Supreme Court Watch

Status
Not open for further replies.
People are gonna fuck. It's in our biology.
So is having and raising children. Killing our children so we can mindlessly coom is what's abnormal.
A fetus doesn't feel anything. It's not sentient until pretty far along in the pregnancy. You want to force women to have babies and not give them any means to provide for them.
Neither are vegetables in a long term care facility, but they're still people.
That's all well and good but some states are also trying to make it illegal to travel to other states to have an abortion.
This will be shot down by the Supreme Court because Texas has no jurisdiction in california, etc.
Birth control can and does fail. You do know that, right?
Having sex may produce a child, even on birth control. Don't have sex if you don't want a child, or accept that you might have one.
People are going to have sex. It's in our biology.

You want to remove a way to deal with accidental pregnancies, and thus are forcing women to give birth, but you also are anti-welfare and anti-subsidized healthcare for the women you want to force to have babies.
It's not society's job to bail out irresponsible people. If you have a kid, be responsible for your actions and take care of it. You might find you grow as a person in ways you didn't think were possible.

It's clear you're just going to repeat the same thing, so this is my last post about it. Agree to disagree, but these are my perspectives.

I've never seen so many democrats side with incels on somehow being entitled to sex. Does nobody see the irony in that?
 
Well, yeah, but Republicans cutting education funding doesn't have much to do with this thread.
> higher education

>funding problem




375dcf46-69ed-4014-ab40-43c734264380.png


More like grifting problem.
 
Its really creepy how Pro lifers view themselves as the gate keeper to people's sexual habbits.
Bible thumpers gonna bible thump.

Sounds like birth control and gay relationships are coming next. There's even talk of premarital sex being next on the block.

You cannot be seriously arguing that higher education has a funding problem.
Overall state funding for public two- and four-year colleges in the school year ending in 2018 was more than $6.6 billion below what it was in 2008 just before the Great Recession fully took hold, after adjusting for inflation.
It's true. Tuition hasn't gone up just because of greedy schools
 
New big SCOTUS decision today (probably late and gay, but if I am the news got buried in people arguing with the Hulkster). I don't know how anyone can disagree with this one unless you are an atheist asshole or a cringey alt-reich LARPagan (another flavor of atheist asshole). The 1st amendment is clear:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...ootball-coach-fired-for-praying-on-the-field/

SCOTUS Sides with High School Football Coach Fired for Praying on the Field​

1
WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 25: Former Bremerton High School assistant football coach Joe Kennedy takes a knee in front of the U.S. Supreme Court after his legal case, Kennedy vs. Bremerton School District, was argued before the court on April 25, 2022 in Washington, DC. Kennedy was terminated from his …
Win McNamee/Getty Images
Katherine Hamilton27 Jun 20222,287

6:21


The Supreme Court on Monday sided 6-3 with a football coach who was fired for praying on the field after games, marking another win for religious liberty delivered by the conservative-leaning court.
The case surrounds high school football coach Joseph Kennedy and Bremerton School District in the state of Washington. Kennedy, a devout Christian who began working at Bremerton High School in 2008, was fired from his role as varsity assistant coach and as the junior varsity head coach after he refused to quit praying on the 50 yard line in full view of the public following games.


Kennedy asserted that the school district violated the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The district also used the First Amendment to justify its argument, claiming that Kennedy’s prayers in view of the public and students following a school-sanctioned event violate the Establishment Clause because his actions could be perceived as a district endorsement of religion.
Justice Neil Gorsuch delivered the majority opinion, ruling that the Bremerton School District violated the Free Exercise Clause and the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment by firing coach Joseph Kennedy for praying after games. Gorsuch further ruled that the district failed to prove that Kennedy violated the Establishment Clause and overruled the “Lemon test,” a measure of government coercion of religion which some justices have previously called outdated and misused.
“Respect for religious expressions is indispensable to life in a free and diverse Republic—whether those expressions take place in a sanctuary or on a field, and whether they manifest through the spoken word or a bowed head. Here, a government entity sought to punish an individual for engaging in a brief, quiet, personal religious observance doubly protected by the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment,” Gorsuch wrote.
Joseph Kennedy
Christian high school football coach Joseph Kennedy was fired in 2015 for refusing to stop kneeling and praying on the field after games. (Screenshot)
“And the only meaningful justification the government offered for its reprisal rested on a mistaken view that it had a duty to ferret out and suppress religious observances even as it allows comparable secular speech. The Constitution neither mandates nor tolerates that kind of discrimination,” he continued.
Gorsuch spoke against both the district court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which sided against Kennedy, writing that the lower courts’ interpretation of the Establishment Clause would make all school employee speech “subject to government control.”

“On this understanding, a school could fire a Muslim teacher for wearing a headscarf in the classroom or prohibit a Christian aide from praying quietly over her lunch in the cafeteria,” he wrote.
Gorsuch also clarified that the Establishment Clause, the Free Exercise Clause, and the Free Speech Clause have complementary purposes, “not warring ones where one Clause is always sure to prevail over the others.”
“In this way, the District effectively created its own vise between the Establishment Clause on one side and the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses on the other, placed itself in the middle, and then chose its preferred way out of its self-imposed trap,” he continued. “To defend its approach, the District relied on Lemon and its progeny. In upholding the District’s actions, the Ninth Circuit followed the same course.”

Gorsuch proceeded to eviscerate Lemon, noting the the district’s claim that Kennedy “coerced” students to pray with him were unfounded. The justice explained that the Lemon test “invited chaos” into lower courts and “created a minefield for legislators.”
“This Court has since made plain, too, that the Establishment Clause does not include anything like a modified heckler’s veto, in which . . . religious activity can be proscribed based on ‘perceptions’ or ‘discomfort,’ he wrote.

“In place of Lemon and the endorsement test, this Court has instructed that the Establishment Clause must be interpreted by ‘reference to historical practices and understandings,'” he continued.
Both Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito wrote concurring opinions; Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer, dissented. Sotomayor argued that the majority decision is a “disservice” to the separation of church and state, and is “no victory for religious liberty.”

First Liberty Institute, which represented Coach Kennedy, disagreed with Sotomayor’s assessment, calling the decision a “tremendous victory” for Kennedy, “and religious liberty for all Americans.”
“Our Constitution protects the right of every American to engage in private religious expression, including praying in public, without fear of getting fired. We are grateful that the Supreme Court recognized what the Constitution and law have always said – Americans are free to live out their faith in public,” Kelly Shackelford, president, CEO, and chief counsel for First Liberty said.


“This is another tremendous victory for the Constitution and rule of law,” agreed former Ambassador Ken Blackwell, senior adviser at both the Family Research Council and the America First Policy Institute. “This highlights yet again the incredible contribution that President Trump made to our nation’s highest court, which in the same week it upheld the Second Amendment and returned abortion to the states has now also upheld the original public meaning of both free speech and religious liberty in the First Amendment.”
Paul Clement, former U.S. Solicitor General and First Liberty network attorney who argued Kennedy’s case, also celebrated the win.
“After seven long years, Coach Kennedy can finally return to the place he belongs – coaching football and quietly praying by himself after the game. This is a great victory for Coach Kennedy and the First Amendment,” Clement said.

Coach Kennedy released a statement too, saying, “This is just so awesome.”
“All I’ve ever wanted was to be back on the field with my guys. I am incredibly grateful to the Supreme Court, my fantastic legal team, and everyone who has supported us. I thank God for answering our prayers and sustaining my family through this long battle,” he said.
The case is Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, No. 21-418 in the Supreme Court of the United States.
Katherine Hamilton is a political reporter for Breitbart News. You can follow her on Twitter.
 
You want the government to get rid of abortions. The best way to do that is to force vasectomies on men. We are removing women's bodily autonomy, so why not men's, too? Oh, right, because that'd affect you
Nigger, I absolutely hate you for spreading this idea because my girl is parroting it too. She's like "well, if abortion is illegal, all men should be required to get vasectomies until they're married. It's an easy and reversable procedure."

I had to hit her with a "damn, it's crazy that a bunch of white men took away your right to bodily autonomy - we totally need to reverse that decision." I'm *NOT* getting the little snib snib.
 
So is having and raising children. Killing our children so we can mindlessly coom is what's abnormal.
Good thing a fetus doesn't have sentience, right? It doesn't know what happens any more than the sperm that dies when you spank the monkey to anime.

Neither are vegetables in a long term care facility, but they're still people.
Right but they were actually alive at one point. A fetus never was born until it's born.
This will be shot down by the Supreme Court because Texas has no jurisdiction in california, etc.
Uh huh. Funny how you guys don't seem outraged about them trying this stuff but just dismiss it as "IT'LL GET STRUCK DOWN". I wonder why that is?
Having sex may produce a child, even on birth control. Don't have sex if you don't want a child, or accept that you might have one.
Like I've said, people are gonna fuck, as much as it pisses you guys off.
It's not society's job to bail out irresponsible people. If you have a kid, be responsible for your actions and take care of it. You might find you grow as a person in ways you didn't think were possible.
It's cute how you guys want to force women to have babies but not help them provide for it. You just want them to be poor.
It's clear you're just going to repeat the same thing, so this is my last post about it. Agree to disagree, but these are my perspectives.
Ironic coming from the guy repeating the same stuff over and over again.
I've never seen so many democrats side with incels on somehow being entitled to sex. Does nobody see the irony in that?
What? I think people should be able to have sex and if it results in a pregnancy, then they should be able to have an abortion if they choose.

> higher education

>funding problem




View attachment 3433159

More like grifting problem.
Why do you keep posting like this is 4chan?
 
Nigger, I absolutely hate you for spreading this idea because my girl is parroting it too. She's like "well, if abortion is illegal, all men should be required to get vasectomies until they're married. It's an easy and reversable procedure."

I had to hit her with a "damn, it's crazy that a bunch of white men took away your right to bodily autonomy - we totally need to reverse that decision." I'm *NOT* getting the little snib snib.
you'll get the snibsnib and you're gonna like it

i hope your girlfriend makes a random appointment for you and she won't tell you where you're going and then you get there and YOU'RE GETTING THE SNIBSNIB
 
Under liberal cultural rot you already have mothers putting their sons in dresses and their daughters in lettermen jackets and both on hormones. Banning abortion isn't going to do even a 10th of the psychological damage that will.
I'm so glad I wasn't born to that generation, abortion sounds like a blessing from the gods in comparison.
 
Bible thumpers gonna bible thump.

Sounds like birth control and gay relationships are coming next. There's even talk of premarital sex being next on the block.
Read Alito's decision instead of just Thomas's concurence where he tries to stick the knife in a bit with his non-precedent setting opinions. For this to happen, the make-up of the court has to change, which would mean either more conservative judges or the current conservative judges being replaced with ones that agree with Thomas. I doubt Alito would have said so otherwise becuase he clearly said stuff like gay marriage, birth control can't be changed under the same reasoning and they have different constitutional justification.
 
Read Alito's decision instead of just Thomas's concurence where he tries to stick the knife in a bit with his non-precedent setting opinions. For this to happen, the make-up of the court has to change, which would mean either more conservative judges or the current conservative judges being replaces with ones that agree with Thomas. I doubt Alito would have said so otherwise becuase he clearly said stuff like gay marriage, birht control can't be changed under the same reasoning and they have different constitutional justification.
Wait til their evangelical overlords tell them to change their mind on that
 
Yes, and I literally showed a link showing that funding has been cut drastically in the past decade.
Your source shows that state funding has been cut, because more and more of it is coming from federally-backed student loans.
The issue isn't a lack of money, it's just state governments offloading the burden onto the federal government, because they can get away with it and because it's another horribly misguided federal policy at work.
Universities make more money than ever, because student loans can't be discharged via bankruptcy, so there's never been consequences for the value of the loan not living up to its outcomes, which is why administrative departments are horribly bloated and tuition keeps skyrocketing.
 
Your link only talked about state funding. If funding were even remotely a problem, why do we have so many universities forcing students to buy 43rd edition calculus 1 books when the 42nd edition was published just last year?
Correct and most funding comes from states for state universities.

Lol funding is a problem which is why they are having them do that.

Your source shows that state funding has been cut, because more and more of it is coming from federally-backed student loans.
The issue isn't a lack of money, it's just state governments offloading the burden onto the federal government, because they can get away with it and because it's another horribly misguided federal policy at work.
The bolded part there. People still gotta pay those loans because less funding. State tuition went up because of cut of funding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back