Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Mainboard' started by harvey birdman, Dec 8, 2015.
We’re actually staring down the barrel of a second Civil War in the near future. This is terrifying.
Burn it all down to the ground
You wouldn’t be saying that if you had a kid and a pregnant wife.
I'm single. I don't like running. It makes me out of breath. Civil War sounds like a lot of cardio. Let's not do that, unless it is inflict upon us.
Peloton has me following rule 1 religiously. I am ready to go.
congrats man, when is the big day?
Stop this. There won’t be a war. This isn’t the days of muskets and farmer soldiers.
we will get predator drone’d instead :)
listen to the it could happen here podcast (season 1!! not the new stuff). A new civil war wouldnt look like that
No thank you
i also was not serious about the drones
Please arkansas my texas
Love the messaging hate the font choice
Good thing the SCOTUS recently gutted sensible gun regulations. Not like anything happened today that might call the wisdom of that decision into question.
Just in time for the next presidential election. What crazy timing.
Our country is over.
the Dems have just as many boomers as the Republicans
All you have to do is vote and it’ll be fixed
tour stops in bend, richland, and spokane
It’s remarkable how many lives will be lost bc of 6 of these fucks
Pretty fucking irresponsible of Rolling Stone to publish that. People may start losing faith in the institution
5th circuit is taking up daca. It’s toast.
Operation Wetback 2022 here we go.
The trio of taking over the courts to tell the executive branch “you can’t do that, Congress has to” then rendering congress impotent is really just an impressively effective feat. Plus you get to just say “we’re undoing all previous court decisions we don’t like.” I hate them all.
Someone that actually knows what they’re talking about tell me if this is just crazy fearmongering stuff or a legitimate possibility. Plz and thanks.
Well, we’ll find out in 2 years!
Majority Report has had on a law professor or two and they definitely are worried about this case. It all depends on how the majority writes their opinion.
No, that's what is going to happen.
They've been working towards this moment for 50 years.
Although partially redeemed when one of these assholes is denied a mediocre steak
Lol at that clown shit. We can take away your rights but you can't take away ours.
If the Founding Fathers wanted to include an unalienable right to eat a medium (I assume he eats medium) steak at Mortons without being bothered they should have included it in the constitution.
Nah, he's definitely a "I like it well done. In fact, you can go ahead and burn it." kind of steak eater.
I was actually at Morton's in Jax to witness my grandfather order a well done filet. The waiter...."sir, are you sure." My grandfather- "burn it."
He loved that steak though.
Morton’s is owned by Tillman Fertitta of course they are upset
Sounds like Brett had to abort his meal
This is going to create a conundrum for conservatives in Florida. Currently the cause of action for a stillbirth caused by medical negligence is limited to pain and anguish as well as medical expenses incurred from the pregnancy. This now becomes a wrongful death case, or else it violates the alleged constitution as these shitbrick justices see it.
Yeah anyone thinking they were shielded from this got another thing coming
Hmmm so if a woman gets pregnant on a Tuesday and goes out drinking on Wednesday and this somehow leads to the termination of the pregnancy that's a criminal offense now?
We’ll all pay the price for this awful decision but I don’t get the characterization of Doug Ducey’s state with Republican majorities in both chambers of the legislature as a blue one.
unless she’s suggesting the Arizona law would have reach outside of Arizona because it’s being heard in a federal court, which also, no
I don't think she was making that characterization
I just think that illustrates how it's not simple. I'm technically in a blue state but that isn't going to shield me from the people that run it.
Maybe I'm missing the relevance, but isn't the point that this is a federal court that could affect everyone and not just Arizonians?
No, because the issue is only about how Arizona law defines life. That won’t change how other states define/regulate life; they’d need to pass a similar one (which, for sure, Republican trifecta states will)
It’s a case that could ultimately lead to a Supreme Court ruling that determines all fertilized eggs are people entitled to due process.