Why do you want right wing judges on the bench, what do you want

[Ray From Cleveland]

Right-wingers seem to hate anyone who is not a heterosexual white Christian guy, but only if he practices the "correct" brand of Christianity. Their attack approach depends on what issue they can use to screw anyone who doesn't fit the above description. It's pure identity politics played by the power-hungry.

So you have some examples of your claim?

 

[Stormy Daniels]

from them?? What do you think they will do??

Just list them:

like repealing Roe v. Wade

Allow insurance companies to opt out of birth control?

Make no laws concerning guns.

End SSM

Start saying prayers in public schools.

Get rid of public schools.

End the EPA.

End ACA for good.

End all social programs , except for vets.

Isn't it obvious? We want to pwn the libs, because you're tears are delicious. How else can we achieve an erection?

 

[Silhouette]

So why should it be a right to get married?

Individuals have a right to enter into whatever kind of contract they want, with whomever they want.

But where is that right written that the public or government has to accept that contract?

Yes, Polygamists could have a contract too. Doesn't make polygamy marriage legal.

And did you know that if adults have a contract that also binds children to its terms, if those terms are damaging to a child (like banishing them for life from a mother or father), the contract isn't merely voidable; it is ALREADY VOID before the ink dries. In other words, there's no challenge. The only challenge to rescind all power of said contract where the child is concerned is to prove that it is harmful to a child. When you look at a contract that says "this child must allow me to anally rape them daily" or "this child must agree to be starved 5 days out of 7" or "this child must never know regular contact with a mother or father in their formative years"...that contract upon its face is unarguably damaging to a child and isn't and never has been valid--ever.

That's going to be a bugger for this case particularly as it makes its way to the now conservative-heavy USSC: Dumont v Lyons 2017 : Will Fathers (or Mothers) Be Judicially-Legislated Into Irrelevance?

Right-wingers seem to hate anyone who is not a heterosexual white Christian guy, but only if he practices the "correct" brand of Christianity. Their attack approach depends on what issue they can use to screw anyone who doesn't fit the above description. It's pure identity politics played by the power-hungry.

There are more than just two people assumed to be part of a marriage contract eventually. You will find this clearly spelled out but it already exists in the Obergefell language in Opinion. Those people are children.

The problem with your weird marriage arrangements and the continued opposition to polygamy marriage (which many LGBTs were/are vocally opposed to "for the sake of the children involved") is that children are involved. Apparently that matters when we're talking polygamy, but not when we're talking another type of marriage where the contract uniquely would make a child never have regular contact with a mother or father for life; or at least in their formative years.

Gay marriage uniquely among all possibilities that could hurt children, does so as a matter of legally binding contract. Polygamy at least offers children both mother and father.

 

[dblack]

So why should it be a right to get married?

Individuals have a right to enter into whatever kind of contract they want, with whomever they want.

Doesn’t make them legal.

It prevents them from being made illegal. That's that a "right" means in a political context.

 

[Lysistrata]

Right-wingers seem to hate anyone who is not a heterosexual white Christian guy, but only if he practices the "correct" brand of Christianity. Their attack approach depends on what issue they can use to screw anyone who doesn't fit the above description. It's pure identity politics played by the power-hungry.

So you have some examples of your claim?

It's all around you. Put down your gun and open your eyes.

 

[mikegriffith1]

from them?? What do you think they will do??

Just list them:

like repealing Roe v. Wade

Allow insurance companies to opt out of birth control?

Make no laws concerning guns.

End SSM

Start saying prayers in public schools.

Get rid of public schools.

End the EPA.

End ACA for good.

End all social programs , except for vets.

Holy cow. #PARANOID and #DELUSIONAL.

Why shouldn't an insurance company be able to opt of covering birth control products for companies that do not want to pay for them when such products are readily and inexpensively available OTC (with the sole exception of birth control pills)?

 

[Lysistrata]

from them?? What do you think they will do??

Just list them:

like repealing Roe v. Wade

Allow insurance companies to opt out of birth control?

Make no laws concerning guns.

End SSM

Start saying prayers in public schools.

Get rid of public schools.

End the EPA.

End ACA for good.

End all social programs , except for vets.

Holy cow. #PARANOID and DELUSIONAL.

It's obvious that you are not keeping up with the news.

 

[Papageorgio]

Right-wingers seem to hate anyone who is not a heterosexual white Christian guy, but only if he practices the "correct" brand of Christianity. Their attack approach depends on what issue they can use to screw anyone who doesn't fit the above description. It's pure identity politics played by the power-hungry.

I see no difference in the extreme right or left in this regard.

 

[Freiheit]

Right-wingers seem to hate anyone who is not a heterosexual white Christian guy, but only if he practices the "correct" brand of Christianity. Their attack approach depends on what issue they can use to screw anyone who doesn't fit the above description. It's pure identity politics played by the power-hungry.

So you have some examples of your claim?

It's all around you. Put down your gun and open your eyes.

No example there. So you have none. What you have is your opinion and as I have said before opinions are like assholes everyone has one and they all stink.

 

[Silhouette]

Right-wingers seem to hate anyone who is not a heterosexual white Christian guy, but only if he practices the "correct" brand of Christianity. Their attack approach depends on what issue they can use to screw anyone who doesn't fit the above description. It's pure identity politics played by the power-hungry.

I see no difference in the extreme right or left in this regard.

Lysistrata's complaint seems to be that their ilk no longer has the coup on the Judicial. Her outrage was absent when the judicial branch went rogue on activism/judicial-legislation in her cult's favor...

 

[pismoe]

from them?? What do you think they will do??

Just list them:

like repealing Roe v. Wade

Allow insurance companies to opt out of birth control?

Make no laws concerning guns.

End SSM

Start saying prayers in public schools.

Get rid of public schools.

End the EPA.

End ACA for good.

End all social programs , except for vets.

---------------------------------------------------------- make no Gun Laws and roll back existing Gun Laws as my First concern and wish Penny .

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Right-wingers seem to hate anyone who is not a heterosexual white Christian guy, but only if he practices the "correct" brand of Christianity. Their attack approach depends on what issue they can use to screw anyone who doesn't fit the above description. It's pure identity politics played by the power-hungry.

So you have some examples of your claim?

It's all around you. Put down your gun and open your eyes.

So in other words, you have no examples. You are simply acting according to how the puppet masters pull your strings.

 

[NathanCross]

from them?? What do you think they will do??

Just list them:

like repealing Roe v. Wade

Allow insurance companies to opt out of birth control?

Make no laws concerning guns.

End SSM

Start saying prayers in public schools.

Get rid of public schools.

End the EPA.

End ACA for good.

End all social programs , except for vets.

Yes, I want Conservatives in government, everywhere. I want them to maintain Christian values, and fight Communism and every other form of paganism.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Correct, it does go by income.

If you are a french fry maker, you likely vote Democrat, therefore the subsidies make it extremely affordable.

If you are middle-class, you likely vote Republican, and the little subsidy you get (if any at all) makes insurance unaffordable.

Yup, their income determines their subsidy but does NOT help them with their max out of pocket. She's being very disingenuous. Go figure.

The entire plan was two-fold: one, create as many new government dependents as they could, because government dependents generally vote Democrat, and two, to take care of their current crop of voters so they continue to vote Democrat.

If you are a working stiff like I am, the cost of Commie Care was completely unaffordable. They wanted nearly 20% of my net pay for a plan with a 7K out of pocket, 7K deductible, no prescriptions, no dental, and a $50.00 office copay. It cost more than my two mortgages combined. HTF am I supposed to afford that while still buying my own life sustaining medications?

Do you know we are the only country without national healthcare of all the developed countries and we have the worst healthcare and the most expensive. Wrong if you are a working stiff it went by your income. One shouldn't get the cheapest plan they offer.

Penelope, let me tell you how well ACA worked. My brother was unemployed. He was on Medicaid. Whenever he went to the doctor his office visit was free, his lab tests were free, and his prescriptions were free. When he did get a job, they dropped him from Medicaid and he went on "Obamacare" proper. His premiums were $700 a month, which was well over half his income, plus he had a $4000 deductible. If he had fallen and broken a bone, he would pay every penny out of pocket that he would have paid even if he had no insurance at all. Then he would STILL have to pay $700 month.

Who can survive on that? He just took the penalty and paid it because that was NOTHING compared to his premiums that got him zero coverage for the first $4000 out of pocket.

Thank you for backing up my story. She thinks I made it up.

Your brother got a better offer than I did. They wanted $740.00 a month for mine and a 7K out of pocket and 7K deductible.

/----/ Obozocare was designed to fail to usher in Single Payer Hell on Earth.

 

[BluesLegend]

Because liberal justices ignore the Constitution that's why. Its not fair to call a SC justice "right wing" or "conservative" because they follow the Constitution that's what ALL the justices are supposed to do.

FACT: The left can't muster the support of the American people to change the Constitution, so they undermine it by nominating liberal justices who ignore it and make up their own laws from the bench, a power clearly given to the legislative branch not the judicial branch.

 

[Lysistrata]

This is just a sampling of what right-wingers aim at women, not what they aim at other groups:

South Dakota Bill Regarding Pre-Abortion Counseling (SB 110) - Rewire.News

South Dakota lawmakers just passed an unprecedented abortion restriction

But under a first-of-its-kind law passed Monday by the state Legislature, providers can no longer preface that information with the phrase “politicians in the state of South Dakota require us to tell you that” — even though state lawmakers acknowledge that the phrase is true.
​

Now the scum is also legislating what a medical professional is NOT ALLOWED to say to a client. This is an incredible act of censorship and infringement on the doctor/patient relationship. Is this the U.S. anymore? Big Government telling people what they are not allowed to say, even though what the law requires a physician to say to a patient is either not proven or has been shown to be false. The politicians, who apparently do not want to be referred to as "politicians," talk about making "disclosures" of some sort to clinic clients, but these "vital" disclosures are false and are merely propaganda.

Plus, the patient has to go personally to an indoctrination facility? How would the politicians know which woman has received her propaganda speech? Are women required to give their names to the politicians? To some religious group?

Is this the U.S. anymore?

 

[Papageorgio]

This is just a sampling of what right-wingers aim at women, not what they aim at other groups:
South Dakota Bill Regarding Pre-Abortion Counseling (SB 110) - Rewire.News
South Dakota lawmakers just passed an unprecedented abortion restriction
But under a first-of-its-kind law passed Monday by the state Legislature, providers can no longer preface that information with the phrase “politicians in the state of South Dakota require us to tell you that” — even though state lawmakers acknowledge that the phrase is true.

Now the scum is also legislating what a medical professional is NOT ALLOWED to say to a client. This is an incredible act of censorship and infringement on the doctor/patient relationship. Is this the U.S. anymore? Big Government telling people what they are not allowed to say, even though what the law requires a physician to say to a patient is either not proven or has been shown to be false. The politicians, who apparently do not want to be referred to as "politicians," talk about making "disclosures" of some sort to clinic clients, but these "vital" disclosures are false and are merely propaganda.​

Plus, the patient has to go personally to an indoctrination facility? How would the politicians know which woman has received her propaganda speech? Are women required to give their names to the politicians? To some religious group?
Is this the U.S. anymore?

Like big government and conversion therapy?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

This is just a sampling of what right-wingers aim at women, not what they aim at other groups:

South Dakota Bill Regarding Pre-Abortion Counseling (SB 110) - Rewire.News

South Dakota lawmakers just passed an unprecedented abortion restriction

But under a first-of-its-kind law passed Monday by the state Legislature, providers can no longer preface that information with the phrase “politicians in the state of South Dakota require us to tell you that” — even though state lawmakers acknowledge that the phrase is true.
​

Now the scum is also legislating what a medical professional is NOT ALLOWED to say to a client. This is an incredible act of censorship and infringement on the doctor/patient relationship. Is this the U.S. anymore? Big Government telling people what they are not allowed to say, even though what the law requires a physician to say to a patient is either not proven or has been shown to be false. The politicians, who apparently do not want to be referred to as "politicians," talk about making "disclosures" of some sort to clinic clients, but these "vital" disclosures are false and are merely propaganda.

Plus, the patient has to go personally to an indoctrination facility? How would the politicians know which woman has received her propaganda speech? Are women required to give their names to the politicians? To some religious group?

Is this the U.S. anymore?

First off, I don't see how it restricts abortion. Secondly, if they believe their rights have been violated, they can sue in the court of law.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

`
When it comes to politics, I'm rather stoic. Personally, I've been involved in races close to home like governor and US senator. When it comes to governor, Tony Evers (D) is in a dead heat with Scott Walker (49 vs 44) Leah Vukmir (R) is getting blown away by democratic incumbent Tammy Baldwin.

I don't particularly like the democratic party but anything is better than the republicans, at least locally.

You have to pick one or the other, I understand that. The SC can make laws that affect all of us down to the water we might drink and the air we breathe and the killing of workers rights and access to affordable healthcare.

How ignorant. The Supreme Court does not make law.

How ignorant, yes they do.

There is the concrete proof that you are a total imbecile.

So why an alt right SC?? Why do you guys want one so badly? Why because they interpret the constitution and do not follow the 1st amendment.

So why didn't you respond to my post? The Supreme Court does not make law, despite your criminal level of stupidity.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Correct, it does go by income.

If you are a french fry maker, you likely vote Democrat, therefore the subsidies make it extremely affordable.

If you are middle-class, you likely vote Republican, and the little subsidy you get (if any at all) makes insurance unaffordable.

Yup, their income determines their subsidy but does NOT help them with their max out of pocket. She's being very disingenuous. Go figure.

The entire plan was two-fold: one, create as many new government dependents as they could, because government dependents generally vote Democrat, and two, to take care of their current crop of voters so they continue to vote Democrat.

If you are a working stiff like I am, the cost of Commie Care was completely unaffordable. They wanted nearly 20% of my net pay for a plan with a 7K out of pocket, 7K deductible, no prescriptions, no dental, and a $50.00 office copay. It cost more than my two mortgages combined. HTF am I supposed to afford that while still buying my own life sustaining medications?

Do you know we are the only country without national healthcare of all the developed countries and we have the worst healthcare and the most expensive. Wrong if you are a working stiff it went by your income. One shouldn't get the cheapest plan they offer.

Penelope, let me tell you how well ACA worked. My brother was unemployed. He was on Medicaid. Whenever he went to the doctor his office visit was free, his lab tests were free, and his prescriptions were free. When he did get a job, they dropped him from Medicaid and he went on "Obamacare" proper. His premiums were $700 a month, which was well over half his income, plus he had a $4000 deductible. If he had fallen and broken a bone, he would pay every penny out of pocket that he would have paid even if he had no insurance at all. Then he would STILL have to pay $700 month.

Who can survive on that? He just took the penalty and paid it because that was NOTHING compared to his premiums that got him zero coverage for the first $4000 out of pocket.

Made too much money I guess to get a higher subsidy. Obviously your brother was highly uninformed.

He made $11.00 an hour. You are a typical libtard, You are so stupid that you don't even realize how stupid your are!