Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died at 87. - 🦀

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Feline Supremacist said:
How hard is it to not have unprotected sex? Is it that hard? Maybe keep your legs closed if it's too hard for you to take a pill, get a shot, get an IUD or learn to insert a diaphragm. And condoms are sold everywhere and given away for free.

t. woman who learned to do things
Click to expand...

Yeah, but if that WAP makes your pull-out game weak.....
 
  • Winner
  • Horrifying
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Accidental Racism, Nguyen Van Phuoc, Toolbox and 4 others
Caustic Gelatin said:
What is with the fetishization (not the kind that makes weirdos peepees hard) of Ruth Bader Ginsburg anyway?
I mean there are books, toys, bobble-heads, funk pops, coloring books and even costumes to dress your children up in. Some places even shoehorn her in as some sort of pop culture reference (I think that new scooby-doo movie had one of the characters as a child dressed up as her). Its never really sat right with me and always seemed pretty weird that people seem to worship her as some sort of saint or deity or something like that.
I'm sure it will now only get worse now that shes kicked the bucket. Probably going to be seeing shit with her on it popping up everywhere.
Click to expand...
She's the most vocally left wing of the left-wing judges, and actively says she is legislating from the bench. or well, did.

She was seen by the left as exactly the kind of judge that would usher in the 'good' future where all democrat policies are green lit and all conservative policies are cast down.

The worst part is, if Hillary had won, they'd be right.
 
  • Like
  • Horrifying
Reactions: Nguyen Van Phuoc, JambledUpWords, Iwasamwillbe and 4 others
benutz said:
Trump news: Obama warns democracy at risk as president pushes to nominate right-wing justice before election


View attachment 1608150


Barack Obama has warned US democracy is at risk if Republicans press ahead with plans to fill the Supreme Court seat left vacant by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Her death just over six weeks before US election day is likely to trigger a fierce battle over whether President Donald Trump should nominate her replacement at the highest court in America, or if the seat should remain vacant until the result of the race in November against Democratic challenger Joe Biden is known.

In a statement, Mr Obama said: “A basic principle of the law — and of everyday fairness — is that we apply rules with consistency, and not based on what’s convenient or advantageous in the moment. The rule of law, the legitimacy of our courts, the fundamental workings of our democracy all depend on that basic principle.”
Click to expand...
Sithis said:
View attachment 1608179
Click to expand...
None More Black said:
in his book david axelrod even talked about obama lying about his stance on gay marriage specifically due to religious blacks
View attachment 1608197
Click to expand...
The guy is a disingenuous hypocrite who just tugs the party line of "do the opposite of what my enemies do" like your standard soulless politician? Say it ain't so. Seriously though, for all his bullshit of unity and peace, he's been using his cult to his advantage since he left office, even telling people right before he left that now was the time to be more critical of the president than ever by passing it off as some sort of free speech thing despite never doing otherwise during his own run which is when it was needed the most since you couldn't say one thing about him without being called racist and I doubt he would've said this if Clinton had won. Guy is still salty as fuck over a fucking tweet.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: Oats12345, Nguyen Van Phuoc, The Pink Panther and 12 others
Caustic Gelatin said:
What is with the fetishization (not the kind that makes weirdos peepees hard) of Ruth Bader Ginsburg anyway?
I mean there are books, toys, bobble-heads, funk pops, coloring books and even costumes to dress your children up in. Some places even shoehorn her in as some sort of pop culture reference (I think that new scooby-doo movie had one of the characters as a child dressed up as her). Its never really sat right with me and always seemed pretty weird that people seem to worship her as some sort of saint or deity or something like that.
I'm sure it will now only get worse now that shes kicked the bucket. Probably going to be seeing shit with her on it popping up everywhere.
Click to expand...
It's the deification of an individual to strengthen and perpetuate a certain mindset. It's why people get starstruck or why some people dedicate themselves to a fandom of sorts.

You establish someone as a superstar or idol and vilify anyone who disagrees.
 
Last edited:
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
Reactions: CashMoney!, Kosher Salt, Parthenos and 3 others
Caustic Gelatin said:
What is with the fetishization (not the kind that makes weirdos peepees hard) of Ruth Bader Ginsburg anyway?
I mean there are books, toys, bobble-heads, funk pops, coloring books and even costumes to dress your children up in. Some places even shoehorn her in as some sort of pop culture reference (I think that new scooby-doo movie had one of the characters as a child dressed up as her). Its never really sat right with me and always seemed pretty weird that people seem to worship her as some sort of saint or deity or something like that.
I'm sure it will now only get worse now that shes kicked the bucket. Probably going to be seeing shit with her on it popping up everywhere.
Click to expand...

Few have brought Moloch more sacrifices
 
  • Winner
  • Agree
  • Horrifying
Reactions: CashMoney!, Kosher Salt, Exigent Circumcisions and 14 others
Honka Honka Burning Love said:
I mean, The entire idea of the SCOTUS is that they are supposed to be principled and not political, people who can't do that should not be on the supreme court at all.
Click to expand...
Doesn't even seem like the Republican picks of Kavanaugh and Gorsuch turned out to be that partisan. Nasty problem with giving a shit about the constitution is it means you can't just rule in favor of one party each time.
 
  • Feels
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Kosher Salt, Nguyen Van Phuoc, Francis York Morgan and 12 others
Caustic Gelatin said:
What is with the fetishization (not the kind that makes weirdos peepees hard) of Ruth Bader Ginsburg anyway?
I mean there are books, toys, bobble-heads, funk pops, coloring books and even costumes to dress your children up in. Some places even shoehorn her in as some sort of pop culture reference (I think that new scooby-doo movie had one of the characters as a child dressed up as her). Its never really sat right with me and always seemed pretty weird that people seem to worship her as some sort of saint or deity or something like that.
I'm sure it will now only get worse now that shes kicked the bucket. Probably going to be seeing shit with her on it popping up everywhere.
Click to expand...
I have a friend named Ronald who is a higher up in corporate for a major fast food chain and apparently there's going to be a Ruth Bader Ginsburg burger released next week after the success of the Travis Scott burger.
 
  • Lunacy
  • Like
  • Horrifying
Reactions: Kosher Salt, Lissamine Green, Nguyen Van Phuoc and 7 others
holy shit almost 100 pages in one fucking day
by the time I catch up it will have another 200 pages
meanwhile some pics related to the topic, I hope those haven't been posted yet
1600539906759.jpg
1600540237316.png

1600547081336.jpg
f78a60e1af136b7e7873389f16e57c25b67312b49162c70926941a0e1b2b8684.jpg

e: skimming thru the pages, and looking at the tweets, I really can't believe how insane democrats are
Trump won the election according to the rles that has been in place for like 100 years, and they screm "oh noes, our democracy is in danger", and riot
now he gets to use his presidential power according to the rules that has been estabilished long time before him, and again it's "democracy is more in danger" and more threats of rioting
meanwhile democrat-supporting newspapers wonder if Trump suppoerters would accept his defeat, or would they start political violence, totally ignoring when the left cannot accept their defeat
such a clown world, this timeline is
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Feels
Reactions: Kosher Salt, Jackisnotaname, Oats12345 and 16 others
Standardized Profile said:
I don't know about "incel talking points," but within living memory the government of an advanced, cultured nation ordered the mass murder of defective and poorly-raised persons. They were roundly scolded, but "non-voluntary euthanasia" is becoming normalized again. In my life, I think we'll move from non-voluntary to straight up involuntary euthanasia again. ("Don't worry, doctor, dad always screams no, stop at 4-o'-clock. Just hurry up and give him his shot.) As for infanticide, there are academic philosophers like Singer who promote infanticide on utilitarian grounds and because newborns aren't really sentient. How long does it take before a baby can recognize itself in a mirror? Is something less intelligent than a dolphin or an elephant really a human person?

The problem with abortion jurisprudence is the legal fiction that a human organism becomes a person at the moment birth is completed, as if some metaphysical metamorphosis occurs the moment his/her little toesies clear the vagina. It's not a particularly rational belief. It most closely mirrors the religious idea of "transubstantiation," the idea that the physical matter that makes something up--a piece of bread or a human organism--transforms essentially but invisibly into another being. The bread becomes the flesh of Christ, the human organism becomes a human person, all without a single particle of matter changing. Thinking people reject this because there's no rational or empirical reason to believe it occurs. (In religion it is believed because of divine revelation, but that doesn't apply here.) Once you get past this magical idea, you start looking for some other landmark that indicates the human organism has become a human person. It could be conception, implantation, development of some physical feature, quickening, even the mirror test, though I reject that. It could be anything that's observable and can serve as a rational basis for determining that an organism is now a person.

Whenever you decide that a human organism becomes a person, that's when he or she has rights, and you have to think about whether the homicide of that person is justifiable or excusable. I'm old-fashioned and subscribe to the idea that homicide is justified in cases of necessary self-defense, defense of others, just war, and operation of law to protect society, following due process. These standards are, or used to be, pretty universal throughout Western Civilization if not the entire civilized world.

Under these principles, an individual abortion could be justified to prevent grievous bodily harm to the mother or other fetuses, as that's self-defense or the defense of others. (And I don't buy the idea that healthy childbirth is GBH.) It could also be said a rape victim suffers sustained harm by experiencing pregnancy, and abortion is the only way to stop that harm. Not everyone would be convinced, but the actual number of abortions attributed to rape is so low, about 1%, that few pro-lifers would fight over it. But abortion for economic reasons, or lifestyle reasons, or convenience, cannot be justified under traditional Western principles.

To return to @Terrorist's reductio ad absurdum, there are lots of people I consider defective or maladapted to society, and there are lots of people whose existence is an inconvenience or a burden to me, but those facts don't justify their homicide. If I kill a street person and tell the jury, "I didn't want a street person, we're better off without them, his life looked pretty miserable, and I didn't want to pay for his gibs," they will rightly put me in prison for the rest of my life.
Click to expand...
The issue with abortion jurisprudence has nothing to do with right or wrong, utilitarian or utopian, the sanctity of life, religion, or anything else like that.

It has to do with the fact that Roe v. Wade made up a bunch of weird rights to privacy that somehow only make abortion legal and apply nowhere else ever. It's some weird Dr. Frankenstein's monster of post-hoc justifications that somehow apply nowhere else. It's a classic case of legislating from the Bench. You don't have a right to straight up buy drugs from your doctor or do whatever you want that would otherwise be illegal in your home. You don't have a right to euthanasia. Why not if the justifications for Roe are sound?
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Kosher Salt, Marvin, Safir and 16 others
Honka Honka Burning Love said:
I mean, The entire idea of the SCOTUS is that they are supposed to be principled and not political, people who can't do that should not be on the supreme court at all.
Click to expand...
Okay.

But that's not the world we inhabit. A staggering number of supreme court cases are decided along party lines.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Francis York Morgan and verissimus
Local Fed said:
I have a friend named Ronald who is a higher up in corporate for a major fast food chain and apparently there's going to be a Ruth Bader Ginsburg burger released next week after the success of the Travis Scott burger.
Click to expand...
So the RGB burger will be the sacramental bread in the new woke church then?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Kosher Salt, BlackBallz, 1Tonka_Truck and 3 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back