Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!
  1. Gator Country Black Friday special!

    Now's a great time to join or renew and get $20 off your annual VIP subscription! LIMITED QUANTITIES -- for details click here.

Roe v Wade Overturned

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by GatorGrowl, Jun 24, 2022.

  1. akaijenkins1

    akaijenkins1 Premium Member

    1,194
    496
    1,958
    Apr 3, 2007
    I like to explain when I lend out a "Come on man."

    The bolded was QUITE the reach and did not address the OP's point about the hundreds of thousands of kids currently in foster care.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. domgator

    domgator Premium Member

    1,719
    146
    198
    Apr 3, 2007
    How did your kids do?
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  3. 92gator

    92gator GC Hall of Fame

    14,382
    14,417
    3,363
    Jun 14, 2007
    It goes to the source of the problem.

    I know, she, you, and every other lib would prefer i ignore the source, and focus on the big gov sponsored solution, which of course, is more big gov. Thats how big gov does. Cause problems, then tell us we need more big gov to fix the problem they made.

    Roe was the source of the justification that young men, women, girls n boys' collective right to get laid, was greater than the inconvenient life that often results from exercise of the former right.
     
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
  4. l_boy

    l_boy 5500

    12,933
    1,730
    3,268
    Jan 6, 2009
    Kavanaugh flat out lied. Straight up liar. Gives some perspective on his truthfulness on the whole sexual assault cluster fork when he was 16, although it still isn’t really relevant.
     
  5. GatorKP

    GatorKP All American

    491
    191
    1,938
    Jul 30, 2011
    Many babies will now live. Great day for them! Well done Supreme Court!
     
    • Dislike Dislike x 3
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Best Post Ever Best Post Ever x 1
  6. 92gator

    92gator GC Hall of Fame

    14,382
    14,417
    3,363
    Jun 14, 2007
    If anybody ever earned the right to shit all over a representation along those lines, it would be Kav.

    Alas, he rides the spilt blood of 60+ million murdered souls for 60+ million times the justification anyone would need.

    C'est la vie.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2022
  7. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer VIP Member

    17,335
    5,906
    3,213
    Oct 30, 2017
    Or it's because there aren't 10+ Republicans in the Senate willing to support it.
     
  8. cocodrilo

    cocodrilo GC Hall of Fame

    Apr 8, 2007
    Q: What did George Washington debate with his men before crossing the Delaware?

    A: Row versus wade.
     
    • Funny Funny x 6
  9. BigCypressGator1981

    BigCypressGator1981 GC Hall of Fame

    6,707
    1,374
    3,103
    Oct 11, 2011
    TBD. They are 2.5 years and 4 months old currently. I’ll keep ya posted.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  10. ATLGATORFAN

    ATLGATORFAN Premium Member

    3,671
    957
    2,153
    Aug 10, 2015
    why do they need 10+? Seems like an easy one for collins or murkowski? I’ll offer another reason. They have no desire to. It’s much more lucrative to raise money and much easier to spin people up to vote on the next election. They’ve had 50 years to cement this into law. Nobody to blame but themselves. Had a chance with 3755 and that turned into a disaster that nobody other than far leftist could support.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2022
  11. akaijenkins1

    akaijenkins1 Premium Member

    1,194
    496
    1,958
    Apr 3, 2007

     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  12. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer VIP Member

    17,335
    5,906
    3,213
    Oct 30, 2017
    Because you need 60 votes to break a filibuster.

    What an absurdly ignorant response. It was cemented into law for 50 years. You don't use a federal statute to "codify" a constitutional right. Constitutional rights trump federal statutes. And anybody who thinks the Republicans who overturned a constitutional right couldn't also strike down a federal statute protecting that right knows nothing about the law.
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  13. domgator

    domgator Premium Member

    1,719
    146
    198
    Apr 3, 2007
    Awesome!
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  14. dynogator

    dynogator VIP Member

    6,373
    318
    418
    Apr 9, 2007
    I agree with what you're saying, but replace "discriminate," with "analyze." Human brains are geared for analyzing and prioritizing threats, and one of the criteria is race. Another is sex, height, weight, musculature, etc. Threat assessment, at it's most basic level.

    How one acts upon those perceptions determines if one is a racist.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  15. ATLGATORFAN

    ATLGATORFAN Premium Member

    3,671
    957
    2,153
    Aug 10, 2015
    my point was it was long believed the RvW was not on sound ground and yes they absolutely could have codified with a new statute.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2022/05/06/ruth-bader-ginsburg-roe-wade/
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer VIP Member

    17,335
    5,906
    3,213
    Oct 30, 2017
    Which would have done less than nothing. This case would have overturned both Roe v. Wade and struck down the statute in that scenario. It's silly to try to even argue that would have been a solution to the problem.
     
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. Emmitto

    Emmitto VIP Member

    9,059
    1,710
    933
    Apr 3, 2007
    But so?

    How is it that apparently only Susan Collins believed that shiznit?

    Trump screeched incessantly that he’d only deliver Roe killers.

    I realize he is has a pathological need to lie, but it isn’t 100%.

    One of BK’s former clerks also told us.

    And he himself revealed the “not rooted in history” theme (taken from Rehnquist) in a speech to the American Enterprise Institute a year before being named.

    Surely no one on these boards had BK as an individual rights guy, since that would be idiotic. Even Susan Collins is also not an idiot. She’s a liar, and a Republican.

    When people tell you scary things, believe them.
     
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  18. pkaib01

    pkaib01 GC Hall of Fame

    3,814
    808
    2,063
    Apr 3, 2007
    I've been told it's the dems' turnout fault. That malignant perspective reminds me of the tripe argument that if a black person works hard, he/she can overcome systemic racism. He/she should not have to work harder than their fellow citizens to succeed.

    The majority of citizens shouldn't have to be a "super majority" to have their views represented.

    We are broken.

     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2022
    • Like Like x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  19. l_boy

    l_boy 5500

    12,933
    1,730
    3,268
    Jan 6, 2009
    Indeed. Let’s make this about racism. Can we get any more predictable?


    I think I am going to change my sig to “Beware the malignant perspective”.
     
  20. OklahomaGator

    OklahomaGator Jedi Administrator Moderator VIP Member

    123,443
    164,002
    116,973
    Apr 3, 2007
    Hold on, the court does not make laws. How can the "court" cement any law? What legal argument did the 3 dissenting justices make to keep Roe v Wade.?