Some registered account users are experiencing password recognition issues. The issue appears to have been triggered by a PHP update last night. If this is occurring, please try logging in and using the "forgot password?" utility. Bear in mind auto-generated password reset emails may appear in your spam folder. If this does not work, please click the "Contact Us" option near the lower right hand corner of the index page to contact me via email.

Thank you for your patience!
- M.W.

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)

Debate and discussion of current events and political issues across the U.S. and throughout the World. Be forewarned -- this forum is NOT for the intellectually weak or those of you with thin skins. Don't come crying to me if you become the subject of ridicule. **Board Administrator reserves the right to revoke posting privileges based on my sole discretion**
Post Reply
User avatar
audiophile
Posts: 9236
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Between 88 and 108 MHz.

Re: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)

Unread post by audiophile »

Image

Pinocchio was just on TV, claiming Thomas was trying undo contraception.

Rubbish, no one is trying overturn that! :rolleyes
Last edited by audiophile on Fri Jun 24, 2022 1:07 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Ask not what your country can do FOR you; ask what they are about to do TO YOU!!
Top
User avatar
Honeyman
Posts: 6904
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 4:44 pm

Re: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)

Unread post by Honeyman »

audiophile wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 12:57 pm Image

Pinocchio was just on TV, claiming Thomas was trying undo contraception.

Rubbish, no one is trying overturn that! :rolleyes
Wrong. That was EXACTLY what Thomas said:

Thomas wrote, “In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.”


Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States protects the liberty of married couples to buy and use contraceptives without government restriction.
Last edited by Honeyman on Fri Jun 24, 2022 1:15 pm, edited 3 times in total.
The censorship king from out of state.
Top
User avatar
audiophile
Posts: 9236
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Between 88 and 108 MHz.

Re: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)

Unread post by audiophile »

Hey 2012 called :rollin

Again, no one is trying overturn that! :rolleyes You are dense today.

Biden just pulled a line from George Stephanopoulos' playbook.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pxyzAjk72U

Ask not what your country can do FOR you; ask what they are about to do TO YOU!!
Top
User avatar
MotorCityRadioFreak
Posts: 7333
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 6:26 am
Location: Warren, MI

Re: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)

Unread post by MotorCityRadioFreak »

Clarence Thomas also said as part of this ruling that non pro creative sex should be re evaluated. I hope you all enjoyed your BJ's because individual states now have the right to ban them. Fuck SCOTUS. Expand the court!
They/them, non-binary and proud.

Remember that “2000 Mules” was concocted by a circus of elephants.
The right needs to stop worry about what’s between people’s legs. Instead, they should focus on what’s between their ears.
Audacity sucks.
Top
Chrocket87
Posts: 498
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 1:46 pm

Re: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)

Unread post by Chrocket87 »

Be careful what you wish for. Let’s say Biden uses his razor thin Democratic majority in Congress to pack the courts with left-wing ideologues until he gets a majority. Well, now there’s precedent for DeSantis (or another conservative) to use a razor thin Republican majority in Congress to pack the courts with conservative ideologues until he gets a majority in 2025. And so on and so forth. When does it end?

Obviously, this scenario is very unlikely to happen, as Biden doesn’t have the votes for this cycle to begin.
Top
User avatar
Bryce
Posts: 7178
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 12:04 pm

Re: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)

Unread post by Bryce »

MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:00 pm Clarence Thomas also said as part of this ruling that non pro creative sex should be re evaluated. I hope you all enjoyed your BJ's because individual states now have the right to ban them. Fuck SCOTUS. Expand the court!
Don't get your panties in a wad. No other justice joined with Justice Thomas in that opinion. Ain't gonna happen.

Even if it did, and the state you lived in did ban sodomy, you're free to move to a state that allows nob gobbling to your hearts content.
New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.
Top
Matt
Posts: 11505
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:18 pm
Location: Home of the National Champions

Re: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)

Unread post by Matt »

MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:00 pm Clarence Thomas also said as part of this ruling that non pro creative sex should be re evaluated. I hope you all enjoyed your BJ's because individual states now have the right to ban them. Fuck SCOTUS. Expand the court!
Typical overly emotional leftist.

Fuck the SCOTUS for following the constitution? That makes zero sense...
This is a pro-Harris/Walz account

"I have to admit - Matt is right." ~bmw
Top
User avatar
MotorCityRadioFreak
Posts: 7333
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 6:26 am
Location: Warren, MI

Re: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)

Unread post by MotorCityRadioFreak »

Bryce wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:28 pm
MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:00 pm Clarence Thomas also said as part of this ruling that non pro creative sex should be re evaluated. I hope you all enjoyed your BJ's because individual states now have the right to ban them. Fuck SCOTUS. Expand the court!
Don't get your panties in a wad. No other justice joined with Justice Thomas in that opinion. Ain't gonna happen.

Even if it did, and the state you lived in did ban sodomy, you're free to move to a state that allows nob gobbling to your hearts content.
It already happened today, you dumb fuck. Non pro creative sex is banned.
They/them, non-binary and proud.

Remember that “2000 Mules” was concocted by a circus of elephants.
The right needs to stop worry about what’s between people’s legs. Instead, they should focus on what’s between their ears.
Audacity sucks.
Top
User avatar
Bryce
Posts: 7178
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 12:04 pm

Re: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)

Unread post by Bryce »

MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:00 pm
Bryce wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:28 pm
MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:00 pm Clarence Thomas also said as part of this ruling that non pro creative sex should be re evaluated. I hope you all enjoyed your BJ's because individual states now have the right to ban them. Fuck SCOTUS. Expand the court!
Don't get your panties in a wad. No other justice joined with Justice Thomas in that opinion. Ain't gonna happen.

Even if it did, and the state you lived in did ban sodomy, you're free to move to a state that allows nob gobbling to your hearts content.
It already happened today, you dumb fuck. Non pro creative sex is banned.
BJ's and butt banging have been banned? Where?
New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.
Top
Matt
Posts: 11505
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:18 pm
Location: Home of the National Champions

Re: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)

Unread post by Matt »

MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:00 pm
Bryce wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:28 pm
MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:00 pm Clarence Thomas also said as part of this ruling that non pro creative sex should be re evaluated. I hope you all enjoyed your BJ's because individual states now have the right to ban them. Fuck SCOTUS. Expand the court!
Don't get your panties in a wad. No other justice joined with Justice Thomas in that opinion. Ain't gonna happen.

Even if it did, and the state you lived in did ban sodomy, you're free to move to a state that allows nob gobbling to your hearts content.
It already happened today, you dumb fuck. Non pro creative sex is banned.
Abortion wasn't even banned. Quit being an overly emotional victim.
This is a pro-Harris/Walz account

"I have to admit - Matt is right." ~bmw
Top
User avatar
MotorCityRadioFreak
Posts: 7333
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 6:26 am
Location: Warren, MI

Re: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)

Unread post by MotorCityRadioFreak »

Matt wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:10 pm
MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:00 pm
Bryce wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:28 pm
MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:00 pm Clarence Thomas also said as part of this ruling that non pro creative sex should be re evaluated. I hope you all enjoyed your BJ's because individual states now have the right to ban them. Fuck SCOTUS. Expand the court!
Don't get your panties in a wad. No other justice joined with Justice Thomas in that opinion. Ain't gonna happen.

Even if it did, and the state you lived in did ban sodomy, you're free to move to a state that allows nob gobbling to your hearts content.
It already happened today, you dumb fuck. Non pro creative sex is banned.
Abortion wasn't even banned. Quit being an overly emotional victim.
I'm saving this for November.
They/them, non-binary and proud.

Remember that “2000 Mules” was concocted by a circus of elephants.
The right needs to stop worry about what’s between people’s legs. Instead, they should focus on what’s between their ears.
Audacity sucks.
Top
Matt
Posts: 11505
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:18 pm
Location: Home of the National Champions

Re: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)

Unread post by Matt »

MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:20 pm
Matt wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:10 pm
MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:00 pm
Bryce wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:28 pm
MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:00 pm Clarence Thomas also said as part of this ruling that non pro creative sex should be re evaluated. I hope you all enjoyed your BJ's because individual states now have the right to ban them. Fuck SCOTUS. Expand the court!
Don't get your panties in a wad. No other justice joined with Justice Thomas in that opinion. Ain't gonna happen.

Even if it did, and the state you lived in did ban sodomy, you're free to move to a state that allows nob gobbling to your hearts content.
It already happened today, you dumb fuck. Non pro creative sex is banned.
Abortion wasn't even banned. Quit being an overly emotional victim.
I'm saving this for November.
Looking forward to the red tsunami?
This is a pro-Harris/Walz account

"I have to admit - Matt is right." ~bmw
Top
User avatar
MotorCityRadioFreak
Posts: 7333
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 6:26 am
Location: Warren, MI

Re: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)

Unread post by MotorCityRadioFreak »

Matt wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:34 pm
MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:20 pm
Matt wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:10 pm
MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:00 pm
Bryce wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:28 pm
MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:00 pm Clarence Thomas also said as part of this ruling that non pro creative sex should be re evaluated. I hope you all enjoyed your BJ's because individual states now have the right to ban them. Fuck SCOTUS. Expand the court!
Don't get your panties in a wad. No other justice joined with Justice Thomas in that opinion. Ain't gonna happen.

Even if it did, and the state you lived in did ban sodomy, you're free to move to a state that allows nob gobbling to your hearts content.
It already happened today, you dumb fuck. Non pro creative sex is banned.
Abortion wasn't even banned. Quit being an overly emotional victim.
I'm saving this for November.
Looking forward to the red tsunami?
When you say red tsunami, I don't think you realize what you are asking for.
They/them, non-binary and proud.

Remember that “2000 Mules” was concocted by a circus of elephants.
The right needs to stop worry about what’s between people’s legs. Instead, they should focus on what’s between their ears.
Audacity sucks.
Top
User avatar
MotorCityRadioFreak
Posts: 7333
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 6:26 am
Location: Warren, MI

Re: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)

Unread post by MotorCityRadioFreak »

It's all over. Gretchen is getting a second term as is Nessel. Women are going to come out and vote like their lives depend on it because it does.
They/them, non-binary and proud.

Remember that “2000 Mules” was concocted by a circus of elephants.
The right needs to stop worry about what’s between people’s legs. Instead, they should focus on what’s between their ears.
Audacity sucks.
Top
Matt
Posts: 11505
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:18 pm
Location: Home of the National Champions

Re: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)

Unread post by Matt »

MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:41 pm
Matt wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:34 pm
MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:20 pm
Matt wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:10 pm
MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:00 pm
Bryce wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:28 pm
MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:00 pm Clarence Thomas also said as part of this ruling that non pro creative sex should be re evaluated. I hope you all enjoyed your BJ's because individual states now have the right to ban them. Fuck SCOTUS. Expand the court!
Don't get your panties in a wad. No other justice joined with Justice Thomas in that opinion. Ain't gonna happen.

Even if it did, and the state you lived in did ban sodomy, you're free to move to a state that allows nob gobbling to your hearts content.
It already happened today, you dumb fuck. Non pro creative sex is banned.
Abortion wasn't even banned. Quit being an overly emotional victim.
I'm saving this for November.
Looking forward to the red tsunami?
When you say red tsunami, I don't think you realize what you are asking for.
Big Republican wins.
This is a pro-Harris/Walz account

"I have to admit - Matt is right." ~bmw
Top
Post Reply

Return to “Political Potpourri - U.S. and World”