This is why you fail. No one is preventing these judges from carrying out their duty. No one is attempting to intimidate judges to vote against the law. They are peaceably assembling to petition the government (the US Supreme Court is a government entity) for a redress of grievances.
They most certainly are trying to intimidate them. Read their signs and listen to their chants. It's anything but peaceful. Regardless Ms. Trampoline, it over.
Peaceably assembly is not strictly a candlelight vigil. If it was, that's what the founding fathers would have said. If anything, US Code 1507 is unconstitutional. You fail.
Nope...I just work within the framework of the rules. You psychos don't like rules. Regardless, R v W is gone.
"FREEDOM!!!!!! (Obey the rules)" How far will you bend to lick the boots of the religious rule setters, though? If they decide you can't fuck your wife without getting her pregnant, or that - if you're firing blanks, then your wife has to be paired with a "proper" man - you gonna take it? Because there's a whole bunch of wacky religious shit these cunts are itching to pull beyond "women don't have the same rights as men". Which, let's not ignore, you ARE against.
So now they understand how the women who were harassed and intimidated outside clinics felt. Regardless, I think you still have a kidney to offer?
C'mon, man.... He needs that kidney to think. It's that or the colon, and he's using that to talk out of.
So that's your admission that they are using harassment and intimidation. I'm glad you admit they're violating the law. Cool.
Nope. SCOTUS ruled it's entirely valid to harass and intimidate government workers when they said the protests outside abortion clinics were fine. You want to proclaim you're in favour of equal treatment? Fucking act like it.
He doesn't. He's a typical right winger. Things that are violations of the Constitution that work in my benefit are cool, but, when it goes against his benefit, then it's wrong. He's not even a real person. He's a probably a very liberal person just trolling here because he's bored. Or she.
Of course not. He's a Christian. If you think they've EVER given a shit about women, you haven't read the Bible or paid attention for the last two millenia.
This is the problem with religion. Women are to be looked at, fucked, blamed, or ignored depending on the situation. In the bible, a fuckhead whose wife JUST died got drunk and raped his daughters impregnating them, then he blamed the daughters. and everyone believed him. Then there's Medusa from Greek mythology in which she is raped. The rapist was someone the Goddess Minerva wanted and was angry at the victim because it wasn't her, so she turned her into the monster and eventually killed by Perseus who was then regarded as a hero for killing the victim. The character TLS is just following those same old misogynist rules and you know that because he thinks he's insulting me by implying that my sexual encounters are somehow wrong.
The Supreme Court used to uphold slavery. I don't see any slaves around. Victory for bigots is always temporary.
Uh, that's certainly an interpretation of Lot and his daughters... I wouldn't say it's wrong, but I think it's a stretch given the narrative presentation (hence why your interpretation does have some merit).
Seriously? The Republican whiners are claiming that SIDEWALK CHALK is vandalism now? If so, a bunch of the kids in my neighborhood are about to be doing hard time.
Frankly, I never gave it much thought beyond what was presented in the KJV. The Joseph Smith Translation () made me roll my eyes because it/Smith explicitly laid blame on his daughters.
