Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Context matters. Instead of simply reading the article go to the primary source.
Watch the speech. It was funny, self deprecating and intelligent regardless of one’s political views.
Understanding your adversary’s viewpoint and arguments is invaluable.
Such a lack of intellectual curiosity on DCUM.

+100
This is true of liberals in general today. Or, I should say, "leftists." Because these people are not at all liberal in the traditional sense of the word.
They protest, shout down, and cancel conservative speakers in law schools, med schools, and universities in general. The mere presence of an opposing view on issues is now viewed as harmful under the new rules that have taken hold of higher education.

Opposing views in this case are based on a reflexive dislike of irrationality to dogmatic organized religion. Alito is a zealot and his jurisprudence is a natural extension of his beliefs. Why else take a case from 50 years ago, magically, as soon as he had the other zealots in place in order to get the ruling they wanted?

I mean, let’s just be real, mothers are going to die, as lawyers are brought in to hospitals now in some states as they’re now needed to tell doctors whether or not they can provide a life saving abortion or what medical care is legally permissible. think about that. Your religion has done that . And then you have this smug dkhead man on the Supreme Court basically legislating Christianity over reason and laughing at the world as the they look aghast in shock? But it’s the stupid liberals who are so polarizing, amirite?

These stupid students right? So divisive: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/07/26/michigan-medical-students-abortion-walkout/

It’s almost as if they took an oath to do no harm but are prevented from treating their patients because of your religious superstitions.

It’s like the med students

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Context matters. Instead of simply reading the article go to the primary source.
Watch the speech. It was funny, self deprecating and intelligent regardless of one’s political views.
Understanding your adversary’s viewpoint and arguments is invaluable.
Such a lack of intellectual curiosity on DCUM.

Intellectual curiosity for this

"“It is hard to convince people that religious liberty is worth defending if they don’t think that religion is a good thing that deserves protection,” Alito told the audience. “The challenge for those who want to protect religious liberty in the United States, Europe, and other similar places is to convince people who are not religious that religious liberty is worth special protection. That will not be easy to do.”

SPECIAL PROTECTION. No, thats been done before. Christians, Muslims, etc. They can do their thing but no, I am not interested in giving religions special protection. That means that those with religion are protected more than those without. Religion needs less power not more and history has shown us time and time again that power combined with religion is a dangerous thing for most people.

Reading is fundamental.
He didn't say giving "religion" special protection.
He said give "religious liberty" special protection. And, that is exactly what this country was founded on. Remember the pilgrims?
People should be free to worship as they wish.

In what way does Dobbs advance religious liberty?

The “joke” was gross because he’s making fun of foreign leaders for being worried about reproductive rights and the health of American women of childbearing age. That’s only a “joke” if you’re a psychopath.

You are guilty of taking soundbites out of context.

His whole speech was about religious freedom. That was the topic. It was not in reference to Roe or any other decision.

Read more here:

https://law.nd.edu/news-events/news/2022-religious-liberty-summit-rome-justice-samuel-alito-keynote/

And, so you know.... he was mocking leaders of OTHER nations for getting their knickers in a bunch about decisions made in the US.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Context matters. Instead of simply reading the article go to the primary source.
Watch the speech. It was funny, self deprecating and intelligent regardless of one’s political views.
Understanding your adversary’s viewpoint and arguments is invaluable.
Such a lack of intellectual curiosity on DCUM.

+100
This is true of liberals in general today. Or, I should say, "leftists." Because these people are not at all liberal in the traditional sense of the word.
They protest, shout down, and cancel conservative speakers in law schools, med schools, and universities in general. The mere presence of an opposing view on issues is now viewed as harmful under the new rules that have taken hold of higher education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Context matters. Instead of simply reading the article go to the primary source.
Watch the speech. It was funny, self deprecating and intelligent regardless of one’s political views.
Understanding your adversary’s viewpoint and arguments is invaluable.
Such a lack of intellectual curiosity on DCUM.

Intellectual curiosity for this

"“It is hard to convince people that religious liberty is worth defending if they don’t think that religion is a good thing that deserves protection,” Alito told the audience. “The challenge for those who want to protect religious liberty in the United States, Europe, and other similar places is to convince people who are not religious that religious liberty is worth special protection. That will not be easy to do.”

SPECIAL PROTECTION. No, thats been done before. Christians, Muslims, etc. They can do their thing but no, I am not interested in giving religions special protection. That means that those with religion are protected more than those without. Religion needs less power not more and history has shown us time and time again that power combined with religion is a dangerous thing for most people.

Reading is fundamental.
He didn't say giving "religion" special protection.
He said give "religious liberty" special protection. And, that is exactly what this country was founded on. Remember the pilgrims?
People should be free to worship as they wish.

It doesnt need further protection. They only people whose rights are being infringed on are non-religious people. You can worship whenever and wherever you like but other people dont have to made to do it, or abide by your definition of moral, nor should government property or those working on behalf of the government use the federal, state, or local owned spaces to worship. You carry your religion inside you- keep it there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Context matters. Instead of simply reading the article go to the primary source.
Watch the speech. It was funny, self deprecating and intelligent regardless of one’s political views.
Understanding your adversary’s viewpoint and arguments is invaluable.
Such a lack of intellectual curiosity on DCUM.

Intellectual curiosity for this

"“It is hard to convince people that religious liberty is worth defending if they don’t think that religion is a good thing that deserves protection,” Alito told the audience. “The challenge for those who want to protect religious liberty in the United States, Europe, and other similar places is to convince people who are not religious that religious liberty is worth special protection. That will not be easy to do.”

SPECIAL PROTECTION. No, thats been done before. Christians, Muslims, etc. They can do their thing but no, I am not interested in giving religions special protection. That means that those with religion are protected more than those without. Religion needs less power not more and history has shown us time and time again that power combined with religion is a dangerous thing for most people.

Reading is fundamental.
He didn't say giving "religion" special protection.
He said give "religious liberty" special protection. And, that is exactly what this country was founded on. Remember the pilgrims?
People should be free to worship as they wish.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Context matters. Instead of simply reading the article go to the primary source.
Watch the speech. It was funny, self deprecating and intelligent regardless of one’s political views.
Understanding your adversary’s viewpoint and arguments is invaluable.
Such a lack of intellectual curiosity on DCUM.

Intellectual curiosity for this

"“It is hard to convince people that religious liberty is worth defending if they don’t think that religion is a good thing that deserves protection,” Alito told the audience. “The challenge for those who want to protect religious liberty in the United States, Europe, and other similar places is to convince people who are not religious that religious liberty is worth special protection. That will not be easy to do.”

SPECIAL PROTECTION. No, thats been done before. Christians, Muslims, etc. They can do their thing but no, I am not interested in giving religions special protection. That means that those with religion are protected more than those without. Religion needs less power not more and history has shown us time and time again that power combined with religion is a dangerous thing for most people.

Reading is fundamental.
He didn't say giving "religion" special protection.
He said give "religious liberty" special protection. And, that is exactly what this country was founded on. Remember the pilgrims?
People should be free to worship as they wish.

In what way does Dobbs advance religious liberty?

The “joke” was gross because he’s making fun of foreign leaders for being worried about reproductive rights and the health of American women of childbearing age. That’s only a “joke” if you’re a psychopath.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Context matters. Instead of simply reading the article go to the primary source.
Watch the speech. It was funny, self deprecating and intelligent regardless of one’s political views.
Understanding your adversary’s viewpoint and arguments is invaluable.
Such a lack of intellectual curiosity on DCUM.

Intellectual curiosity for this

"“It is hard to convince people that religious liberty is worth defending if they don’t think that religion is a good thing that deserves protection,” Alito told the audience. “The challenge for those who want to protect religious liberty in the United States, Europe, and other similar places is to convince people who are not religious that religious liberty is worth special protection. That will not be easy to do.”

SPECIAL PROTECTION. No, thats been done before. Christians, Muslims, etc. They can do their thing but no, I am not interested in giving religions special protection. That means that those with religion are protected more than those without. Religion needs less power not more and history has shown us time and time again that power combined with religion is a dangerous thing for most people.

Reading is fundamental.
He didn't say giving "religion" special protection.
He said give "religious liberty" special protection. And, that is exactly what this country was founded on. Remember the pilgrims?
People should be free to worship as they wish.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Context matters. Instead of simply reading the article go to the primary source.
Watch the speech. It was funny, self deprecating and intelligent regardless of one’s political views.
Understanding your adversary’s viewpoint and arguments is invaluable.
Such a lack of intellectual curiosity on DCUM.

Intellectual curiosity for this

"“It is hard to convince people that religious liberty is worth defending if they don’t think that religion is a good thing that deserves protection,” Alito told the audience. “The challenge for those who want to protect religious liberty in the United States, Europe, and other similar places is to convince people who are not religious that religious liberty is worth special protection. That will not be easy to do.”

SPECIAL PROTECTION. No, thats been done before. Christians, Muslims, etc. They can do their thing but no, I am not interested in giving religions special protection. That means that those with religion are protected more than those without. Religion needs less power not more and history has shown us time and time again that power combined with religion is a dangerous thing for most people.

Anonymous wrote:Context matters. Instead of simply reading the article go to the primary source.
Watch the speech. It was funny, self deprecating and intelligent regardless of one’s political views.
Understanding your adversary’s viewpoint and arguments is invaluable.
Such a lack of intellectual curiosity on DCUM.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Context matters. Instead of simply reading the article go to the primary source.
Watch the speech. It was funny, self deprecating and intelligent regardless of one’s political views.
Understanding your adversary’s viewpoint and arguments is invaluable.
Such a lack of intellectual curiosity on DCUM.

+100
This is true of liberals in general today. Or, I should say, "leftists." Because these people are not at all liberal in the traditional sense of the word.
They protest, shout down, and cancel conservative speakers in law schools, med schools, and universities in general. The mere presence of an opposing view on issues is now viewed as harmful under the new rules that have taken hold of higher education.

Anonymous wrote:Context matters. Instead of simply reading the article go to the primary source.
Watch the speech. It was funny, self deprecating and intelligent regardless of one’s political views.
Understanding your adversary’s viewpoint and arguments is invaluable.
Such a lack of intellectual curiosity on DCUM.