Trumped - Supreme Court Edition

[InsideThePark]

Just now, Adam said:

Well that's already law so...

One more judge like him and it may not be.

[Adam]

Trump loves the gays

[Jason]

12 minutes ago, InsideThePark said:

One more judge like him and it may not be.

I think it's done deal for good. Just like Row v. Wade. People and the media will focus on them though just to get people worked up.

 

[InsideThePark]

4 minutes ago, Jason said:

I think it's done deal for good. Just like Row v. Wade. People and the media will focus on them though just to get people worked up.

 

I'm even less sure about Roe v. Wade. I think if it did get overturned, it would be a matter of time before it went back, given that society is getting less religious as time advances... but it would take years or decades.

[red321]

Scalia was a jagoff more interested in blowing shit up at the end, than being consistent. The funny part of "strict constitutionalists" is a strict interpretation of the constitution is what they think it is. So to see someone in his mold is...well...this is the type of judge you would expect Trump to nominate...he even looks the part.

 

[UndertheHalo]

58 minutes ago, InsideThePark said:

I'm even less sure about Roe v. Wade. I think if it did get overturned, it would be a matter of time before it went back, given that society is getting less religious as time advances... but it would take years or decades.

years not decades.  Atheists/Agnostics by far the most rapidly growing part of that demographic.

[Adam]

So atheists and agnostics are pro baby murder?

[UndertheHalo]

5 minutes ago, Adam said:

So atheists and agnostics are pro baby murder?

well, the thing is.  Largely they don't see it as "baby murder".  Don't get me wrong, I'm sure that there are a fair number of them who are "pro life"  but its not gonna be the front and center issue for them that it is for many religious folks.  I mean, I would say that I'm agnostic and I would consider myself pro life.  I'm sure that some pro life people would not consider my views pro life though.  In any case, its not a top 5 issue for me personally and I'm pretty confident like minded people would agree.

Edited February 1, 2017 by UndertheHalo

[Adam]

Easy bud I was just trolling 

[InsideThePark]

10 minutes ago, Adam said:

So atheists and agnostics are pro baby murder?

Totes (if one wants to frame it that way). 

Most of us also think assisted suicide should be an option for the suffering. This judge is against it because of a silly religious belief. It should be up to the sufferer - not what you think God wants.

[Adam]

Judges shouldn't be making laws.

 

its unfortunate that political philosophy even has an impact on decisions. Law is supposed to be objective.

[InsideThePark]

40 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

years not decades.  Atheists/Agnostics by far the most rapidly growing part of that demographic.

Perhaps, but as you know, we're talking about lifetime appointments. Those con judges would die on the bench if they had to lol

[Adam]

Ginsburg is trying to do that

[Adam]

You know what I do with most laws I don't agree with?

 

i break them

[InsideThePark]

2 minutes ago, Adam said:

Ginsburg is trying to do that

Oh lib judges too. Didn't mean to imply that it only cuts one way.

[Adam]

Who the fuck wants to work past 60? I really hate publicly paid people. Sorry glen. 

 

And sorry wife.

[Angels_Make_Me_Drink]

I think the Dems will let this one slide. They're not going to be filibustering this one with the very strong possibility that Trump will be in position to appoint another SCOTUS sometime in the near future. 

[Kevin]

7 hours ago, calscuf said:

Well that's a huge red flag for a guy who secretly wants his face covered in jizz.

"He enjoys the company of men."

[Lou]

1 hour ago, Kevin said:

"He enjoys the company of men."

"Who doesn't!"

[Amazing Larry]

5 hours ago, Angels_Make_Me_Drink said:

I think the Dems will let this one slide. They're not going to be filibustering this one with the very strong possibility that Trump will be in position to appoint another SCOTUS sometime in the near future. 

I concur. The dems won't waste their ammo on this pick. They'll wait for the battle royale when Ginsburg croaks. 

[Jason]

18 minutes ago, Lawrence said:

I concur. The dems won't waste their ammo on this pick. They'll wait for the battle royale when Ginsburg croaks. 

Who knows, it's not like the congressional Dems are acting rationally at this time. 

[Spirit]

7 hours ago, Adam said:

Ginsburg is trying to do that

 

Ginsburg loved her some Scalia. 

 

 

 

[mtangelsfan]

9 hours ago, red321 said:

Scalia was a jagoff more interested in blowing shit up at the end, than being consistent. The funny part of "strict constitutionalists" is a strict interpretation of the constitution is what they think it is. So to see someone in his mold is...well...this is the type of judge you would expect Trump to nominate...he even looks the part.

 

Is he qualified or not?

[mtangelsfan]

Now, while I will totally get why the dems may put up a huge fight or filibuster the crap out of this I still will feel the same way I did when the republicans pulled that crap.

Do your freaking job man.  That is what you were hired for.

[Taylor]

Seeing as Gorsuch is from Denver, I hope his first act is to declare it unconstitutional that there is no In-N-Out in Colorado. The Supreme Court can do that, right?