77 comments

  1. Your comments cannot be serious, do you really think public outcry by the majority are tears. No it means action, votes and more work to vote out authoritarian candidates who only want to oppress and abuse. The words woman, freedom or abortion are not in the US Constitution and to act like there is some governmental reason to oppress women that is bs

    1. @Neil Dusseault Sadly your definition is incomplete. An adult HUMAN female. But that is not the real problem with your position. I’m sure you think your statement “Do I accept those who are different than me?” is a well formed position. But that is incorrectly framed, and that is why it is a useless foundational position. The basis of *HUMAN* civilization and *SOCIETY* is the concept of “NORMAL” meaning the acceptable standard of behavior that makes coherent society and civilization possible. So far, human civilization has chosen to deem *CANNIBALISM* an unacceptable behavior. They are different than you, assuming you do not eat human flesh. Yet your position exudes an arrogant liberal pride that you are non-judgemental to the point of accepting cannibalism as “just different” and therefore something you would proudly accept.

      I’m sure your conditioned reaction will be that the example is hyperbolic. Perhaps it is and must be, because I find liberal minds cannot logically extrapolate subtle abstract concepts beyond their immediate gratification. Do you think a person suffering a debilitating delusion *HAS THE RIGHT* to demand every other person accept, encourage and even defend that delusion? More than that, *CAN THE STATE* and the power of the state, be *USED TO COMPEL* participation in the delusion of someone who is mentally ill?

    2. @Jillian Copeland “the right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment such as forced pregnancy,” You are full of it. Shredding a child into hundreds of pieces and sucking it into a dumpster (for the convenience of the mother) is the epitome of sadistic cruelty. The child has its own separate and distinct DNA, its own body, with it own heartbeat, and nervous system. The mother has hers. Infanticide, like slavery before it, is not mentioned in the constitution or bill of rights. These are not rights, they never were.

  2. …well – the people didn’t show up during any of the midterm elections – they deserve this result. Tell them if they really want to be screwed – don’t show up in November 2022 either…

    1. @Pedro The Mexican *9th Amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.*

      The Constitution is very specific in stating the exact opposite of your doctrine that any right not specifically included in the Constitution does not exist. But you’re right about one thing: somebody needs to retake high school civics.

  3. “I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.”
    – Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787

    1. I believe Mr Jefferson also said anyone who would give up Liberty for safety deserves neither. And by the way and his day the people who were saying this were looking at a rope in a tree not a musket!

  4. Cleary, the first part of the 2nd Amendment is a context phrase (a preposition) to the second part which is the declaration phrase. Meaning that the right to bear arms is guaranteed in the context of forming a militia. That’s patently clear, and any English grammar scholar knows it.

    1. @David Pompili Oh, no, wasn’t criticizing your English, at all. You gave a choice, I went for the latter. LOL

      I was agreeing that it was his Forte’. LOL

      You made a great point, BTW.

    2. @Shawn Newell You make it so much harder than it has to be. There was no gun issue in 1791. Why would they need to create a Constitutional amendment to protect a thing that wasn’t under threat?

      This is the heart of the issue.

      The gun debate is recent and modern. But I guess James Madison was a futurist, he could see that far into the future and recognize the people of the future, wouldn’t be able to have guns (Liberal Dems were even a problem back then I guess) so he figured even though it was 150 years ahead of its time and no one could have imagined the kind of weapons science and engineering would offer us, I guess he just needed to act.

      This makes sense to Americans, I guess.

      I know one thing, forget Abortion or gun rights, I think we need a Constitutional Amendment to protect time travel. If we don’t some future government beauracrat, could threaten your right to visit the past.

      Oh, they’ll blah blah about multiverse and time lines, but we need to get this done now. If we wait, it’ll be too late. We need a Constitutional right to travel infinite time. God gave us that right and you will NOT infringe.

      GROAN!

      This is what these dim bulbs believe happened in 1791. No, what happened was America, A new nation, needed a national defense and the second was the best way to get it going quickly. It had barely been 15 years, the Brits may well have tried to come back.

      Only a dishonest moron could think the Second refers to an unchangeable, universal, God Given, RIGHT, to own any weapon you can afford. IT IS UTTERLY SENSELESS!

      What is wrong with Americans?

  5. What’s so sad is that in America, the land of liberty and freedoms, the one thing we are suppose to have control over are the decisions we make in our own personal and private lives. We are suppose to have control over the decisions we make in our own homes and homesteads. But apparently not anymore. Republicans have decided that they will make those decisions for you and me. If that’s not wrong, then nothing is wrong.

    Semper Fi…

    1. @Tomas Pita You didn’t have to write a thesis to try and make your argument. Good try, though. Abortion is not a Constitutional right, it is not expressly written in the Constitution. Keep in mind it involves two lives, not not just one. Where does the privacy of one life take priority over the life of another life??? The majority of the Justices opined, and I agree with their reasoning, that it should not be left up to 9 unelected black robed individuals to decide these morality issues. For over 185 years this particular issue was a states issue. It’s only within the last 50 years that SCOTUS decided, erroneously, to make a states issue a Constitutional right. Justice Alito is a brilliant jurist who layed out his arguments beautifully and cogently. Thank God we still have great minds in our SCOTUS because the last 3 liberal justices nominated and approved by the Senate aren’t exactly stellar intellects.

  6. I recall that Americans were very upset when the Ayatollahs took over Iran creating an Islamic state…and the Taliban imposing their religious ideology on Afghanistan, and particularly on the women, was considered evil.
    Yet here we are with the same thing being implemented in the USA.

    1. @Tony Bryant This exposes that you think abortion is somehow bad.
      Or avoids the reality that slave owners were fine with breeding slaves, so long as they remained enslaved.
      And they want that perpetual underclass. This requires not only more of these people, but people in financial need, too busy to rise up, too busy to cause trouble, just working, working, working.
      And if you cannot control your reproductive choices, you’re going to end up with kids, they’re going to cost money, time, and end up working the same poor jobs.
      Justice Thomas has even explicitly stated that birth control of any sort is open to similar criminalization.
      The well-to-do need not worry about this, they will have ways around, influence with law enforcement, and never suffer these consequences.
      Does it make sense yet? Or you just concern trolling?

    1. @Luis
      Are you trying to saying that it’s stupid to say, and a nutjob would say, “morality depends on the culture” or are you affirming “morality depends on the culture”?

      Because if morality depends on the culture, then we can’t judge a society that stones women.

  7. Separation of church and state.

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

    Federal government will not establish a religion nor will it prohibit the free exercise thereof (by the people).

    You belief what you belief & do what you want. I belief what i belief & do what i want.

    1. And murder is murder!

      Heartbeat = Life
      End of Heartbeat = Death

      When a person intentionally ends a life we normally call that murder or manslaughter depending on intent.

    2. @John Thomas in the real world, all killings are not necessarily murders. You should try nuance, it’s not that hard. It even helps making life easier sometimes.

    3. @Will Hartley because they have not thought about the fact that the starting point of human life is totally irrelevant and does not constitute a good argument against abortion.

  8. It’s long past time to acknowledge that the “reasoning” SC Justices (and especially these conservatives) give is based less on legal arguments and more on personal political philosophies!

    1. Isn’t it an objective question rather than a moral or philosophical one? Is the right to abortion guaranteed by the constitution or not? We all speak English so we should be able to agree on the words of an important document. And so what if its not in the constitution, the majority supports the right to abortion right? So just make an amendment. Meanwhile people should chill, its not like its illegal just cause its not a right.

  9. This supreme court could NOT rise above the extremism in this country right now. In fact, They just showed that the courts have become extreme.

    1. @#SuperOldGameSaturday that is a stupid statement because i can’t tell you have never read it by what you say .

    2. @Scott Simmans Spoken by someone with deflection issues who didn’t read it and is likely to be the next Nicholas John Roske. Oh wait, that’s EVERY Democrat now.

  10. The underlying foundation of this right (and other rights) is the *_Right to Privacy._* This court is dismantling that foundation – and those celebrating this “victory” will find that the State owns and uses *all* your personal, professional, medical, “private” and secured information to control you and all those like you.

    1. @Reformed Conservative No I am not.
      That would take a Constitutional Amendment.

    2. @Dominique Brasseur Thank you for your kind comment, my friend. I would never vote for a Republican. I grew up in a red state among Republicans and saw first hand that their thinking and policies were cruel, hypocritical, selfish, and dangerous. I am as sad and concerned as you are. I believe the entire planet will be affected by what happens in the US and I feel tremendous worry for all lives. I believe we are in for a very turbulent time ahead. The majority of Americans want a democracy and freedom but the minority has used gerrymandering and restrictive voting laws to control vote outcomes. Not to mention propaganda. And going forward they will contest all vote outcomes they do not like, and likely decide the vote themselves. I believe our last free and fair election for a long time was 2020. We all will witness horrible things in our future as experts and even some Republicans are saying that the worst is coming. I still cannot believe we can’t do something to stop them. Thank you for your support, and I wish you and your family the very best.

  11. The nail is in the coffin of this nation’s trust in the Supreme Court. It is gone, and it will not return. Four justices who in their nomination interviews and in their testimony under oath before congress stated on the record that RvW was settled constitutional law, have decided now that it is not. The opinion doesn’t state that new evidence has come to light that compelled these justices to change their mind, which is their right to do. Alito in his confirmation hearings back in 1990 stated it was settled. Yet his opinion stated Friday is that RvW was always wrong. So if these four justices are on the public record during their confirmation that RvW was settled, and there is no new and compelling evidence put forth that has changed their mind, then there is only one conclusion that can be drawn. They lied. They lied to get on the court. They lied to get on the court with the intention of waiting until the day that their “side” would have the votes to overturn RvW. They lied to congress. They lied to the American people. And it could be argued they lied in front of God.
    When the evidence is clear that half the court lied to get on the court and then deliberately waited until the right opportunity to carry our their agenda, an agenda that is either driven by their personal interpretation of religion or is driven by their political affiliation (or both), you have a court that cannot be trusted. It is not acting on behalf of the will of the people. It is not acting on established constitutional law. It is acting on self interest, personal interest. And this is why the U.S. Supreme Court has irrevocably squandered its trust through a political process veiled in religion. The supreme court is now just another political hack institution, used by which ever party can load it to their benefit, to drive political agendas and not to serve the constitution or the people the constitution is supposed to serve and protect. No matter where you stand on RvW, today is a dark day. No one wins. Everyone is a loser, because the branch of government our founding fathers created as an essential check on the other two branches is now cemented in history as just a political hack. For those of you celebrating a single decision today, take note. Whether it is five years from now, or 25 years from now, the court will be loaded the other day, and the institution will function then as it is today, serving the party that loaded the majority.

    1. @Texas75023 I know every word to Mama Tried and Sing Me Back Home along with Amazing Grace an Old Yeller yeah I wasn’t that a sad story sometimes you just got to do what you got to do though

    2. @wouldn’t you like to know Truth. They thought they could kill babies without consequence . . . but a few of the babies they did not kill decided to stand up for the rest. Keep standing brother.

    3. @wouldn’t you like to know *MEN* have always had to do the tough job . . . often living our lives in quiet desperation.

      We’ve made a world safe for women . . . where women could thrive . . . and they have shown the majority of women are unappreciative and ungrateful.

      This does not end pretty for humanity.

    4. Even the Late Liberal Justice Ginsberg admitted the RvW decision was not on a sound basis. RvW was not legislation, not a law, or a constitutional right. RvW was wrongly decided as a right to privacy. Abortion is not a right to privacy. RvW was a settled decision, a ruling but not constitutional law or a constitutional right. This is false framing. There’s no better example of democracy and a working court than one that has the courage to overturn a bad unconstitutional decision putting the power back to the people of each state. Instead of legislating from the bench this court unlegislated from the bench.

    5. Bet you the SC will still have a higher approval rating than the Dem majority Congress 🤣🤣🤣

  12. You cant self regulate your own sovereign militia outside the control of the US gov on US soil.
    Theres a specific term for that.

    1. The “Militia” is the purview of your locally elected sheriff. You may be thinking of the National Guard, in which case you would be wrong there as well as the National Guard falls under the control of your governor, unless federalized, which comes with specific criteria.

    2. When you add the word control then you just lost the argument. The Constitution says, “shall not infringe”. Easy one.

  13. “I fear the day that ideology will surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots.”

  14. Thank you for calling the SCOTUS out. We blew past conservatism long ago, by the time McConnell decided to hold up any and all legislation and nominees proposed by the moderate left. This is what he paved the way to do, and the GOP as we know it now is not trying to say otherwise anymore.

  15. Assume they will repeal all your civil rights. Use this as motivation to vote. Don’t forget today when your institutions abandoned you. May all these justices burn in hell for the pain they just inflicted on so many women.

    1. We will vote for those who still respect the rule of law and understand the difference between a democracy, a republic, states rights, Federalism, and what separation of powers means. These justices didn’t do a thing to obliterate a woman’s rights. Our institution, SCOTUS, opined correctly and made right a 50 year wrongly decided law. They returned back to the states and their people, to decide through their elected representatives, the right to make their own decisions/ laws. That’s democracy which Liberals claim to revere.

  16. So with that thought expressed by Thomas …the citizens United ruling most be stricken from the books …according to Thomas that ruling is not in the constitution either ….so let’s see what this right wing justices do with that one too …

  17. Zakaria’s conclusion is boosted by the fact that 3 of the justices lied about their stand on Roe v. Wade to get past the panel. Not exactly what you’d expect from members of the high tribunal.

    1. @Stuart Hayward – Figured as much. What I do is block them every time. There are so many of them. Same content, different names.

  18. Yes! You are right! I’m a baby boomer, I told my sister 2 days ago that now no court in our land is trustworthy anymore. Everyone is bought and paid for. Everyone. I’m glad my parents are no longer here to see the slow burning away of democracy in America. I’m saddened

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.