The Republican Utopia

[nic]

Interesting read on a Ginsburg speech from 1992 where she felt RoevWade was in shaky ground, because it didn’t just strike down the Texas law. 

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/why-justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-disapproved-of-roe-v-wade

 

[nic]

Article on the the concern some have mentioned here. This new decision extending itself to other decisions.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/04/politics/roe-alito-obergefell-loving/index.html

[Scarlet]

 

[ZRod]

2 hours ago, knapplc said:

 

Funny how no one ever answered that question, isn't it? But now their actions are speaking for them.

 

I'm just waiting for the attack on Griswold v. Connecticut, and Obergefell, and by extension Lawrence vs. Texas. And Brown v. Board of Education, because why not?

I was told the 60s... And I raise my eyebrow (civil rights, Vietnam, cold war, counterculture...)

[BigRedBuster]

3 minutes ago, ZRod said:

I was told the 60s... And I raise my eyebrow (civil rights, Vietnam, cold war, counterculture...)

President murdered

Presidential candidate murdered

Civil Rights Leader murdered

 

Yeah...the 60s were great.

[Guy Chamberlin]

12 hours ago, knapplc said:

 

A return to the 1950s. When minorities couldn't vote, when Jim Crow laws ran rampant, when women literally could not refuse their husband's demand for sex.

 

It's what "Make America Great Again" has always meant.

 

Yes, libtards get accused of blame games and race-baiting, and Republicans choose their words carefully and clutch their pearls at the mere accusation but......yeah. They yearn for a simpler time when they were in charge and everyone knew their place. It's really f#&%ing ugly. 

[Guy Chamberlin]

12 hours ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

According to Democrats men can give birth now too so I guess we all get opinions on abortion now according to the also ridiculously dumb logic of "only women should have a say on the abortion issue"

 

According to the extreme straw man you often create in order to distract from your own flailing argument. 

 

Listen, there's tons of room for disagreement on this issue, but one thing is pretty clear:  if men got pregnant, they would never tolerate government control of their bodies. 

 

As it stands, there's virtually no consequence for the man behind every pregnancy and his right to bolt the inconvenience. 

 

 

[Archy1221]

9 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

Yes, libtards get accused of blame games and race-baiting, and Republicans choose their words carefully and clutch their pearls at the mere accusation but......yeah. They yearn for a simpler time when they were in charge and everyone knew their place. It's really f#&%ing ugly. 

I’m the 50’s D’s controlled Government a bit longer than Republicans.  The 60’s was pretty much dominant Democrat control.  

[Archy1221]

2 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

According to the extreme straw man you often create in order to distract from your own flailing argument. 

His “strawman” isn’t a wrong statement.   There is now a male pregnant emoji developed by the most valuable company in the US.  Not to mention all the news articles/tweets/tik tocs/Instagram posts telling us so.  

[BigRedBuster]

10 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

if men got pregnant, they would never tolerate government control of their bodies. 

Years ago, I threw out the idea that if a guy fathers a child that he doesn't support, you take one nut.  If he fathers a second child he doesn't support, you take the second nut.

 

Think men would be OK if the government did that?

9 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

His “strawman” isn’t a wrong statement.   There is now a male pregnant emoji developed by the most valuable company in the US.  Not to mention all the news articles/tweets/tik tocs/Instagram posts telling us so.  

LOL....you're basing this off of an emoji.....LOL

[Archy1221]

5 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

OL....you're basing this off of an emoji.....LOL

Ohhh, you missed the rest of the post.   Or forgot.  Or choose to not include   LOL

[nic]

3 hours ago, ZRod said:

I was told the 60s... And I raise my eyebrow (civil rights, Vietnam, cold war, counterculture...)

In some ways I feel we are back in the 70s already.   I always took MAGA as more of a statement on rejecting globalist policies and doing what he thought was better for the US. Like the renegotiated trade deals (did those actually ever take affect?) Maybe more isolation, not sure I know what they are now. I guess we will never know. He gone.

[BigRedBuster]

1 minute ago, nic said:

In some ways I feel we are back in the 70s already.   I always took MAGA as more of a statement on rejecting globalist policies and doing what he thought was better for the US. Like the renegotiated trade deals (did those actually ever take affect?) Maybe more isolation, not sure I kwon what they are now. I guess we will never know. He gone.

 

But, others are trying to take his place using the same MAGA motivation.  So, it's still pertinent to the conversation.

[nic]

10 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Years ago, I threw out the idea that if a guy fathers a child that he doesn't support, you take one nut.  If he fathers a second child he doesn't support, you take the second nut.

I am in for this. Always thought we should cut both off for pedophiles. Tongue in cheek obviously.

[Scarlet]

Does this guy have the discipline and self awareness to do one video or speaking engagement, just one, when he's not high as a kite?   Any ideas on his resting heart rate?  I'll take over 140.