***Official Political Discussion Thread***

11,134
2,771
Joined
Dec 30, 2006
I understood what Roe decision said, I understand how the SCOTUS can undermine the regulatory conditions and protections that it created.

I am just not some pathetic ******* that claimed to support reproductive rights, but also supports a racist piece of **** like Trump and the GOP appointment judges to undermine them

You whine and complain about people forming "narratives" but here you go trying to form one about me

Unprincipled, cry baby pathetic troll as usual

So you understand Roe but said this?


They could die, or have complications that make her unable to give birth again.

But yeah, let us force them to give birth

This must be how I sound discussing economics :smh:
 

RustyShackleford

Supporter
51,993
144,350
Joined
Jul 20, 2009
Everyone, please don't listen to this shameful and shameless troll.

The court can keep Roe v. Wade technically alive, but completely gutted at the same time



It is kinda like when Mitch McConnell said that he wanted to repeal the ACA even though Kentuck was one of the biggest beneficiaries of the Medicaid expansion

He smugly joked, if people liked the Kentucky Marketplace website, they can keep it, he won't stop them.

But the laws protecting people will be erased
 

RustyShackleford

Supporter
51,993
144,350
Joined
Jul 20, 2009
So you understand Roe but said this?




This must be how I sound discussing economics:smh:
Here is a dude with a JD from Duke, who worked as a clerk for a US Court of Appeals judge,, and one of the leading analysts on the Court, explaining why you are full of **** with the talking point you are using...


When you are peddling ****ery about economics, feel free to post a long-form explanation from a highly qualified economic analyst to back up your point

I welcome any change of pace from your usual nonsense
 
Last edited:
11,134
2,771
Joined
Dec 30, 2006
Here is a dude with an JD from Duke, who worked as a clerk for a US Court of Appeals judge,, and one of the leading analysts on the Court, explaining why you are full of ****...


When you are peddling ****ery about economics, feel free to post a long-form explanation from a highly qualified economic analyst to back up your point

I welcome any change of pace from your usual nonsense

Did you read the article? Where did he suggest that the Court will force women to give birth that have medical conditions or who are victims or rape/incest?

At least he had well-reasoned guesses instead randomly making up possibilities that aren’t even on the table—as people did during the election/appointing of certain Justices.

It has gone from if Kavanaugh is confirmed, Roe could be overturned. To, well, even if it isn’t overturned a new burden could be put in place. The reality is that as a practical matter not much will change. Roe never made abortion an absolute right.
 
120,853
150,032
Joined
Mar 30, 2007
This dude really crawled back in here

1638388683756.gif
 

RustyShackleford

Supporter
51,993
144,350
Joined
Jul 20, 2009
Did you read the article? Where did he suggest that the Court will force women to give birth that have medical conditions or who are victims or rape/incest?

At least he had well-reasoned guesses instead randomly making up possibilities that aren’t even on the table—as people did during the election/appointing of certain Justices.

It has gone from if Kavanaugh is confirmed, Roe could be overturned. To, well, even if it isn’t overturned a new burden could be put in place. The reality is that as a practical matter not much will change. Roe never made abortion an absolute right.
This is it now.

It explains how the court can create a backdoor so that there are no options to have a legal abortion in the state

But it doesn't explicitly say some words, so you are technically right

Usual bull**** from you
 
24,210
13,948
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Id really like to see Nancy hold a vote to expel these evil women and men from Congress.
 
Top Bottom