring opinion Kavanaugh wrote that he saw no reason for reversal of the same sex decision.

R250 Not exactly. He just said overturning Roe doesn't necessarily mean overturning other precedents.

But if he found reasons to overturn Roe, he surely can find reasons to overturn others.

Miss Lindz demurs...

Let's stop pretending that logic is involved in these decisions.

Look, the SC is majority psycho, fed. soc. political activist. Nothing remotely judicious about 6 shits who say fucking guns are not up to the states, but your own body and who you love is up to the states.

R8, that goes for blacks for Trump as well.

Someone needs to challenge loving asap and 3/5 yesterday. Minimum, bring back segregation.

One way out: Pack the courts, quick as you can, overturn the overturned, but noooo, can’t do that ….

State governments should decide whether their citizens have rights over their own bodies and sex lives! But the federal constitution protects private ownership of military-grade weapons—just in case someone should happen to organize a well-regulated militia.

I find it hard to believe Lindsey is so religious. Unless Mar-a-Lago has a chapel whereby Lindsey goes for a religious service each Sunday morning with a hangover, there aren’t options. He sure isn’t at a Southern Baptist Church in South Carolina.

What a coincidence—justices who are against a abortion personally find there’s no constitutional right to it!

What a coincidence—justices who are for everyone to own guns find a right to personal gun ownership in the constitution !

“It’s for state governments to decide!”

The cry of conservatives since slavery because they know state governments are easily bought

Samuel L. Jackson @SamuelLJackson

How’s Uncle Clarence feeling about Overturning Loving v Virginia??!!

What would've been funnier is if Jackson called him "Stephen."

Someone is going to eventually physically attack the US Supreme Court. You can only tighten the screws on a population in what is supposed to be a free democratic society in America. These justices are drunk with power. I could definitely see someone carrying out a 9/11 style attack on the Court as revenge for fucking with the American public just because the court felt it could. The same for Trump Tower & Mar a lago in Palm Beach. Just because Trump put three extremists on the court.

The dark web is an ugly place man!

The Supreme Court needs to change, but it can't and won't happen quickly, because that would endanger its own institutional legitimacy.

Let's hypothetically suppose that Thomas and another conservative magically died within the next 12 months, and were replaced by fire-breathing liberals. Guess what? The new Supreme Court will bend over backwards for at LEAST the next 5 years to avoid going anywhere NEAR revisiting the matter of abortion, even IF those two new Justices were absolutely chomping at the bit to do it.

The Supreme Court simply CAN NOT thrash around and radically reverse itself every few years, ESPECIALLY after something like this. It would make the Court look "political", and destroy almost 250 years of official myth and image-making legend. At best, once the composition of the Court shifts back towards liberals, they can start slowly re-establishing abortion as a right, the same way conservatives nibbled away at it for decades. To do otherwise is politically UNTHINKABLE.

Furthermore, any attempt to "pack" the court risks having Republicans do the exact same thing at the first opportunity.

A sensible compromise might be something like this:

* If no vacancies emerge in the Supreme Court during a President's first two years of office, s/he is automatically entitled to appoint one after the start of his/her third year.

* If a President appoints a Justice under this rule, then a sitting Justice retires/dies/whatever, they wouldn't get to appoint a new one to replace them until the number of Justices fell below 10. This keeps the number from perpetually creeping upwards, without needing to amend the Constitution (damn-near impossible under the most optimistic scenario) to impose term limits on Justices. Even IF a bunch of Presidents appoint 30 year olds to the bench and the number grows towards 20, time will eventually catch up with them & prune the number back down.

Checks & Balances:

* Statistically, the House of Representatives flips during a President's second term, and the opposing party often gains a seat or two in the Senate. Making Presidents wait until Year Three to exercise "their" right to appoint a Justice would temper it by making them do it at a point when the Senate probably isn't in their favor.

* It's impossible to predict whether this would ultimately benefit liberals OR conservatives over the long run, so both parties would probably accept it as "fair", especially if it didn't take effect until after the 2024 election (blunting current passions). The one thing it WOULD tend to do is belatedly align the Court with the ideology of the coalition that wins a Presidential election. If a Democrat wins 2 terms followed by a Republican, the Court would end up with two new liberals and a new conservative. If Republicans win for 3 consecutive elections, they'd appoint at least 3 new conservatives. It passes the "fairness" test by applying to BOTH parties equally.

* In theory, a President could appoint a 30 year old... but history has shown that's a dangerous strategy for Presidents, because the ideological beliefs of the Justices THEMSELVES evolves over time. Arguably, your thirties to early 40s are precisely WHEN you're most likely to have your ideologies "flip". After age 50, they tend to solidify and become unassailable for the rest of your life.

In any case, remember... even IF something happened and a majority of the Court's conservative justices suddenly were out of the picture, the remaining Justices (even the liberal ones) would hit the brakes and tiptoe around abortion for YEARS, just to avoid even the PERCEPTION that the Court was trying to undo last week's ruling. Like it or not, abortion is going to be a state issue for at least a decade or two, and there's really nothing anybody can do about that besides fight for federal laws to mitigate it.

* If there is an even number of Justices the day the President takes his/her Oath of Office, they can exercise their appointment early and do it during the first two years.

[quote] you've obviously never been to northeast Ohio. It would be literally, utterly, and completely impossible to secure the Ohio-PA border against "unauthorized crossings". There are areas where the state line literally runs down the middle of a street.

Trust me, this won't be a problem for the repugs. There will be lots of citizens turning each other in. It will mostly be republican women

[quote]Someone is going to eventually physically attack the US Supreme Court. You can only tighten the screws on a population in what is supposed to be a free democratic society in America. These justices are drunk with power. I could definitely see someone carrying out a 9/11 style attack on the Court as revenge for fucking with the American public just because the court felt it could.

oh well

He’s coming for us homosex-yuhs .

r265 with all due respect this is a totally different world. All bets are off. People want immediate action and your scenarios are not relevant in the modern day. Nobody in the 21st Century is going to wait an entire generation for change to happen.

Don't the the GOP fool you...Since last week they have said it is Democracy to let the states decide, but that implies it is a FAIR Democracy....But the GOP has Gerrymandered the states. Look at Ohio...The MINORITY Right Wing Fringe has taken over because they Gerrymandered. And it is all over the U.S. They want the states to decide because they rigged the maps at the state levels..

Conservatives are NOT pro life.

They are pro birth.

If they were pro life they wouldn't start wars.

If they were pro life they wouldn't have executions.

If they were pro life WE WOULD HAVE UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE!! Mothers could take more time off from work to be with their babies. Childcare workers/daycare would get a living wage.

If they were pro life they would adopt some of those tens of thousands of children that aren't being adopted.

If they were pro life they wouldn't be obsessed with guns and would pass laws to help end gun culture.

If they were pro life they would open mental clinics, hospitals and train more people to get into counseling/healthcare.

If they were pro life they would see the hate and anger spreading from Fox and Breitbart etc. and end that shit!!! They would recreate the fairness doctrine to cover radio, television and cable. No exceptions.

Conservatives only want to control anybody that's not a white male. And only christians.

r269, the fact is... they're going to HAVE to wait, whether they like it or not. If the Court's membership changed radically over the next 2-3 years, and it suddenly turned around and issued a decision that flat-out contradicted Dobbs & agreed with Roe, it would institutionally damage the Supreme Court's political legitimacy, and its very ability to review and negate unconstitutional laws.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it explicitly say, "The Supreme Court has the authority to review laws and negate those found to be unconstitutional". The Supreme Court ITSELF established that precedent in Marbury v. Madison, and the Executive & Legislative branches went along with it because the Supreme Court made a compelling case and convinced the other 2 branches it was reasonable. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court is ALWAYS to some extent walking on eggshells, aware that its most potent power is ironically its least objectively-defensible on the very same grounds used to justify the exercise of that power.

Roe v. Wade wasn't overturned in a day, a year, or even a generation. Conservatives have been picking and chipping away at it for decades, slowly nudging the goalposts until they finally went in for the deathblow.

Mark my words, within 2-3 years, the same conservatives who are scurrying NOW to restrict abortion will be discreetly loosening the reins once the actual impact of those restrictions becomes apparent, while doing their best to convince the far right that they aren't doing it. Bible-bangers in some states will try to restrict Plan B and abortifacient drugs, women in those states will buy them online, the states will try to prosecute it... and eventually, get smacked down by the federal government (probably, by indirect means involving the FDA, US Mail, and court cases involving the Interstate Commerce Clause). Or a future thriving market for abortion clinics on Indian reservations. Or both.

Laws banning surgical abortions after week 15 will get chipped away when a judge issues an emergency injunction to save the life of a woman about to die from an ectopic pregnancy, and get further chipped away by cases involving raped 12-14 year olds.

Meanwhile, companies that moved to Texas because of its perceived "business-friendly climate" will increasingly have a hell of a time trying to convince women to move there for a job, and will have to bend over backwards with company-paid time off and employer-paid transportation to states where abortions are less restricted, until the same people who moved to Texas from California start to make a difference in Texas elections & Texas' own laws start to get changed.

Roe vs Wade was actually overturned in a few short years because Trump got to seat three supreme court justices while the Republicans had total control of Congress, or close to it. That is why the court balance shifted so dramatically, so suddenly. The aggressive legislation banning all abortions, allowing others to sue, etc., all came about from this specific court once Republicans knew they had a lock on it.

Even the leaking of the decision was done by a Republican, specifically to blunt the impact of the actual verdict. That's why it was released early.

[quote]One way out: Pack the courts, quick as you can, overturn the overturned, but noooo, can’t do that ….

Cant do that without a majority, Dems don't have that. 2 votes short. Not enough people came out to put the Dems over the top during the last election. Many sat it out. Elections have consequences.

The million-dollar question is, if Clarence Thomas died & Biden got to replace him with someone more... er... reasonable... would Roberts go back to holding his nose & unenthusiastically siding with the liberals for the sake of keeping up appearances, or would he vote with conservatives to keep up their 5-4 majority?

Personally, I think that if it came to it, he'd side with the liberals to uphold precedent for things like birth control & gay marriage... but will fight to his grave to keep the Court as far away from future abortion-related cases as he can, just to avoid even the APPEARANCE of either "giving in" or "politicization".

R275, it's too close to the election!

I'ts too late for Roberts R275. The damage has been done. The court was already circling the drain with the American public at about 25% approval rating. Now with the latest antics of Thomas's wife and the overturn of 50 years of established law, you might as well flush that turd down the toilet. No one respects the court now. Reputation is permanently destroyed for generations to come. Every young person born after 1970's who just got their rights taken away will not forget this. It will be talked about like Watergate was for Boomers.

Republicans ruin absolutely everything.

The conservatives have pushed "leave it up to the states" for policies they don't like and "there's a constitutional right" for policies they like.

Leave it up to the states = we can gerrymander, voter suppress, and bribe to the outcome we want.

Constitutional right = we can force the entire country to do what we want

[quote] Roe v. Wade wasn't overturned in a day, a year, or even a generation. Conservatives have been picking and chipping away at it for decades, slowly nudging the goalposts until they finally went in for the deathblow.

GOP picked at it because it didn't have a majority on SCOTUS until now. It had no choice by to use state legislature to put up blockades to the procedure.

Reducing abortion isn't the main goal.

The main goal is to force birth so there's a bigger white population. That GOP congress woman who said this was a great ruling for "white life," is their goal.

ACA, with its access to birth control, brought abortions to records lows, but the GOP continues to be against it. Recent anti-abortion laws actually led to an increase in abortion.

[quote] It's all going away fuckers because you won't vote the STRAIGHT DEM ticket in every election!

I have been…so have a lot of people posting here. What’s stopping the Democrats from doing the right thing and standing up to the Republicans? Because they don’t want to rock the boat. They are financed by the same corporate overlords lining the Republican’s coffers. Even Obama, who I voted for TWICE. He made campaign promises to protect a woman’s right to choose in 2007-08. A couple of years later, he was caught on camera at a press conference saying that it was no longer a priority! When we vote Democrat, what exactly are we voting for anymore?

Be careful. There are clear right-wing operatives on this forum trying to demotivate Democratic voters.

[Quote] What’s stopping the Democrats from doing the right thing and standing up to the Republicans?

How exactly?

[Quote] Even Obama, who I voted for TWICE. He made campaign promises to protect a woman’s right to choose in 2007-08.

He was dealing with the Great Recession and then healthcare. He ended DADT and DOMA. There were tons of other issues and, at the time, Roe seemed secure, so it fell to the bottom of the list.

r282, have you been watching the House Panel proceedings?

I remember when I was a kid in the 1970s that the SC was unpopular and feared. That helped bring the ERA down because opponents pointed out that the rouge Burger Court (and previously the Warren Court) was capable of twisting anything in the Constitution to create rights out of nowhere. People didn’t want to give the court another amendment to work with. The court survived that period and will this one as well.

[quote]R257: One way out: Pack the courts, quick as you can, overturn the overturned, but noooo, can’t do that ….

As a matter of fact, we can't.

[quote]R265: Let's hypothetically suppose that Thomas and another conservative magically died within the next 12 months, and were replaced by fire-breathing liberals.

That would be a hell of a hypothetical, because Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans still have the way blocked; the Biden Administration couldn't appoint a Supreme Court justice if our lives depended on it, and that is not through any fault of Biden's.

There's only one way forward, and that is to win more seats in the House and the Senate. It will be tougher this time than ever before, though, because while everyone has been looking the other way, state Republicans have been passing voter suppression measures and tampering with election laws to enable themselves to overthrow results they don't like.

[quote]In his concurring opinion Kavanaugh wrote that he saw no reason for reversal of the same sex decision.

I believe him!

Slightly off topic, but I get the sense that the RWNJs haven’t quite grasped the implications of overturning Roe v Wade in the era of ancestry.com and 23andme, especially as it intersects with adultery, rape and incest. This idea that all the bad outcomes fall on the woman because you can never really know for sure who the father is, doesn’t really apply anymore.

[quote] In his concurring opinion Kavanaugh wrote that he saw no reason for reversal of the same sex decision.

And watch that conveniently be forgotten when a gay marriage case is brought to this Supreme Court

"The main goal is to force birth so there's a bigger white population.'

Except, R281, that overturning Roe will disprortionately affect women of color more than white women, so there will be more babies of color being born, it would seem--and poor white women forced to give birth. But this won't impact middle-class or wealthy white women nearly as much, as they will always find a way to get abortions.

People who claim "the main goal is more white people" are wrong.

How’d this Susan Collins idiot ever get the reputation of being a Republican who might be persuaded to vote with the Dems? She’s a concern troll.

Believe it or not, the overturning of Roe will probably end Abortion as a "Republican" wedge issue after the passions cool in the next election, and make it HARDER for the evangelical right to go after things like gay marriage & sodomy laws.

For 50 years, the far right has campaigned on "overturning Roe v. Wade" by screaming about murdered babies, then used it to get their foot in the door and pass laws that go FAR beyond what they'd have ever dared to openly campaign on (at least, in a halfway-respectable state not run by neonazis and KKK members.

The bad news for them is... they won. Their states will pass laws restricting abortion to the limits of their local voter sensibilities, then as far as those local voters are concerned... the problem is solved, and the issue is moot.

Oh, some of them will keep howling about godless Californians promoting partial-birth abortions by women who allegedly changed their mind about having a kid at the last minute, but nothing short of a constitutional amendment could actually ban abortions in those states, too... and such an amendment has exactly zero chance of passing, for the same reason an amendment guaranteeing abortion rights would fail: it's damn-near impossible to muster the required supermatorities for almost ANY amendment.

The point is... those Republicans have just lost their big selling point. It's easy to whip up outrage over alleged cut-up baby parts in dumpsters. Everything past that is another matter, and wouldn't necessarily fan the same flames of passion among Karen O' Culdesac and Joe Sixpaxski.

I know Qui Tam law is not a topic many people care interested in, but it’s bizarre that the Supreme Court is taking this case given the settled precedent involved.

But if they are actually thinking of overturning the precedent my understanding is will cause a lot of trouble with unchecked frivolous lawsuits against awardees of government funds.

And I don’t understand why they’d take it unless some of them do want to overturn the precedent.

Dirty bird Barrett

KNOWLEDGE IS POWER.

More on this bitch!

And the radical religious right wing wonder why people come to not trust religion and fake proselytizing!

The bitch is only 50 and could be on the court another 30+ years.

Shouldn’t this bitch have recused herself from the abortion ruling?

Burn in hell dirty bird Barrett!

Every one of them who belongs to a church that teaches abortion is bad should have recused themselves. Same goes with anything related to homosexuality.

They are all fake religious freaks anyway. The word Abortion is not even in the Bible.

[Quote] People who claim "the main goal is more white people" are wrong.

No, they’re absolutely right. Evangelicals aren’t anti-abortion in the hopes that it brings America more brown babies. Sure, right now, white women will have more opportunities to get abortions, but the ultimate goal is to ban it everywhere in the US. Then we’ll become that paradise of white people evangelicals have always hoped for.

The word Abortion is not in the US Constitution.

R299 "people of praise" doesn't sound like a cult. It seems it is a part of the pentecostal faith since the word charismatic was also used.

Yes. They are a Pentecostal cult! That sound about right, Troll?

The noun AR-15 is also not in the Constitution.

[quote]R307: "people of praise" doesn't sound like a cult. It seems it is a part of the pentecostal faith since the word charismatic was also used.

Bitch needs a keratin treatment

She's the Karen of the Court.

Nutty as all fuck, righteous about her beliefs, with vindictive determination.

Generic Ballot (National) Rep 45% Dem 40% 6/25-6/28 by YouGov (B+) 776 LV

r313 found the only poll that favors the Repugs right now.

But it’s a good, reputable pollster

2018 vs 2022 Primary Turnout:

(+- vs 2018 Midterm Elections)

NY - GOP: +102%, Dem +81%

IL - GOP: +15%, Dem: -18%

OK - GOP: -29%, Dem: -58%

CO - GOP: +19%, Dem: -29%

25 STATES TURNOUT Republicans: +26% Democrats: -4%

✅ Net Difference: GOP +30%

Data from @WinWithJMC

According to a CBS News/YouGov poll released Sunday, 50% of Democrats said that they are more likely to vote in the midterm elections as a result of the Supreme Court overturning Roe, compared to just 20% of Republicans.

A survey from NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist suggests that among registered voters, 78% of Democrats said the Supreme Court’s ruling makes them more likely to vote in November, a full 24 points higher than Republicans (54%). The poll also gives Democrats a 48-41 advantage in which party they want to see control Congress, compared to 47-44 in favor of Republicans in April of this year.

"With the midterm elections less than five months away, the decision by SCOTUS has sent shockwaves through the electorate," Lee Miringoff, Director of the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion, wrote in an analysis of the survey results. "Men are +12 points and women are +18 points more likely to support congressional candidates who pledge to codify the protections of Roe v. Wade.”

The survey said that 51% of voters would back a candidate that would vote to codify the protections previously established in Roe, including 47% of independents, compared to just 36% who responded they would definitively vote against a candidate who took such a stance.

Both polls suggest that a majority of Americans oppose the Supreme Court’s ruling — the NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist survey showed 56% opposed to the ruling, and 59% in the CBS News/YouGov poll disapproving of the high court overturning Roe.

Among women, that figure is even higher: Fifty-nine percent in the NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll oppose the court overturning Roe, and 67% in the CBS News/YouGov poll.

Despite this, one expert told Spectrum News that he does not think the decision will “substantially change the contours of the midterm election.”

“I do think that the conventional wisdom is right that this will serve to help the Democratic Party mobilize some of its voters and get people out to the polls at a time when they might not otherwise,” Ziad Munson, a sociologist at Lehigh University and author of “Abortion Politics,” said in an interview Spectrum News. “And so in that case, it will make Democrats more competitive in some races, but I don't think that the overall complexion of the election is likely to change.”

“There's decades of research on the abortion issue that shows that it is seldom the sort of major issue that people use when they actually go to the polls,” Munson added. “Abortion is really important for its sort of symbolic value to many voters. It's a sort of flag that people use to say what side of the partisan divide they're on, and politicians wave that flag quite a bit.”

“But when you actually ask voters, what are the top issues that they voted on and so forth, abortion is seldom mentioned,” he continued. “I think it's going to be more likely to be mentioned in this cycle, but it's still not going to be the top issue in most races.”

The NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist survey found that 56% of Americans are concerned that the court could revisit and potentially overturn the rights to contraception, same-sex marriage or same-sex relationships.

“Digging deeper, 63% of women, including 74% of suburban women, are also concerned that the Court’s decision is a harbinger of things to come,” Miringoff added.

In a concurring opinion to last week’s abortion ruling, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the court should “reconsider” the rulings which guaranteed those rights.

"In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold [contraception], Lawrence [same-sex relationships], and Obergefell [same-sex marriage],” Thomas wrote. “Because any substantive due process decision is ‘demonstrably erroneous’ … we have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents.”

Of that figure, 89% of Democrats, 55% of independents and 18% of Republicans said they were either “very concerned” or “concerned” that the overturning of Roe could lead to those cases being reconsidered.

R317, post your source.

We vote Dem because have no choice. I loathe the site of both Pelosi and Schumer at this point. Feckless leadership.

sight*

Ok r318

As expected, the poll results changed after the immediate emotional reaction. The Economist/YouGov poll, taken Saturday through Tuesday, has the Republicans back up by 5, 45-40. Inflation is the number 1 issue, with 71% indicating it was Very Important.

I think the solution to the current SCOTUS decision is to leave all unwanted babies on their doorsteps.

If they’re so Pro-Life, show it!

[quote] I think the solution to the current SCOTUS decision is to leave all unwanted babies on their doorsteps.

My city has safe haven baby boxes for mothers to get rid of an unwanted baby. It’s not theoretical, they are real and have been used by women who didn’t want to have an abortion.

We now have 3 Congressional Generics since Roe ended:

NPR/Marist 48 Dem 41 R +7

Morning Consult 45 Dem 42 R +3

Yahoo/YouGov 45 Dem 38 R +7

"Pro-choice Dem" vs "Pro-life R" is 47-32.

see offsite link on twitter.com Fuck you r316

"but nothing short of a constitutional amendment could actually ban abortions in those states, too... and such an amendment has exactly zero chance of passing, for the same reason an amendment guaranteeing abortion rights would fail: it's damn-near impossible to muster the required supermatorities for almost ANY amendment."

R295, if the Republicans recapture a majority in Congress, and the next president is a Republican, or the next time a Republican is president with a majority in Congress, the GOP will pass a federal law banning abortion nationwide. They won't need a Constitutional amendment.

R326, it’s now expected that a federal law overruling states (for or against abortion) would not be constitutional. The legal basis for a federal law would have been Roe v. Wade, but that’s not available to use anymore.

A federal law is not the way to go unless you want another insurrection on your hands. We'll just have to wait out this conservative bench and do our best to help the poor women in anti-choice states. Same for Obergefell and Lawrence and everything else that's about to fall or get whittled down.

I'd like to believe that, R327, but what do you mean when you say "it’s now expected that a federal law overruling states (for or against abortion) would not be constitutional." Expected by whom? I never heard this. I hope it's true, but I have not heard that.

[quote]One way out: Pack the courts, quick as you can, overturn the overturned, but noooo, can’t do that ….

"JUST ADD WATER! RRRRAAAAWWWWRRR!"

Please, oh wise one, by what mechanism does one "pack the courts"? I think you just mean one court, the Supreme Court, because historically speaking President Biden HAS PACKED THE COURTS and gotten more judges approved by the Senate in this amount of time than any other President before him!

Tell us precisely how these judges will be allowed or approved by the Senate? You might research how FDR tried this with super majorities in both the House and Senate, failed, and then got shellacked in the next midterm election and the Dems lost a ton of seats. This kind of tampering is extremely unpopular with the electorate in general.

This flies in the face of what R327 claims. The law professor interviewed in this New Yorker piece says very clearly, that, yes, Congress can pass a federal law banning abortions nationwide. I also read in The New York Times that it's a possibility, because the Times article said that would leave Canada as the nearest place available for American women to get abortions.

[quote]Be careful. There are clear right-wing operatives on this forum trying to demotivate Democratic voters.

AOC is on Datalounge!?

[Quote] Inflation is the number 1 issue, with 71% indicating it was Very Important.

Yes, but how is electing Republicans going to fix it, exactly?

Crickets

R332, try not to be one yourself.

I’m pissed that gas is $5 so I’m going to turn the country over to a bunch of Nazis.

[quote]My city has safe haven baby boxes for mothers to get rid of an unwanted baby.

Yeah, most cities call that a dumpster. Happens more than people realize. Get ready for a lot of news stories in the near future. The thing is with these safe haven drop offs like the fire station or ER, the woman can never be sure if it's just a way of finding out who she is or tracking her down later.

Thomas is one nasty old fucker. According to Hilary Clinton he was that way in law school. I wonder what happened to him to so early in life to make his life an act of revenge?

Small penis for a black guy. He's pissed.

R308 so his progressivism and conservatism both are cults.

R335 and they don’t realize that voting Republican won’t solve the issue…and possibly make it worse!

Why would anyone imagine Americans could get abortions in Canada? It's a public health care system. There is no way to buy your way in. You want an abortion, looks like Mexico or Europe. Which is fine if you're a middle class woman.

Yes, you can buy your way in. In fact, many Americans who live closer to Canadian healthcare (like in Alaska) use it and pay.

Sarah Palin admitted that's what her family did.

Meanwhile, KBJ is currently being sworn in. It's so bittersweet. I'm sorry, but I'm going to be another person who blames RBG for her ego.

And let's not forget that Alito would not be on the court if Gore was rightfully made president.

Clarence Thomas wrote in a dissenting opinion today the covid vaccines are derived from the cells of "aborted children."

I'm going to call him the "Newsmax Justice" from now on.

In MI GOP gov debate tonight, q about whether SCOTUS should roll back same-sex marriage, gay sex protections, etc.

Garret Soldano: 'They need to revisit marriage."

Ryan Kelley: "The Supreme Court needs to start rolling back a lot of those things & give the power back to states"

But when did they blame trans for their beliefs, R346? I mean according the "both sides" idiots on DL and beyond, these fanatics are fine with guys fucking and marrying, it's the trans thing that turns them off. 🙄

New twist, this is going to end in tears. Some women have been starting to freak out about their future unborn children. Women who have had their eggs frozen for a later date when Mr. Right comes along are asking professional providers if they should move them to more Blue states for storage. Apparently when the collect the eggs, they collect quite a few. When the time comes to fertilize them they discard the ones they no longer need or want in the future. This in the eyes of some religious folk is murder. AKA abortion. All they need is one case to go to court over this and these woman could find themselves in same boat as those having illegal abortions. Or they may be forced to give them up to total strangers weather they want to or not.

Fuck this man! Bl**k self-loathing Uncle Tom. Reminds me of Django Unchained. The House Negro Butler played by Samuel L. Jackson. He must have channeled Thomas in his portrayal. I can’t imagine him having sex with that ugly, fat white woman. Gross!

R349 I hope you are black stating your comment while using the word "negro" to describe thomas. If you are white you have crossed the line and you are just as racist as the white rightwingers. Check yourself.

I’m pretty sure r349 was more racist against whites than blacks.

So a black guy can use the word negro, but a white guy cannot? I am so tired of this racist concept. So a white guy can use the word cracker, oh but wait, so can everyone else. Got it.

Sorry, but either all words should be spoken by everyone without being labeled racist or specific words should not be spoken by anyone including the group its about.

Bullshit, r352. Back in the day if a lesbian referred to me as a dyke was was no harm no foul, but if a straight person did it was understood to be a put down.

R352, so you're saying if you're called a "homo" by a straight person, you're fine with it?

No mention a Loving

You can hear straight people “homo,” “fag,” “gay,” in countless tv shows, movies and middle schools. Let a white person try saying the N word. I won’t even dare type it on an anonymous message board. DOUBLE STANDARD! The only groups that are okay to make fun of are gays and fat people (I say this is a thin person).

R356, I've never seen a more weak attempt to defend being a scumbag. Aside from the fact that you've never been to every middle school in the world, you're using a TV show and movies as your defense?

A white person using racial slurs is wrong. You try to use liberalism as justification, but it fails

[quote] weather they want to or not.

Oh, DEAR…

And you must be under the whether…

[quote] so you're saying if you're called a "homo" by a straight person, you're fine with it?

Am I being forced to service him when he says it, and is he good looking?

[R345]

"Clarence Thomas wrote in a dissenting opinion today the Covid vaccines are derived from the cells of "aborted children." I'm going to call him the "Newsmax Justice" from now on."

WTF WTF WTF!!!! This FUCKING MORON. Is he a flat earther also? Does he think Democrats eat babies? I know he thinks IQ45 really won the election in 2020. Obviously knows nothing about SCIENCE!!!! We are so fucked with this total hateful moron leading the Supremes.

Yes decades ago(and now) cells/blood were taken from UMBILICAL CORDS of LIVE babies' born for research. Everything from vaccines to cures for cancer. Umbilical cord blood contains blood-forming stem cells, which can renew themselves and differentiate into other types of cells. Stem cells are used in transplants for patients with cancers like leukemia and lymphoma. Cord Blood can be used to treat over 80 other life- threatening diseases and for vaccines.

R361, it's not just him. Legal scholars were going after Alito's idiotic summation which had holes in it. They are not basing their decisions on anything but their own, psychotic beliefs

True Dat.

[quote] I can’t imagine him having sex with that ugly, fat white woman.

I can. They are both grotesque.

Do we really have any proof they've ever had sex?

Clarence Thomas is fucking evil and if anyone will burn in hell it's him. Also just think about all the unwanted babies who will turn into serial killers/mass shooters later. It will be like the 1970s all over again.

Good lord, R364. I hope Whitmer is getting advice from Jennifer "beat DeVos like a drum" Granholm.

What a strange reason to support abortion: to have fewer serial killers and mass shooters. I guess that makes sense. Fran Lebowitz wanted to do away with all the unborn lawyers. I would advocate fort aborting unborn GOP politicians. Go, blue states!

[quote]What a strange reason to support abortion: to have fewer serial killers and mass shooters.

Roe v Wade legalized abortion nationwide in 1973. In the early 1990s crime rates decreased dramatically.

We still have had plenty of mass shootings since then, though, R370, And lawyers. And GOP politicians.

r371 crime rates fell. They were not as high as the 70s and 80s.

R364, the GOP has thrown down the gauntlet that gay marriage is next.

Ahh, remember when the DL trolls tried to convince us that the GOP just loves gays and gay marriage isn’t threatened; that it’s trans they really want to go after, and blah blah blah.

It’s gay they’re going after and they say it out loud

[quote] Ahh, remember when the DL trolls tried to convince us that the GOP just loves gays and gay marriage isn’t threatened; that it’s trans they really want to go after, and blah blah blah

Over on the "Florida Band [sic] Rainbow Clothing" thread they're still doing it even as I type!

Thomas is like trump...vindictive, with a huge grudge....and wants to take it out on everyone, especially liberals He's a very bitter and angry, self loathing black man. He may be worse than trump. He gleefully wants to tear everything down and hurt people. He's not rational. He has a lot of help now, with the other four conservs...and Roberts.

At least Republican faggots will have to take a long, hard look in the mirror now, now that we're on the verge on losing all of our rights.

R376, why do you use homophobic slurs?

Log Cabinettes don't deserve any respect, R377. Calling them what their fellow Repuglicans no doubt call them seems appropriate. Get over it.

Same with the nonsense that was visited upon R349, who was merely saying Jackson was playing the archetype of an Uncle Tom negro in that movie. And R350, if anyone told me to "check" myself, I'd tell them to go fuck themselves.

[quote][R376], why do you use homophobic slurs?

In the case of log cabinettes, it's obviously what turns them on. It gets them hard. Take their rights away to make them really cum. Milky Loads liked the days of fucking in dark alleys.

To every Gay Republican living in FL: FUCK YOU. Karma, assholes.

Senator Liz Cheney, R1?

Obviously Clarence Thoms is a closeted homosexual whose boyfriend abandoned him.

And ACB is a closeted lesbian with a male-oriented brain. She’s probably a misogynist as well.

Does anybody remember the film "The Firm"?

You know what I mean...

We’re being fucked by an elephant!

R379. I will still tell you "cracka" you can't use that word. You will get your ass kicked and we black people did not give you the license to use that word.

FUCK OFF NIG*ER! Guess I can use that word since Negro upsets you so much!

R388 you shouldn't be talking dusty ass cracka.

Stop it R388 and R389. Just STFU.

I’m not even a “cracka” you idiot!

Oh my

R391 neither am I a nigger. dumbass we black people know you smell like wet bags and dog piss.

You are way, way off. Next time you need a good dr. or surgeon or professor, you’ll be looking at me.

Professor of crackadom. Surgeon who can't figure out why some white people smell like wet bags.

R390, they're hoping to get the thread deleted. It's deliberate.

Call for impeachment

Fuck this ignorant idiot.

This compromised man sitting on the highest court of the land is an embarrassment.

Venal, traitorous. There hasn't been a worse justice since Roger Taney who was like Thomas in so many ways.

He's a hideous man in every way.

He enjoys looking unpleasant—he enjoys giving pain to others even through his mere appearance.

Could we also go after Alito?

[quote]We’re being fucked by an elephant!

Pics, please!

TIA!