Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Archy1221

  1. 19 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:


    JJ: Yeah, so what? Show me when SC justices have lied in their confirmation hearing and then virtually immediately overturned that same thing they called “settled law” and “precedent”.

    1) show me where the SC Justices lied  in their hearings.


    2) the next point moot because the first didn’t happen.   Plus you are asking for unrealistic information, 

    • Plus1 2
  2. 8 minutes ago, knapplc said:


    And this is how a question is dodged. Because he asked for specific examples with specific criteria, and whoosh off we went into another tangent.


    It's a pattern we're all familiar with.

    And this is why no one takes you seriously and for good reason.  The criteria he wanted was for someone to look into confirmation hearings from 50-200 years ago.   Ain’t gonna happen.  He can do the research if he wants to dispute someone.  The cases have been posted, then he changed what he wanted.   You chime in and say the same nonsense because you have sad trombone going on about the ruling and just want to argue for the sake of arguing.  

    • Plus1 2
  3. 1 minute ago, knapplc said:


    You insinuated you had knowledge of "what else was settled law and Precedent before getting overruled" and he asked for examples. Not only is that not a stupid question, it's a great question.


    Of course, a person who doesn't actually know the answer to that would dodge the question, then try to make the conversation about the question without ever actually answering the question... and here we are.

    Ya, I posted the cases earlier there knap:facepalm:.  Not a good look for you here.  

    • Upvote 1
  4. 1 hour ago, JJ Husker said:

    Please provide some comparable examples. I’ll be lenient, the examples must have been decided within 4 years of the deciding justice’s confirmation hearings where they are on record stating what they subsequently voted to overturn was “settled law” and “precedent”. To be clear, THAT is the issue, not simply that something was overturned. So show me the other SC liars.

    I think this is where the goalpost emoji gets inserted.  

    • Plus1 1
  5. 51 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

    The Mayo clinic considers it a contraceptive….


    but what do they know? We should probably use your women’s magazine source.  I wonder how Sports Illustrated categorizes it :lol:


    53 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

    The Mayo clinic considers it a contraceptive….


    but what do they know? We should probably use your women’s magazine source.  I wonder how Sports Illustrated categorizes it :lol:

    How exactly does what the Mayo Clinic says pertain to no States having it banned?  Which is kinda what I said if you followed along from the beginning.  If


    You don’t like the womens magazine I guess you can read these (or sports illustrated, whatever floats your boat).  You will probably notice that it isn’t banned, which again, is what I said earlier.  

    If these don’t work out for ya, just let me know what source you would like. 







    • Plus1 2
  6. 37 minutes ago, knapplc said:


    Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, Ohio, South Dakota, Tennessee and Texas

     None of those states ban abortion for ectopic pregnancy. Florida is 15 weeks so doesn’t apply to what you said, Tennessee is 6 weeks, pretty restrictive timeframe but still gives time for what you claim to not be allowed, Ohio has a fetal heartbeat bill so not what you describe, Oklahoma has a rape/incest provision so not what you think. Arkansas Gov is going to call a special session on the rape/incest component.  

    • Plus1 1
  7. 26 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

    That’s fine but maybe quit acting like this ruling didn’t affect contraceptives. You do this a lot, throw out some gotcha questions and then when your assumptions are proven false you continue to act like your assumptions were well founded.

    You ok?!?  One would assume that just because I consider the morning after pill a contraceptive based off an either or choice you gave, doesn’t mean a state or others consider it a contraceptive.  

    BTW…..you do this a lot, as in get things wrong.  Notice it’s not banned?  



    • Plus1 1
  8. 52 minutes ago, knapplc said:

    It took a World War and the deaths of millions of people for Germans to realize their adherence to christofascist beliefs were a horror.


    Here's hoping America doesn't have to live through that to realize how awful today was.

    We kinda survived before the Roe ruling (when we won the World War) and we will survive after this ruling.  

    • Plus1 2
  9. 2 hours ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

    There’s been a whole lot of hyperbolic whining on the social media platforms today. On Twitter, we’ve already reached the point of tracking which corporations have/haven’t put out statements on the matter.


    Obviously, I support the decision of the Supreme Court. It absolutely should be a state issue and, in my opinion, abortion should only be performed under medical emergencies, or rape. Outside of those rare instances, abortions are an act of inhumanity, and a gross deflection of personal/moral responsibility. 

    Pretty well said.  

    • Plus1 1
    • Thanks 1
  10. 2 hours ago, JJ Husker said:

    Hey, I simply answered your question. You asked if they banned contraceptives and then stated you viewed the morning after pill as a contraceptive. So yeah, I guess they did allow the banning of contraceptives. But then you proceeded to do what so many republicans are want to do nowadays and, completely unsolicited, started in with advice on which alternate contraceptives others should use. How about you and your party stay out of people’s bedrooms? I know, it’s a pipe dream…..but still.

    I think you missed the part where I would disagree if they banned that morning after pill.  Go have a beef with someone else about it.  

    • Plus1 1
  • Create New...