SCOTUS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While everyone is bitching and complaining about Donald Trump being our next President do you all realize what will happen to the SC?

One seat is vacant.
RBG is 83.
Kennedy is 80.
Breyer is 78.

In 8 short years the Spureme Court of our nation will be 7 Conservative Judges against 2 single white middle aged females. Your world, as you know it, will be changed for the next 35 years.

For the better!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, please keep in mind that many of us voted for Trump with exactly this knowledge. HRC appointing justices would have been a true disaster for this country, one from which we may not have recovered.

Yeah it would have been very hard for you to recover from women keeping reproductive rights

It's the children who are being murdered that I'm more concerned about. You know, those little women-to-be who are killed before they ever have the opportunity to express an opinion about these "rights."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, please keep in mind that many of us voted for Trump with exactly this knowledge. HRC appointing justices would have been a true disaster for this country, one from which we may not have recovered.

Yeah it would have been very hard for you to recover from women keeping reproductive rights

It's the children who are being murdered that I'm more concerned about. You know, those little women-to-be who are killed before they ever have the opportunity to express an opinion about these "rights."

You believe an embryo or a fetus before viability should have greater rights than a woman. So it goes men > male embryos > females embryos > women. Why do you think women should lose rights after they are born?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, please keep in mind that many of us voted for Trump with exactly this knowledge. HRC appointing justices would have been a true disaster for this country, one from which we may not have recovered.

Yeah it would have been very hard for you to recover from women keeping reproductive rights

It's the children who are being murdered that I'm more concerned about. You know, those little women-to-be who are killed before they ever have the opportunity to express an opinion about these "rights."

Some comments make me long for retroactive abortion. My body is mine and I should be the only one to make the decision as to whether I want to procreate. Certainly not a jerk I do not know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, please keep in mind that many of us voted for Trump with exactly this knowledge. HRC appointing justices would have been a true disaster for this country, one from which we may not have recovered.

Yeah it would have been very hard for you to recover from women keeping reproductive rights

It's the children who are being murdered that I'm more concerned about. You know, those little women-to-be who are killed before they ever have the opportunity to express an opinion about these "rights."

"Children"are not being murdered, idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, please keep in mind that many of us voted for Trump with exactly this knowledge. HRC appointing justices would have been a true disaster for this country, one from which we may not have recovered.

Yeah it would have been very hard for you to recover from women keeping reproductive rights

It's the children who are being murdered that I'm more concerned about. You know, those little women-to-be who are killed before they ever have the opportunity to express an opinion about these "rights."

+1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, please keep in mind that many of us voted for Trump with exactly this knowledge. HRC appointing justices would have been a true disaster for this country, one from which we may not have recovered.

Yeah it would have been very hard for you to recover from women keeping reproductive rights

It's the children who are being murdered that I'm more concerned about. You know, those little women-to-be who are killed before they ever have the opportunity to express an opinion about these "rights."

You believe an embryo or a fetus before viability should have greater rights than a woman. So it goes men > male embryos > females embryos > women. Why do you think women should lose rights after they are born?

It is the responsibility of the government to protect the most weak and vulnerable among us, perhaps from people such as yourself who wish them harm. That includes children, the elderly, the mentally impaired, the disabled, etc. etc. And yes, unborn children as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, please keep in mind that many of us voted for Trump with exactly this knowledge. HRC appointing justices would have been a true disaster for this country, one from which we may not have recovered.

Yeah it would have been very hard for you to recover from women keeping reproductive rights

It's the children who are being murdered that I'm more concerned about. You know, those little women-to-be who are killed before they ever have the opportunity to express an opinion about these "rights."

Some comments make me long for retroactive abortion. My body is mine and I should be the only one to make the decision as to whether I want to procreate. Certainly not a jerk I do not know.

You can. Just don't have sex when you can get pregnant. Problem solved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, please keep in mind that many of us voted for Trump with exactly this knowledge. HRC appointing justices would have been a true disaster for this country, one from which we may not have recovered.

Yeah it would have been very hard for you to recover from women keeping reproductive rights

It's the children who are being murdered that I'm more concerned about. You know, those little women-to-be who are killed before they ever have the opportunity to express an opinion about these "rights."

"Children"are not being murdered, idiot.

Yes, actually, they are. Every single day -- approximately 500,000 a year in the U.S. alone. Sobering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, please keep in mind that many of us voted for Trump with exactly this knowledge. HRC appointing justices would have been a true disaster for this country, one from which we may not have recovered.

Yeah it would have been very hard for you to recover from women keeping reproductive rights

It's the children who are being murdered that I'm more concerned about. You know, those little women-to-be who are killed before they ever have the opportunity to express an opinion about these "rights."

You believe an embryo or a fetus before viability should have greater rights than a woman. So it goes men > male embryos > females embryos > women. Why do you think women should lose rights after they are born?

It is the responsibility of the government to protect the most weak and vulnerable among us, perhaps from people such as yourself who wish them harm. That includes children, the elderly, the mentally impaired, the disabled, etc. etc. And yes, unborn children as well.

What about women who want protection from people like you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, please keep in mind that many of us voted for Trump with exactly this knowledge. HRC appointing justices would have been a true disaster for this country, one from which we may not have recovered.

Yeah it would have been very hard for you to recover from women keeping reproductive rights

It's the children who are being murdered that I'm more concerned about. You know, those little women-to-be who are killed before they ever have the opportunity to express an opinion about these "rights."

You believe an embryo or a fetus before viability should have greater rights than a woman. So it goes men > male embryos > females embryos > women. Why do you think women should lose rights after they are born?

It is the responsibility of the government to protect the most weak and vulnerable among us, perhaps from people such as yourself who wish them harm. That includes children, the elderly, the mentally impaired, the disabled, etc. etc. And yes, unborn children as well.

do black lives matter then? Are you concerned about the welfare of Latinos and Muslims under Trump? Or are you another white supremacist who wants to deny women their full rights because your church tells you removing those cells equals murdering babies?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, please keep in mind that many of us voted for Trump with exactly this knowledge. HRC appointing justices would have been a true disaster for this country, one from which we may not have recovered.

Yeah it would have been very hard for you to recover from women keeping reproductive rights

It's the children who are being murdered that I'm more concerned about. You know, those little women-to-be who are killed before they ever have the opportunity to express an opinion about these "rights."

You believe an embryo or a fetus before viability should have greater rights than a woman. So it goes men > male embryos > females embryos > women. Why do you think women should lose rights after they are born?

It is the responsibility of the government to protect the most weak and vulnerable among us, perhaps from people such as yourself who wish them harm. That includes children, the elderly, the mentally impaired, the disabled, etc. etc. And yes, unborn children as well.

do black lives matter then? Are you concerned about the welfare of Latinos and Muslims under Trump? Or are you another white supremacist who wants to deny women their full rights because your church tells you removing those cells equals murdering babies?

Of course black lives matter. ALL lives matter. Amazingly, that has to be explained to some people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, please keep in mind that many of us voted for Trump with exactly this knowledge. HRC appointing justices would have been a true disaster for this country, one from which we may not have recovered.

Yeah it would have been very hard for you to recover from women keeping reproductive rights

It's the children who are being murdered that I'm more concerned about. You know, those little women-to-be who are killed before they ever have the opportunity to express an opinion about these "rights."

"Children"are not being murdered, idiot.

Yes, actually, they are. Every single day -- approximately 500,000 a year in the U.S. alone. Sobering.

There are effective ways to reducing abortions -- free birth control (including IUDs), paid family leave, and increased public assistance for families with young children. Punishing women for having sex is not one of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ginsburg, Kennedy, and Breyer are all very SELFISH idiots. They should have stepped down 3 years ago.
Especially Ginsburg, who has two cancers.
BTW OP, it is unlikely that all three of them will be dead or retired in 4-8 years.
So think more like 4 conservatives against 3 liberals.

I always wonder why they did not retire during Obama's tenure, especially the more liberal justices. It does not make any sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While everyone is bitching and complaining about Donald Trump being our next President do you all realize what will happen to the SC?

One seat is vacant.
RBG is 83.
Kennedy is 80.
Breyer is 78.

In 8 short years the Spureme Court of our nation will be 7 Conservative Judges against 2 single white middle aged females. Your world, as you know it, will be changed for the next 35 years.

Every so called conservative judge eventually votes like a progressive. Its only a matter of time. Nothing will change LGBTQ marriage or Row vs Wade. There maybe small changes around the margins. The country marches to the tune of the progressives. Nothing will change that.

Nothing will change that? The SC has already ruled that States can place "reasonable" restrictions on abortion.

This week the Ohio legislature passed a "heartbeat" bill that was vetoed by Kasic on the grounds that a legal battle would be too costly to defend. With a 7-2 SC the court would surely uphold that law from a lower decision. Don't say nothing will change that.

There will be a revolution and GOP will lose everything if Roe vs Wade is over turned. The population as a whole is more liberal since the 70s.It is very difficult to revisit the past. So it won't happen.