Stacking the court?

My biggest issue with this is that Dems will talk about it, they might even muster up the cajones to put it up to a vote, but they will never pass it.

The next time Republicans find themselves in the minority, they will hold this up as justification for doing it themselves and all the R’s in Washington and most of the people here on RO will support it.

I won’t support it ever. By either side. I have to admit that stacking wasn’t something I’d thought of until it was mentioned last year; I was thinking that some conservative justices might die under peculiar circumstances. I still don’t rule that one (or stacking) out in terms of what might happen within a decade.

OH good lord NO.

We don’t need any deranged, sick, moral-less supreme court justices.

Oh gods no.

Who decides what is and is not moral?

I thought humanity had kind of decided on what is and what is not moral over thousands of years.

But you’re totally right. With Biden’s team in office, the definition of morality will be turned on its head.

Ok, so give me an example of the moral-less behavior you are concerned about, and let’s try something other than abortion.

Like 50 year old men and their 4 year old boyfriends walking through the streets dressed like S&M giraffes to celebrate furry pride day, which will replace Christmas.

1 Like

But now that you mention abortion. I’m sure abortion will be legalized from 9 months to like 9 years. :smile:

Let me humor this and assume it’s true…

And not let’s wrap this back to:

And you think Democratic justices would uphold this kind of behavior (pedophilia)?

Can you give us an example of a liberal judge at the Federal level (where most Supreme Court picks come from ) supporting these kinds of activities?

LOL, yes the supposed “war against Christmas”…Again…lol

It’s the liberals who are sexualizing children through the use of hollywood and children’s books.

You won’t see any conservatives teaching their LITTLE KIDS about how they need to really grasp if they’re gay or not. We think kids shouldn’t even be considering things like this.

I’m not going to research any of biden’s picks for judges. I don’t need to. If they’ve been chosen by him, that’s all I need to know. It would be kind of funny to see a picture of one of them sniffing kid’s hair though… even better, doing it while standing next to Biden next to the kid.

2 Likes

If you prefer the term war on Christianity hey I’m in total agreement.

Now you’re sliding away from the comment you made.

You said:

You’re equating what you claim people on the left do with the morality of Supreme Court picks. Do you think it would be hard for me to find examples of people who identify as “right” who act morally and then protect that on to presumptive SCOTUS picks on the right?

No, what you do see is people on the right brainwashing their kids to hate people who are gay.

Last time I checked, hate isn’t a “Christian value”.

And that’s is how the left will continue to gain support for a left-only agenda without any concern for how the right feels, because the right isn’t interested in discussion or compromise, the right has become the party of pure obstruction.

Conservatives don’t teach people to hate anyone. On the contrary, liberals teach everyone to hate conservatives.

And welcome to your new America buddy you guys earned it.

1 Like

Gonna beg to differ…

This your last guy?

1 Like

And Trump abandoned Epstein when he saw that Epstein was a bad guy. You can’t say the same for Bill Clinton.

1 Like

1 Funny; I remember going round and round with you on this issue.

2 Why is abortion off limits?

3 They enabled transgenders in Bostock vs. Clayton County:


Why would any other moral taboo faze them?

4 Can’t say that I’ve seen that in my church.

1 Like

Which is why I didn’t ask you :crazy_face::wink:

I didn’t use the word “off-limits”, it’s just an issue that we already know we disagree on to some degree, which is to say I agree with you in some respects, but not others. That said, if the only immoral behavior of Dems is that they’d allow abortion as it has been for almost 50 years, I’d say that’s not so bad.

In other words, I was looking for more than the “go-to” argument.

Not sure what’s wrong with allowing people to make personal choices.

There are issues that enter the public sphere, bathrooms, and sports for example, but I think in our conversations you’d punish everyone out of fear of what a few unscrupulous people might do. Sorry, that’ not a compelling argument to me.

In the case of bathrooms, it’s already illegal to invade people’s privacy.

In the case of sports, you want to prevent all transgenders from playing because a few cisgender men (men who pretend to be women to win) might try to infiltrate sports.

That’s called cheating and it happens in all sports at all levels. In competitive sports (at higher levels) and the Olympics, trans men who become women are limited to a certain amount of testosterone. In powerlifting, Trans women are excluded because the bone density and muscle mass isn’t something that vanishes when a person becomes transgender.

But it is part of your religion.

1 If you rationalize the unborn as just “blobs of tissue” and not people, then yeah, it’s not so bad. But I feel I made a pretty good case to the contrary. And on that basis, 62+ million unborn children killed since Roe v Wade is quite bad. It’s on the order of double the combined purges of Nazi Germany (13 million) and Stalinist Soviet Union (15-20 million), and rivaling or doubling the Mao purge (30-60 million).

2 I think you know that my argument isn’t about whether they choose to be perverts (what happened to the gender-dysphoria-they-can’t-help-it-it’s-a-disorder argument?), but bringing their perversions into a place where it invades rightful privacy. To use a different example, I don’t think anyone who moonlights as a pornographer has any business being a gynecologist (not that I think they have any business being a pornographer).
3 We punish people all the time for bring bad behavior to public places.
4 Then there is a conflict. Because I’ll argue that this crap is aimed at disrupting sexual privacy.
5 Really? Where did I say or imply that? They can compete all they want. In the venue for their XY chromosomes.
6 “Might?” They’re doing it. It’s happened any number of times that women lost competitions to males pretending to be female.
7 And this crap enables that cheating.

8 It’s where I meet conservatives in real life.