What other rights will be taken away next now that Roe is gone?

You just haven't been listening. Bear in mind a guy who plans on robbing your house or a bank seldom if ever announces his intention. Politicos do the same. But once in a while they let their guard down, slip up, and admit their intentions. Sen. Feinstein, prime author of the original assault weapon ban, in a weak moment declared she was going to get the guns. Beto [sic], Biden's gun czar, recently publicly proclaimed he is going to get every AR-15, and over the past few years has been quite vocal and open on confiscating guns. There have been many such instances from politicos over the years, more of late. But they always try to stop themselves with whatever they think they can get away with at the moment, and they continually push that envelope.

 

No tragedy - I was responding to this comment - "From what I can see the majority, including women, blacks, and Hispanics, do not approve of abortion, although that is on a sliding scale relative basis." I was simply showing a poll stating that the majority DO support abortion.

 

Loving v VA has solid and clear constitutional support. While not as clear, Lawrence v Texas (sodomy) has significant constitutional backing. Griswald not so much

 

So did Roe v Wade.

 

This has already been discussed and ignored by you.
Same sex couples originally tried to call them civil unions and even went as far as to create marriage like contracts with no name. Your side made both of these practices illegal.

I know you have the integrity to stop acting like this has anything to do with the word marriage.

Even if “marriage” was a completely religious term, there are many churches that will marry a same sex couple so you still wouldn’t be able to keep that word for yourself.

 

No, Roe v Wade had no, as in zero, nada, zip, constitutional backing, justification, or authority: precisely why it was overturned

 

They didn’t think they needed to as they trusted in the precedent and the integrity of the court. Also democrats care more about donations and posturing than actually doing anything

 

Hate to be picky, but you used precedent and integrity similarly in the same sentence and they are not the same.

 

What you are arguing is that it's possible that actual democracy could give you an outcome you don't like. That's very true, In theory, a State could vote in a ridiculous law that you oppose, but the electoral majority of that State would favor. That happened nation wide with the Prohibition amendment.

I don't know what to tell you. Democracy doesn't guarantee you specific outcomes that you favor.

 

President was that it would be overruled eventually because it violates the 10th amendment. I don't believe that they didn't know what the Constitution says.

But I don't think they ever really cared about it it was just used as a political football.

 

Totally sane.
https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1540912343047032832?s=20&t=v2kxYYz34NZxM3Lo9GCX1g

 

It just occurred to me that no state can ban contraception as it is federal law that contraception has to be made available to anyone by medical practitioners and insurance companies (free if with a prescription) under Obamacare.

 

The Court is correct.

No. You have State Legislatures that represent YOU, if they don't, replace them with folks that do. Self government requires maturity. Step Up!

They didn't "take it away" they correctly and honestly corrected a fifty year old lie and admitted that this is a question for the Legislature, not the Court.

Have your Legislatures suddenly lost their ability to pass laws? Why are you under the false assumption that laws are written by 5 unelected lawyers in robes rather than the vast array of Federal, State, County, City representative Law Making Bodies?

Oh Gawd - It is amazing to me how obsessive hatred of Trump leaves the brain unable to operate. I fear that many on the Left will soon require Bidenian Lists to remind them to breathe. YOU inhale, YOU exhale.

Tell me how your popularly elected legislature enables minority rule.

And your lists next targets? WRONG!

The next targets are illegitimate decrees of the Administrative State - where unelected bureaucrats write laws, rather than our Elected Representatives.

If you are paying attention, you are beginning to see a theme, a deepening of our Democracy and our ability to Rule Ourselves rather than being dictated to by unelected overlords.

 

Well that's a lie.

 

So an entire two with one (Beto) not having any ability to legislate and vote anything into law. So that leaves one….wow…quite a coup.

 

When did my side make civil unions and marriage like contracts illegal, this is the first I’ve heard of it.

I have no beef with same sex couples having the exact same benefits and grief as married people do. What I would like is a term that strictly applies to straight couples and only straight couples and that word is marriage. The left excels at coming up with names to defines things, surely they can come up with a quick and easy phrase to define same sex marriages. By doing so it will clarify things greatly and we won’t have to use terms like same sex marriage when one simple word will suffice. Also, the left is big on identity and being unique, this is their opportunity to shine and do both.

 

So you’re all about the “separate but equal” mindset eh? Heh

 

The English language has words and words are used to describe things. We have words that describe the many newly discovered genders. We have words that describe political affiliation. We have words that describe what teams are playing tonight. Your attempt at a gotcha is meaningless. Even you guys have to put ‘same sex’ in front of marriage so we know what’s being discussed.

You have your gender names, you have your LGBT alliance, you have your pride month, and you have your flag. All of that separates you from us and you do it intentionally. Just invent a word for gay marriage and roll with it.

 

The word is marriage. Get over it

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_unions_in_the_United_States

Why would advocates for marriage equality agree to take on a term that your side made illegal because y’all won the battle on civil unions and marriage like contracts but lost the battle for the recognition of marriage rights?

 

This makes no sense. All the states recognize same sex marriage but not unions? Marriage by any other name is still marriage, all I want is the two types of marriage we’re talking about to have identifying names. That’s it. Nothing else.

 

Bigotry doesn’t typically make sense. It is based on hate not logic. They were forced to recognize same sex marriage.

Care to answer the question why same sex couples would take steps backwards to accept a lesser term that was banned for them?

 

I’ve already explained it, so SSM can easily be identified instead of saying SSM.

 

Why should they care when people like you didn’t care until you lost the narrative?

They were banned from civil unions and then from marriage like unions. Why would they go back?

 

Why should they care? Somewhere on this board I gave an example. In case you missed I’ll say it again.

I used to work for a company that was very in tune with bias training. During one of the four or five million classes we had to attend an example of unconscious bias was when a guy got transferred to a new office. When he told his coworkers he was married they asked how his wife liked the new location. The guy is gay and got all bent out of shape that people assumed he was married to a woman. A defining word would have prevented that.