joe was lowkey happy it got overturned, Kamala (and most people) were horrified
big difference
they elected a socialist
You mean the actual job of the supreme court
Sorry brother you need to just read up I cant keep typing the same things and coming back to type it again. This is why you get joke responses instead of serious ones
1 Like
their job is to do shit that represents the will of the people, not maliciously take away basic rights
No that is distinctly not their job. Their job is outlined in the constitution. They are distinctly not elected officials
love when ppl who identify as some type of libertarian adjacent âgood conservativeâ are defending the govt taking rights AWAY from people
the thing youre usually fear mongering about happening to you
In addition calling something they do malicious betrays a complete lack of understanding of the issues, political landscape of the US, and the law
if you think that decision wasnt malicious youre insane
actual cultist rhetoric over and over
can you tell me what they did is a good thing? why was this important, if it wasnt just to take away rights from women
what else was accomplished??
defend the decision you coward dont just attack my critiques of it
you explain to me how âPaper doesnt explicitly say they canât take your rights away, so its fine if they take your rights awayâ
that doesnt make it fine.
imagine if the supreme court repealed the 2nd ammendmant and I sat here telling you thatâs fine and dont be upset, the constituion allows it
the constitution the holy piece of paper thay is given way too much significance and reverence 360 years later. âbecause constitution says so/doesnt say soâ may as well be a religious argument. youâre telling me if the bible says it, it must be true, only differently. cultist behaviour
it also happens to coincide with the technical/semantic arguments done in bad faith to shut down any opposition that makes everyone else want to tear their eyes our.
the constitution is not infallible
i understand the president didnt make it into existence by himself
law, ammendment , statue
just because I used the wrong jargon doesnt mean I know nothing, the fact you have to do the âyoure canadianâ bit EVERY time shows you cant engage with my points. literally every time you bring this up, just because you think it will influence the other people reading to think less of what Iâm saying. itâs a cowardly tactic.
its not new information so there is no other reason to bring it up
no really you cant go 1 conversation without this essentially pointless adhominem. everyone here knows I am Canadian. Stop side stepping half the shit I say. You make a 4 paragraph post and still dont respond to half of my given points. you just pick and choose the ones you feel best talking about and ignore the rest, and sprinkle in some adhom. every time
you wanna sit here and pretend i know nothing and am not allowed to have an opinion on ABORTION because I wasnât aware of the actual legal levers pulled to make Roe v Wade happen. I get that it was a legal challenge, not a piece of legislation asshole. I literally just said law because itâs quick and I figured youâd know what I meant. Instead youâre nitpicking me about it like jesus christ dude
it was 50 years ago, and I doubt you could tell me exactly how it was passed, who proposed it, how the vote went and in what order. how many times was it challenged in court. how exactly it made its way to the SUPREME court. im on mobile talking off the top of my head, i dont have time to wikicheck everything I say for fear of misspeaking
you trying to latch on to that and form a narrative that I just know nothing about anything is dishonest as fuck
ur not allowed to have an opinion ur a vaccinated Cucknuk
I'm sorry insom it's not fun to talk about these things with you, you don't seem to read or understand when I make serious/high-effort posts to help you and you turn it into an opportunity to grandstand about your current political issue without actually understanding the situation in front of you or the people you're talking to
For example: I am pro-abortion and happily live in one of the most permissive states in the country.
You type here as if you are speaking to some bogeyman of American backwards conservativism but nobody on this website is any of that except when you antagonize them into making posts along those lines in response to yours.
In general the world is simpler and less scary than you make it out to be but when given the opportunity you refuse to see this and instead go on one of your multi-post tirades where you deviate further and further from the reality of the situation. This is the point where I would start writing some nonsense here because the serious part of the interaction was not getting anywhere and not fun but I am instead giving you this one last post out of kindness.
My next post will return to calling you Canadian or saying you only watch CNN - enjoy.
In short I explained how this change is probably for the best, how the malfunction in the US govt is currently in the Legislative and Executive branches (controlled by the DNC) and why the situation is complicated/why the malfunction exists (lack of will to legislate on progressive issues by the supposed progressive party)
You can take that or leave it but I won't keep explaining it over and over in the thread.
well this is probably the first pro abortion post youâve ever made, how am I supposed to know that?
you want someone to win who is fine leaving it up to states, which means theyre fine with some states refusing to give women medical care.
cant be that important to you
Yes -- the justice system exists to adjudicate based on vibes and feels. To kow-tow to the whims of the mob.
