Ruth Bader Ginsburg Writes Scathing 35-Page Dissent In Birth Control Case

[Dot Com]

I'm shocked that piece of shit hag could type up something 35 pages long.

Must be a lot of pictures that need to be colored in...

That ***** needs to read about FREEDOM OF RELIGION.....it preceded her and will last long after she is being eaten by maggots.

I see our high-brow, rw, master debater is back

why are rw'ers allowed to all over this thread

 

[Contumacious]

Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer, joined Ginsburg in her dissent.

Notice these people are what America will be in the near future with the demographic shift ,not the pasty faced old cracker goyim and uncle Clarence Thomas's

Ruth Bader Ginsburg Writes Scathing 35-Page Dissent In Birth Control Case

Well her dissent wasn't that bad, after all it was published.

Now compare her dissent to that of the Honorable James Clark McReynolds. His dissent objecting to the elimination of the GOLD CLAUSE was SUPPRESSED, CENSORED, UNPUBLISHED.

Judicial review is a fraud. The system is corrupt, to its core.

.

.

 

[Billo_Really]

Do you not understand English - this IS a case of smaller government - a government that can no longer demand you ignore your religious beliefs. Beliefs that are EXPRESSLY protected in the first amendment.

This opens up Pandora's box and allows owners to ban anything they think doesn't jive with their religion. Gays, liberals, the poor, anyone they don't like, they can now ****! And that will take more government to enforce.

 

[theHawk]

I don't see anything that would now prohibit a corporation from claiming that their religious beliefs exempt them from providing health coverage to same sex married couples, in spite of the fact that under state law, they are just as legally married as a heterosexual couple.

...and we march down the road to theocracy....

Oh, so since the government can't force everyone to do things against their own religion, we're turning to a "theocracy".

Theocracy would be a government whose laws are determined by religious beliefs. This is it, in spades.

Laws in every government have always been largely determined by "religious beliefs", that doesn't make a government a theocracy. Forcing people to conform to a certain religion or religious beliefs is. You progressives want to force your beliefs onto everyone, even if they are largely atheist beliefs, it is still a religious belief. This court decision has essentially declare there shall be no atheist theocracy in our country. Too bad for you progressives that wish to impose your beliefs on everyone else.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Hobby Lobby case: What birth control is affected? The Supreme Court decision in the Hobby Lobby case doesn't currently affect the birth control methods that are most commonly used. It doesn't affect:

• Most birth control pills

• Condoms

• Sponges

• Sterilization

It does affect:

• Plan B "morning-after pill"

• Ella "morning-after pill"

• Hormonal and copper intrauterine devices (IUDs)

 

[theHawk]

Do you not understand English - this IS a case of smaller government - a government that can no longer demand you ignore your religious beliefs. Beliefs that are EXPRESSLY protected in the first amendment.

This opens up Pandora's box and allows owners to ban anything they think doesn't jive with their religion. Gays, liberals, the poor, anyone they don't like, they can now ****! And that will take more government to enforce.

Imagine that! People can't be forced to accept your beliefs! The horror!

 

[Vandalshandle]

Oh, so since the government can't force everyone to do things against their own religion, we're turning to a "theocracy".

Theocracy would be a government whose laws are determined by religious beliefs. This is it, in spades.

Laws in every government have always been largely determined by "religious beliefs", that doesn't make a government a theocracy. Forcing people to conform to a certain religion or religious beliefs is. You progressives want to force your beliefs onto everyone, even if they are largely atheist beliefs, it is still a religious belief. This court decision has essentially declare there shall be no atheist theocracy in our country. Too bad for you progressives that wish to impose your beliefs on everyone else.

Atheist theocracy? Doesn't your posts make you dizzy sometimes? I haven't seen this much spin since I rode the Tilt-a-whirl back in the 1960's!

 

[NYcarbineer]

Oh, so since the government can't force everyone to do things against their own religion, we're turning to a "theocracy".

Theocracy would be a government whose laws are determined by religious beliefs. This is it, in spades.

Laws in every government have always been largely determined by "religious beliefs", that doesn't make a government a theocracy. Forcing people to conform to a certain religion or religious beliefs is. You progressives want to force your beliefs onto everyone, even if they are largely atheist beliefs, it is still a religious belief. This court decision has essentially declare there shall be no atheist theocracy in our country. Too bad for you progressives that wish to impose your beliefs on everyone else.

This is a business trying to force its female employees to conform to a religious belief by denying them an employee benefit that the law provides for all other female employees in the same employment circumstance;

the business is imposing a financial penalty on the employee if she wishes to act in a manner that is contrary to the religious belief.

 

[auditor0007]

I wasn't aware that she could write.......

Not surprising coming from someone like you. You're obviously not that bright.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Could be the most articulate and legally compelling argument in the history of jurisprudence and it doesn't mean shit. Dissenting argumentation is good for mental masterbation and first year law school pop quizzes.

It's only because of some quirks of life expectancy, or retirement decisions, and who was or wasn't president at any given time that Ginsburg's dissent wasn't the majority opinion.

Pretty much the case with every decision though, and isn't it a bit of a life expectancy quirk that Ginsburg is still around to make this dissent?

My point was that with a 5 to 4 decision along partisan/ideological lines, the Supreme Court has produced a political decision.

At a certain level there are really 2 Constitutions -

the Constitution of the conservatives on the Supreme Court, and the Constitution of the liberals on the Supreme Court.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

35 pages? Tell that ***** to shut up!

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

Does Ruth still have a uterus?? I've noticed a common theme since yesterdays ruling.. Dykes and old liberal bats are swarming the forum talking about birth control and yet neither of these two groups of people have had to use it in what?? YEARS, DECADES?? So how the **** do you know it's availability?? YOU DON'T.. but those of us out here who actually have the ability to conceive do thus we're the ones affected, not you old leftists hags... BIRTH CONTROL IS AVAILABLE and easy to get: Health Dept through Social Services- Make an appt, you have to have a pap smear done.. but you walk out with birth control.. free or CHEAP.. Planned Parenthood for the abort lovers.. So shove the faux outrage.. Ruth Bader-Ginsberg needs to worry more about denture creme.

 

[Mac1958]

.

I'll bet this ruling really lights a fire under both parties.

The more rabidly divided this nation becomes, the more important the makeup of the Supreme Court becomes. The next President might very well be able to change the face of the Court, one way or the other.

Such a shame that those who want us to be so rabidly divided have so much influence.

.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

.

I'll bet this ruling really lights a fire under both parties.

This ruling doesn't affect that many people and it was expected. It's too hot an issue so the court punted on third. We will all survive.

BTW, if would have been much better for the GOP if they had lost. That they could have used with the My Morals into your Vagina crowd. Now they got what they wanted so there's nothing to *****, pun intended, about.

 

[Mac1958]

.

I'll bet this ruling really lights a fire under both parties.

This ruling doesn't affect that many people and it was expected. It's too hot an issue so the court punted on third. We will all survive.

BTW, if would have been much better for the GOP if they had lost. That they could have used with the My Morals into your Vagina crowd. Now they got what they wanted so there's nothing to *****, pun intended, about.

Agreed. But the actual scope of a ruling really doesn't matter at this point. Everything is hyperbole in politics, and there's a shitload of people running around with their hair on fire. That's probably enough to keep both parties screaming.

.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

.

I'll bet this ruling really lights a fire under both parties.

This ruling doesn't affect that many people and it was expected. It's too hot an issue so the court punted on third. We will all survive.

BTW, if would have been much better for the GOP if they had lost. That they could have used with the My Morals into your Vagina crowd. Now they got what they wanted so there's nothing to *****, pun intended, about.

Agreed. But the actual scope of a ruling really doesn't matter at this point. Everything is hyperbole in politics, and there's a shitload of people running around with their hair on fire. That's probably enough to keep both parties screaming.

The short-attention span will fix this in no time. There's really nothing either side can make of this beyond a soundbite.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

.

I'll bet this ruling really lights a fire under both parties.

The more rabidly divided this nation becomes, the more important the makeup of the Supreme Court becomes. The next President might very well be able to change the face of the Court, one way or the other.

Such a shame that those who want us to be so rabidly divided have so much influence.

.

Oh don't worry, the Dims will dust off their "War On Women" signs and will be marching soon. I think I can hear Sandra Flook clearing her throat as we speak.

 

[Stephanie]

Someone said on another site, we should be damn worried about the judges who voted against this

this should of been simple vote for our freedoms

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Hobby Lobby case: What birth control is affected? The Supreme Court decision in the Hobby Lobby case doesn't currently affect the birth control methods that are most commonly used. It doesn't affect:

• Most birth control pills

• Condoms

• Sponges

• Sterilization

It does affect:

• Plan B "morning-after pill"

• Ella "morning-after pill"

• Hormonal and copper intrauterine devices (IUDs)

I was waiting for someone to mention this.
Hobby lobby covers 16 of 20 forms of birth control. What the **** are you liberals crying about?

Reminder: Hobby Lobby Provides Coverage for 16 Types of Contraception - Katie Pavlich

Just looking for a reason to whine ....?

 

[Stephanie]

Hobby Lobby case: What birth control is affected? The Supreme Court decision in the Hobby Lobby case doesn't currently affect the birth control methods that are most commonly used. It doesn't affect:

• Most birth control pills

• Condoms

• Sponges

• Sterilization

It does affect:

• Plan B "morning-after pill"

• Ella "morning-after pill"

• Hormonal and copper intrauterine devices (IUDs)

I was waiting for someone to mention this.
Hobby lobby covers 16 of 20 forms of birth control. What the **** are you liberals crying about?

Reminder: Hobby Lobby Provides Coverage for 16 Types of Contraception - Katie Pavlich

Just looking for a reason to whine ....?

They have to follow their masters in the Democrat party

They're believe you people are too stupid to control their own "birth control"