Leaked/breaking:Roe v. Wade expected to be overturned

[BigRed]

"Progressives" consistently seem better at screeching tolerance than exercising it.

 

[KLB]

Haven't been to a fast food place in years, sounds like a lot has changed.

Talking to my son last night I figured the leaker will never be found. I'm assuming that Merrick Garland and Co are the chief investigators.

It sounded like they have their own department.

 

[KLB]

Now do McGreasolds where one can finally go back inside but eat inside isn't available, only ordering, and you have to use the stupid ****ing kiosks because they can't or won't staff the registers and they don't want to handle cash anyway

The kiosks were coming before Covid. I am betting all of the living wage talk before Covid was the impetus for that.

 

[jamil]

Haven't been to a fast food place in years, sounds like a lot has changed.

Talking to my son last night I figured the leaker will never be found. I'm assuming that Merrick Garland and Co are the chief investigators.

No, SCOTUS has its own. The Martial of the Court is handling the investigation. But, I would assume that they don’t have their own prosecution arm. So I think if the culprit is found, he or she—probably she, will have to be prosecuted by DOJ. And let’s just say that it’s doubtful they’ll be highly motivated to get a conviction. But, whoever it is will probably be disbarred. So there’s that.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Now do McGreasolds where one can finally go back inside but eat inside isn't available, only ordering, and you have to use the stupid ****ing kiosks because they can't or won't staff the registers and they don't want to handle cash anyway

I actually prefer the kiosks now. Same at Taco Bell. I can put in my order with any substitutions or customizations that I want a lot faster than some pimple faced kid that gets a deer in the headlights look at the register if you order anything that varies even slightly from the menu.

 

[jamil]

I actually prefer the kiosks now. Same at Taco Bell. I can put in my order with any substitutions or customizations that I want a lot faster than some pimple faced kid that gets a deer in the headlights look at the register if you order anything that varies even slightly from the menu.

Not a fan of McDonald’s. They’re a **** hole too. But, those of us who are antisocial do love to not have to interface with actual people. So the kiosks wouldn’t offend me. It’s the **** food they serve that offends me.

 

[Ark]

"Progressives" consistently seem better at screeching tolerance than exercising it.



View attachment 199293View attachment 199294View attachment 199295

Funny how "my body my choice" seems to be on the way out as a slogan after their behavior during covid. "Bans off our bodies" is the new one.

What's another name for a ban? Mandate.

 

[BigRed]

Funny how "my body my choice" seems to be on the way out as a slogan after their behavior during covid. "Bans off our bodies" is the new one.

What's another name for a ban? Mandate.

Marxist pieces of ****......nothing more.

 

[indyblue]

I actually prefer the kiosks now. Same at Taco Bell. I can put in my order with any substitutions or customizations that I want a lot faster than some pimple faced kid that gets a deer in the headlights look at the register if you order anything that varies even slightly from the menu.

Except there's not a way to pay with cash at a kiosk. F* that! If they don't want my cash I'll give it to companies that do.

 

[Ark]

Marxist pieces of ****......nothing more.

We're mandating no more murder. For public health. It's a mandate.

You know, nominally I'm still pro-autonomy and pro-choice in all things health related. But, I'm simply so goshdarn bitter after the last couple of years that I'm pretty happy to see the libs and Marxists get stuffed on this one. No, it's not a principled position. Yes, I'm going to hold it anyway. These SOBs tried to have me fired from my private sector job less than six months ago, to coerce me into health decisions I did NOT want to make. Screw 'em, make more responsible choices and stop sleeping around.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Except there's not a way to pay with cash at a kiosk. F* that! If they don't want my cash I'll give it to companies that do.

The ones I've used have an option to pay with cash at the counter. I rarely use cash anymore anyhow.

 

[Twangbanger]

We're mandating no more murder. For public health. It's a mandate.

You know, nominally I'm still pro-autonomy and pro-choice in all things health related. But, I'm simply so goshdarn bitter after the last couple of years that I'm pretty happy to see the libs and Marxists get stuffed on this one. No, it's not a principled position. Yes, I'm going to hold it anyway. These SOBs tried to have me fired from my private sector job less than six months ago, to coerce me into health decisions I did NOT want to make. Screw 'em, make more responsible choices and stop sleeping around.

I can relate to this. I'm sick of it. I'm pretty pro-choice in most things but I just want to see the libs get owned. If there's a principle wrapped up in it, all the better. And from what I can see, RvW was a terrible law...and I say law, not court decision, because that's what it basically did. It gave liberals the effects of a law they couldn't get through Congress.

If their ideas are agreed-with by a majority of Americans, then fine. You'll get your chance to prove it at the statehouse.

 

[ljk]

Let's say pro-lifers got what they want, SCOTUS overturns it 9-0, meaning each state decides abortion is legal or not.

Indiana bans it outright, Illinois keeps it wide open.

If a girl goes to IL to get her fetus cut out, and come back. Does Indiana charge her with murder?

 

[Cameramonkey]

Let's say pro-lifers got what they want, SCOTUS overturns it 9-0, meaning each state decides abortion is legal or not.

Indiana bans it outright, Illinois keeps it wide open.

If a girl goes to IL to get her fetus cut out, and come back. Does Indiana charge her with murder?

No. She didnt "commit murder" within the jurisdiction of the state. No case. (IANAL)

Does IL charge a resident with illegally buying ammo if they come over here, buy a box of ammo without their permission slip, shoot all the ammo at the range and go back home? Its illegal in IL to buy ammo without a card. But they bought it anyway here without a card.

 

[Twangbanger]

Let's say pro-lifers got what they want, SCOTUS overturns it 9-0, meaning each state decides abortion is legal or not.

Indiana bans it outright, Illinois keeps it wide open.

If a girl goes to IL to get her fetus cut out, and come back. Does Indiana charge her with murder?

That's for your Statehouse reps to decide.

So, now for the flipside, let's send the believers into church tomorrow with a question to ponder:

How do you answer the Rape Question? Because although others in this thread have talked about women "screwing around," that's not what the debates are going to be about. It's going to be about women getting raped, and the belief that it's one of these mysterious ways God works his magic in the world, and we as humans are not equipped to understand it.

Now that RvW seems headed to the ash-heap, it's not just prick reporters picking on Richard Mourdock who are going to ask this question. It's basically every single debate moderator facing a Republican candidate...because now it's become a very relevant question. It's not just muck-raking anymore.

Every Republican candidate, from US Senator down to your local-yokel statehouse guy is going to get asked the Rape Question.

Indiana has 6 or 7 Million people and 100 statehouse districts. That works out to about 65,000 constituents per district, which isn't even 10% the population of Indianapolis. So now, you're going to have candidates who only represent an area the size of 2 or 3 large Indianapolis neighborhoods, being asked the Rape Question.

How do you answer the Rape Question? Keeping in mind, that your Christian beliefs on the subject are a horrifying "Handmaid's Tale" anachronism to many.

Offered to provoke thought. I don't think many Republicans really realize what they've just been thrown into. Every Republican candidate just became Richard Mourdock. When that moderator asked him the Rape Question...it was like his campaign was a hot-air balloon that got strafed with a 50 cal. He was in the trees before he knew what hit him.

Can Christians strategically "hold their nose" and make peace with a Rape Exception, in order to move the football to a better place than where it is now? Because it's precisely this kind of political-compromise gray area that the "Ultimate Divine Truth" crowd seems to have no aptitude for.

Personally, I think Republicans and their constituents are going to step all over their peckers on this. Because it's what they've always done.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Innocent children should not bear the death penalty for the crimes of their fathers.

 

[actaeon277]

 

[BigRed]

The kiosks were coming before Covid. I am betting all of the living wage talk before Covid was the impetus for that.

This.....All those useful idiots were squawking about "$15 an hour" without realizing it is more than they are worth and at some point automation is the better investment for the employer.

 

[BigRed]

That's for your Statehouse reps to decide.

So, now for the flipside, let's send the believers into church tomorrow with a question to ponder:

How do you answer the Rape Question? Because although others in this thread have talked about women "screwing around," that's not what the debates are going to be about. It's going to be about women getting raped, and the belief that it's one of these mysterious ways God works his magic in the world, and we as humans are not equipped to understand it.

Now that RvW seems headed to the ash-heap, it's not just prick reporters picking on Richard Mourdock who are going to ask this question. It's basically every single debate moderator facing a Republican candidate...because now it's become a very relevant question. It's not just muck-raking anymore.

Every Republican candidate, from US Senator down to your local-yokel statehouse guy is going to get asked the Rape Question.

Indiana has 6 or 7 Million people and 100 statehouse districts. That works out to about 65,000 constituents per district, which isn't even 10% the population of Indianapolis. So now, you're going to have candidates who only represent an area the size of 2 or 3 large Indianapolis neighborhoods, being asked the Rape Question.

How do you answer the Rape Question? Keeping in mind, that your Christian beliefs on the subject are a horrifying "Handmaid's Tale" anachronism to many.

Offered to provoke thought. I don't think many Republicans really realize what they've just been thrown into. Every Republican candidate just became Richard Mourdock. When that moderator asked him the Rape Question...it was like his campaign was a hot-air balloon that got strafed with a 50 cal. He was in the trees before he knew what hit him.

Can Christians strategically "hold their nose" and make peace with a Rape Exception, in order to move the football to a better place than where it is now? Because it's precisely this kind of political-compromise gray area that the "Ultimate Divine Truth" crowd seems to have no aptitude for.

Personally, I think Republicans and their constituents are going to step all over their peckers on this. Because it's what they've always done.

The standing offer I have for putin is also in effect for rapists. However, for rapists it is $5, not $5B.

Have gun.
Will travel.

 

[Route 45]

Innocent children should not bear the death penalty for the crimes of their fathers.

11 Then the Lord said to Moses, 12 “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘If a man’s wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him 13 so that another man has sexual relations with her, and this is hidden from her husband and her impurity is undetected (since there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act), 14 and if feelings of jealousy come over her husband and he suspects his wife and she is impure—or if he is jealous and suspects her even though she is not impure— 15 then he is to take his wife to the priest. He must also take an offering of a tenth of an ephah[a] of barley flour on her behalf. He must not pour olive oil on it or put incense on it, because it is a grain offering for jealousy, a reminder-offering to draw attention to wrongdoing.

16 “‘The priest shall bring her and have her stand before the Lord. 17 Then he shall take some holy water in a clay jar and put some dust from the tabernacle floor into the water. 18 After the priest has had the woman stand before the Lord, he shall loosen her hair and place in her hands the reminder-offering, the grain offering for jealousy, while he himself holds the bitter water that brings a curse. 19 Then the priest shall put the woman under oath and say to her, “If no other man has had sexual relations with you and you have not gone astray and become impure while married to your husband, may this bitter water that brings a curse not harm you. 20 But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse[b] among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. 22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”

“‘Then the woman is to say, “Amen. So be it.”

Numbers 5: 11-22