Current Events > So all of a sudden Roe vs Wade is in danger

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3
Coastal_elite 05/15/19 11:39:34 AM #52:	DarkRoast posted... Why would even hardcore conservatives be against interracial marriage? "muh white genocide!!" "muh great replacement!" <cite>Coastal_elite posted [p:921925168] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>DarkRoast posted...</cite> <quote>Why would even hardcore conservatives be against interracial marriage?</quote> "muh white genocide!!" "muh great replacement!"</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 05/15/19 11:40:29 AM #53:	Coastal_elite posted... DirkDiggles posted... How many times has it been that the legality of the Roe v Wade has been brought to the SC? How many times has plans to overturn the ruling been shot down? The sky isn't falling, TC. Calm down. we have an alt right SCOTUS now Which is a thing that can happen, when we let five people decree the law of the land for some reason. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:921925211] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Coastal_elite posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DirkDiggles posted...</cite> <quote>How many times has it been that the legality of the Roe v Wade has been brought to the SC? How many times has plans to overturn the ruling been shot down? The sky isn't falling, TC. Calm down.</quote> we have an alt right SCOTUS now</quote> Which is a thing that can happen, when we let five people decree the law of the land for some reason.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
MedeaLysistrata 05/15/19 11:47:46 AM #54:	There's also this apparent bullshit: https://www.thedailybeast.com/state-department-to-lgbt-married-couples-your-out-of-wedlock-kids-arent-citizens?via=twitter_page --- "Why is ontology so expensive?" - JH [Is this live?] <cite>MedeaLysistrata posted [p:921925550] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote>There's also this apparent bullshit: https://www.thedailybeast.com/state-department-to-lgbt-married-couples-your-out-of-wedlock-kids-arent-citizens?via=twitter_page</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Solar_Crimson 05/15/19 11:47:56 AM #55:	DarkRoast posted... Why would even hardcore conservatives be against interracial marriage? There's still a segment of the Right that believes in "like goes with like" and "White genocide". ...Of course, this same segment can and will make exceptions for White men in Interracial relationships. --- Be wary of boarding the hype train, lest you end up on the ruse cruise... - nanobuilder (r/nintendo) http://backloggery.com/SolarCrimson <cite>Solar_Crimson posted [p:921925556] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>DarkRoast posted...</cite> <quote>Why would even hardcore conservatives be against interracial marriage?</quote> There's still a segment of the Right that believes in "like goes with like" and "White genocide". ...Of course, this same segment can and will make exceptions for White men in Interracial relationships.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ruvan22 05/15/19 11:54:15 AM #56:	DarkRoast posted... Why would even hardcore conservatives be against interracial marriage? Because (according to some) it goes against the bible's teachings - case in point the remarks by a city councilman near Atlanta few days ago <cite>Ruvan22 posted [p:921925818] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>DarkRoast posted...</cite> <quote>Why would even hardcore conservatives be against interracial marriage?</quote> Because (according to some) it goes against the bible's teachings - case in point the remarks by a city councilman near Atlanta few days ago</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 05/15/19 11:56:17 AM #57:	Solar_Crimson posted... ...Of course, this same segment can and will make exceptions for White men in Interracial relationships. If you want to go down a huge rabbit hole, go look up Australia's (repeated) attempts to breed out the indigenous population. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:921925912] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Solar_Crimson posted...</cite> <quote>...Of course, this same segment can and will make exceptions for White men in Interracial relationships.</quote> If you want to go down a huge rabbit hole, go look up Australia's (repeated) attempts to breed out the indigenous population.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DarkRoast 05/15/19 12:28:58 PM #58:	Solar_Crimson posted... DarkRoast posted... Why would even hardcore conservatives be against interracial marriage? There's still a segment of the Right that believes in "like goes with like" and "White genocide". ...Of course, this same segment can and will make exceptions for White men in Interracial relationships. Even biblically speaking, Moses literally married someone from Africa. In fact, people were punished for criticizing it. There's no legitimate biblical argument against interracial marriage. "Don't mix the tribes" had nothing to do with race (they were all the same race in that case) --- Well allons-y, Alonso! <cite>DarkRoast posted [p:921927248] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Solar_Crimson posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DarkRoast posted...</cite> <quote>Why would even hardcore conservatives be against interracial marriage?</quote> There's still a segment of the Right that believes in "like goes with like" and "White genocide". ...Of course, this same segment can and will make exceptions for White men in Interracial relationships.</quote> Even biblically speaking, Moses literally married someone from Africa. In fact, people were punished for criticizing it. There's no legitimate biblical argument against interracial marriage. "Don't mix the tribes" had nothing to do with race (they were all the same race in that case)</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Bloodychess 05/15/19 12:35:55 PM #59:	UnfairRepresent posted... Bloodychess posted... In 2 years: "Muh guns!" In 4 more year: "Muh abortion!" In 6 years : "Muh Guns!" In 8 years: "Abortion!" In 10 years: "Muh guns!"' Relax, kick your feet up and take a drink. The boogeyman doesn't exist This is such a bad post. The fact contenious issues are going to be contenious doesn't mean decisions that effect millions of people don't matter? In 2 years: "Economy!" In 4 more year: "Climate Change!" In 6 years : "Economy!" In 8 years: "Climate Change!" In 10 years: "Economy!" "Lol there's nobooogeyman!" God I'm glad you didn't exist during WW2. "Sir the Germans Occupation of Norway is dangerously successful, our counter-movements have all failed." "OMG You've been banging on about Germany for decades! there;s no bogeyman!" Did you really just compare domestic policy to the invasion and occupation of a country? This isn't even apples to oranges. More like toasters to bears. --- To err is human To arr is pirate <cite>Bloodychess posted [p:921927537] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>UnfairRepresent posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Bloodychess posted...</cite> <quote>In 2 years: "Muh guns!" In 4 more year: "Muh abortion!" In 6 years : "Muh Guns!" In 8 years: "Abortion!" In 10 years: "Muh guns!"' Relax, kick your feet up and take a drink. The boogeyman doesn't exist</quote> This is such a bad post. The fact contenious issues are going to be contenious doesn't mean decisions that effect millions of people don't matter? In 2 years: "Economy!" In 4 more year: "Climate Change!" In 6 years : "Economy!" In 8 years: "Climate Change!" In 10 years: "Economy!" "Lol there's nobooogeyman!" God I'm glad you didn't exist during WW2. "Sir the Germans Occupation of Norway is dangerously successful, our counter-movements have all failed." "OMG You've been banging on about Germany for decades! there;s no bogeyman!"</quote> Did you really just compare domestic policy to the invasion and occupation of a country? This isn't even apples to oranges. More like toasters to bears.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Hop103 05/15/19 12:39:12 PM #60:	Coastal_elite posted... Hop103 posted... That source is extremely questionable, it's fake news until the MSM covers it. what source? Smartdissent, it's an activist site, thus it cannot be relied on at all, it's even lower on the credibility scale than CNN and Breitbart. --- "In the name of the future moon I shall punish you"-Chibi Moon <cite>Hop103 posted [p:921927676] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Coastal_elite posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Hop103 posted...</cite> <quote>That source is extremely questionable, it's fake news until the MSM covers it.</quote> what source?</quote> Smartdissent, it's an activist site, thus it cannot be relied on at all, it's even lower on the credibility scale than CNN and Breitbart.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
creativerealms 05/15/19 12:48:16 PM #62:	Bat178 posted... Coastal_elite posted... Hop103 posted... You would need a fully far right government and fully far right populace for that which of course that won't happen we got a very far right senate, a 5-4 SCOTUS that may become 7-2 by 2024 if trump wins, and many, many people who are pleased by this... Democrats still outnumber those many, many people by 3 to 1. Which is why the republicans are trying to get so much done now. Thats why controling the SC is so important to them. Why they had to win in 2016. Keeping the supreme court for decades to come was their main goal. It is a temporary victory and they know it. --- Sarcasm is my basic function. <cite>creativerealms posted [p:921928053] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Bat178 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Coastal_elite posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Hop103 posted...</cite> <quote>You would need a fully far right government and fully far right populace for that which of course that won't happen</quote> we got a very far right senate, a 5-4 SCOTUS that may become 7-2 by 2024 if trump wins, and many, many people who are pleased by this...</quote> Democrats still outnumber those many, many people by 3 to 1.</quote> Which is why the republicans are trying to get so much done now. Thats why controling the SC is so important to them. Why they had to win in 2016. Keeping the supreme court for decades to come was their main goal. It is a temporary victory and they know it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Coastal_elite 05/15/19 1:18:57 PM #63:	MedeaLysistrata posted... There's also this apparent bullshit: https://www.thedailybeast.com/state-department-to-lgbt-married-couples-your-out-of-wedlock-kids-arent-citizens?via=twitter_page Y I K E S I forgot about his push to end birthright citizenship. I tell you, it will come down to asking all brown people to show the papers of their parents and grandparents, going back 4 generations. If you can't prove your grand grand grandparents were citizens, off with your entire (brown) bloodline, you're out. <cite>Coastal_elite posted [p:921929383] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>MedeaLysistrata posted...</cite> <quote>There's also this apparent bullshit: https://www.thedailybeast.com/state-department-to-lgbt-married-couples-your-out-of-wedlock-kids-arent-citizens?via=twitter_page</quote> Y I K E S I forgot about his push to end birthright citizenship. I tell you, it will come down to asking all brown people to show the papers of their parents and grandparents, going back 4 generations. If you can't prove your grand grand grandparents were citizens, off with your entire (brown) bloodline, you're out.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Coastal_elite 05/15/19 1:20:15 PM #64:	Ruvan22 posted... DarkRoast posted... Why would even hardcore conservatives be against interracial marriage? Because (according to some) it goes against the bible's teachings - case in point the remarks by a city councilman near Atlanta few days ago and this is how those "religious liberty" bills fit into the picture. If you work at the ER and see a minority riddled with bullet holes, you don't have to help him/her because of his/her race or that of his/her spouse <cite>Coastal_elite posted [p:921929434] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Ruvan22 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DarkRoast posted...</cite> <quote>Why would even hardcore conservatives be against interracial marriage?</quote> Because (according to some) it goes against the bible's teachings - case in point the remarks by a city councilman near Atlanta few days ago</quote> and this is how those "religious liberty" bills fit into the picture. If you work at the ER and see a minority riddled with bullet holes, you don't have to help him/her because of his/her race or that of his/her spouse</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Coastal_elite 05/15/19 1:20:53 PM #65:	Hop103 posted... Coastal_elite posted... Hop103 posted... That source is extremely questionable, it's fake news until the MSM covers it. what source? Smartdissent, it's an activist site, thus it cannot be relied on at all, it's even lower on the credibility scale than CNN and Breitbart. lmao@breitbart being at the same level as CNN. There are other sources ,stop concern trolling <cite>Coastal_elite posted [p:921929469] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Hop103 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Coastal_elite posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Hop103 posted...</cite> <quote>That source is extremely questionable, it's fake news until the MSM covers it.</quote> what source?</quote> Smartdissent, it's an activist site, thus it cannot be relied on at all, it's even lower on the credibility scale than CNN and Breitbart.</quote> lmao@breitbart being at the same level as CNN. There are other sources ,stop concern trolling</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Solar_Crimson 05/15/19 1:25:44 PM #66:	DarkRoast posted... Solar_Crimson posted... DarkRoast posted... Why would even hardcore conservatives be against interracial marriage? There's still a segment of the Right that believes in "like goes with like" and "White genocide". ...Of course, this same segment can and will make exceptions for White men in Interracial relationships. Even biblically speaking, Moses literally married someone from Africa. In fact, people were punished for criticizing it. There's no legitimate biblical argument against interracial marriage. "Don't mix the tribes" had nothing to do with race (they were all the same race in that case) Your problem is expecting evangelicals to have an actual understanding of the Bible. The Bible was actually used to justify slavery, and has been used to justify racism and anti-interracial marriage/miscegenation laws in the past. --- Be wary of boarding the hype train, lest you end up on the ruse cruise... - nanobuilder (r/nintendo) http://backloggery.com/SolarCrimson <cite>Solar_Crimson posted [p:921929666] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>DarkRoast posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Solar_Crimson posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DarkRoast posted...</cite> <quote>Why would even hardcore conservatives be against interracial marriage?</quote> There's still a segment of the Right that believes in "like goes with like" and "White genocide". ...Of course, this same segment can and will make exceptions for White men in Interracial relationships.</quote> Even biblically speaking, Moses literally married someone from Africa. In fact, people were punished for criticizing it. There's no legitimate biblical argument against interracial marriage. "Don't mix the tribes" had nothing to do with race (they were all the same race in that case)</quote> Your problem is expecting evangelicals to have an actual understanding of the Bible. The Bible was actually used to justify slavery, and has been used to justify racism and anti-interracial marriage/miscegenation laws in the past.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
creativerealms 05/15/19 1:45:13 PM #67:	Coastal_elite posted... Hop103 posted... Coastal_elite posted... Hop103 posted... That source is extremely questionable, it's fake news until the MSM covers it. what source? Smartdissent, it's an activist site, thus it cannot be relied on at all, it's even lower on the credibility scale than CNN and Breitbart. lmao@breitbart being at the same level as CNN. There are other sources ,stop concern trolling I think at thia point the CNN thing is a meme and people don't really think it's untrustworthy or unreliable. --- Sarcasm is my basic function. <cite>creativerealms posted [p:921930541] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Coastal_elite posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Hop103 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Coastal_elite posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Hop103 posted...</cite> <quote>That source is extremely questionable, it's fake news until the MSM covers it.</quote> what source?</quote> Smartdissent, it's an activist site, thus it cannot be relied on at all, it's even lower on the credibility scale than CNN and Breitbart.</quote> lmao@breitbart being at the same level as CNN. There are other sources ,stop concern trolling</quote> I think at thia point the CNN thing is a meme and people don't really think it's untrustworthy or unreliable.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Machete 05/15/19 1:53:46 PM #68:	Tag --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>Machete posted [p:921930884] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote>Tag</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Coastal_elite 05/15/19 2:16:13 PM #69:	Machete posted... Tag wtf <cite>Coastal_elite posted [p:921931809] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Machete posted...</cite> <quote>Tag</quote> wtf</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Silver Bearings 05/15/19 2:23:35 PM #70:	What is the official ruling in Roe vs Wade (I'm actually not sure, not trying to be funny). I was under the impression that the Federal government did not outlaw abortion, but left it up to each state to decide for themselves. How is Alabama's new law contrary to that? I might be missing something, please educate me. --- Silver Bearings 2020: Clear Vision for America <cite>Silver Bearings posted [p:921932156] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote>What is the official ruling in Roe vs Wade (I'm actually not sure, not trying to be funny). I was under the impression that the Federal government did not outlaw abortion, but left it up to each state to decide for themselves. How is Alabama's new law contrary to that? I might be missing something, please educate me.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Machete 05/15/19 2:50:47 PM #71:	Coastal_elite posted... Machete posted... Tag wtf ? --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>Machete posted [p:921933329] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Coastal_elite posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Machete posted...</cite> <quote>Tag</quote> wtf</quote> ?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 05/15/19 6:12:36 PM #72:	Bloodychess posted... UnfairRepresent posted... Bloodychess posted... In 2 years: "Muh guns!" In 4 more year: "Muh abortion!" In 6 years : "Muh Guns!" In 8 years: "Abortion!" In 10 years: "Muh guns!"' Relax, kick your feet up and take a drink. The boogeyman doesn't exist This is such a bad post. The fact contenious issues are going to be contenious doesn't mean decisions that effect millions of people don't matter? In 2 years: "Economy!" In 4 more year: "Climate Change!" In 6 years : "Economy!" In 8 years: "Climate Change!" In 10 years: "Economy!" "Lol there's nobooogeyman!" God I'm glad you didn't exist during WW2. "Sir the Germans Occupation of Norway is dangerously successful, our counter-movements have all failed." "OMG You've been banging on about Germany for decades! there;s no bogeyman!" Did you really just compare domestic policy to the invasion and occupation of a country? This isn't even apples to oranges. More like toasters to bears. Lazy evasion. I'm pointing out how foolish the logic of "Lots of people talked about this in the past, lots of people will talk about it in the future. Therefore it doesn't matter what anyone says or does now!" is on par with stabbing yourself in the face and say "Lots of people will handle knives in the future, lots of people have handled knives in the past, so it doesn't matter." And your evasion proves that you know I am right. --- ^ Hey now that's completely woke! https://imgtc.com/i/bHqCLJF.png https://i.imgtc.com/YnvkpvU.png <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:921942152] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Bloodychess posted...</cite> <quote><cite>UnfairRepresent posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Bloodychess posted...</cite> <quote>In 2 years: "Muh guns!" In 4 more year: "Muh abortion!" In 6 years : "Muh Guns!" In 8 years: "Abortion!" In 10 years: "Muh guns!"' Relax, kick your feet up and take a drink. The boogeyman doesn't exist</quote> This is such a bad post. The fact contenious issues are going to be contenious doesn't mean decisions that effect millions of people don't matter? In 2 years: "Economy!" In 4 more year: "Climate Change!" In 6 years : "Economy!" In 8 years: "Climate Change!" In 10 years: "Economy!" "Lol there's nobooogeyman!" God I'm glad you didn't exist during WW2. "Sir the Germans Occupation of Norway is dangerously successful, our counter-movements have all failed." "OMG You've been banging on about Germany for decades! there;s no bogeyman!"</quote> Did you really just compare domestic policy to the invasion and occupation of a country? This isn't even apples to oranges. More like toasters to bears.</quote> Lazy evasion. I'm pointing out how foolish the logic of "Lots of people talked about this in the past, lots of people will talk about it in the future. Therefore it doesn't matter what anyone says or does now!" is on par with stabbing yourself in the face and say "Lots of people will handle knives in the future, lots of people have handled knives in the past, so it doesn't matter." And your evasion proves that you know I am right.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JE19426 05/15/19 6:25:23 PM #73:	Silver Bearings posted... What is the official ruling in Roe vs Wade (I'm actually not sure, not trying to be funny). I was under the impression that the Federal government did not outlaw abortion, but left it up to each state to decide for themselves. How is Alabama's new law contrary to that? I might be missing something, please educate me. In simplified terms Roe vs Wade says that for early pregnancies only a womans life is effected, so it's an overstep of state authority to restrict a woman's right to abortion, this is due to the idea people are entitled to medical privacy. After a (vague) certain point the fetus is considered alive, so both the fetus and woman is effected, and the state can restrict that in respect to protect a human's life. The most commonly used point for whether the fetus is alive is when the fetus can survive outside the womb. This isn't an exact date, due in large part to medical advances that allows more premature babies to survive. <cite>JE19426 posted [p:921942770] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Silver Bearings posted...</cite> <quote>What is the official ruling in Roe vs Wade (I'm actually not sure, not trying to be funny). I was under the impression that the Federal government did not outlaw abortion, but left it up to each state to decide for themselves. How is Alabama's new law contrary to that? I might be missing something, please educate me.</quote> In simplified terms Roe vs Wade says that for early pregnancies only a womans life is effected, so it's an overstep of state authority to restrict a woman's right to abortion, this is due to the idea people are entitled to medical privacy. After a (vague) certain point the fetus is considered alive, so both the fetus and woman is effected, and the state can restrict that in respect to protect a human's life. The most commonly used point for whether the fetus is alive is when the fetus can survive outside the womb. This isn't an exact date, due in large part to medical advances that allows more premature babies to survive.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Shablagoo 05/15/19 6:33:09 PM #74:	Coastal_elite posted... People said we'd never get to this point, yet here we are. If Roe goes, nothing is set in stone anymore. obergefell v. hodges (gay marriage) would be the next civil rights in the crosshairs. What other civil rights cases do you think MAGA would target? In which one do you think they'd succeed? Roe vs Wade - Happening already (abortion) Obergefell - Talked about as the next target (gay marriage) Loving v Virginia (interracial marriage) Brown V Board of Education (school segregation) Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. (allows people of all races to be US citizens) It really might snowball like that. We live in dark times. --- Sigful user. <cite>Shablagoo posted [p:921943211] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Coastal_elite posted...</cite> <quote>People said we'd never get to this point, yet here we are. If Roe goes, nothing is set in stone anymore. obergefell v. hodges (gay marriage) would be the next civil rights in the crosshairs. What other civil rights cases do you think MAGA would target? In which one do you think they'd succeed? Roe vs Wade - Happening already (abortion) Obergefell - Talked about as the next target (gay marriage) Loving v Virginia (interracial marriage) Brown V Board of Education (school segregation) Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. (allows people of all races to be US citizens)</quote> It really might snowball like that. We live in dark times.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Cheater87 05/15/19 6:44:02 PM #75:	Could we really see segregation come back, if so what other races would be segregated? This is scary. --- Doom, the game with unlimited ways to play. <cite>Cheater87 posted [p:921943744] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote>Could we really see segregation come back, if so what other races would be segregated? This is scary.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 05/15/19 7:27:56 PM #76:	Cheater87 posted... Could we really see segregation come back, if so what other races would be segregated? This is scary. Already has, but we call it "safe space" now. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:921945694] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Cheater87 posted...</cite> <quote>Could we really see segregation come back, if so what other races would be segregated? This is scary.</quote> Already has, but we call it "safe space" now.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RoboLaserGandhi 05/15/19 7:42:07 PM #77:	Anything involving race is off the table. Republicans even in the Trump era are still afraid of being called racist. <cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted [p:921946275] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote>Anything involving race is off the table. Republicans even in the Trump era are still afraid of being called racist.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TiamatNM 05/15/19 7:42:26 PM #78:	creativerealms posted... Coastal_elite posted... Hop103 posted... Coastal_elite posted... Hop103 posted... That source is extremely questionable, it's fake news until the MSM covers it. what source? Smartdissent, it's an activist site, thus it cannot be relied on at all, it's even lower on the credibility scale than CNN and Breitbart. lmao@breitbart being at the same level as CNN. There are other sources ,stop concern trolling I think at thia point the CNN thing is a meme and people don't really think it's untrustworthy or unreliable. CNN really is untrustworthy. <cite>TiamatNM posted [p:921946287] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>creativerealms posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Coastal_elite posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Hop103 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Coastal_elite posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Hop103 posted...</cite> <quote>That source is extremely questionable, it's fake news until the MSM covers it.</quote> what source?</quote> Smartdissent, it's an activist site, thus it cannot be relied on at all, it's even lower on the credibility scale than CNN and Breitbart.</quote> lmao@breitbart being at the same level as CNN. There are other sources ,stop concern trolling</quote> I think at thia point the CNN thing is a meme and people don't really think it's untrustworthy or unreliable.</quote> CNN really is untrustworthy.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Pyrocitor 05/15/19 7:43:19 PM #79:	TiamatNM posted... creativerealms posted... Coastal_elite posted... Hop103 posted... Coastal_elite posted... Hop103 posted... That source is extremely questionable, it's fake news until the MSM covers it. what source? Smartdissent, it's an activist site, thus it cannot be relied on at all, it's even lower on the credibility scale than CNN and Breitbart. lmao@breitbart being at the same level as CNN. There are other sources ,stop concern trolling I think at thia point the CNN thing is a meme and people don't really think it's untrustworthy or unreliable. CNN really is untrustworthy. It's Fox News level though, certainly not Breitbart <cite>Pyrocitor posted [p:921946329] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>TiamatNM posted...</cite> <quote><cite>creativerealms posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Coastal_elite posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Hop103 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Coastal_elite posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Hop103 posted...</cite> <quote>That source is extremely questionable, it's fake news until the MSM covers it.</quote> what source?</quote> Smartdissent, it's an activist site, thus it cannot be relied on at all, it's even lower on the credibility scale than CNN and Breitbart.</quote> lmao@breitbart being at the same level as CNN. There are other sources ,stop concern trolling</quote> I think at thia point the CNN thing is a meme and people don't really think it's untrustworthy or unreliable.</quote> CNN really is untrustworthy.</quote> It's Fox News level though, certainly not Breitbart</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ScazarMeltex 05/15/19 7:47:43 PM #80:	The GOP is already on the record as stating that they don't feel that Obergefell V Hodges is settled law. When Roe goes that will be their next target. --- "If you wish to converse with me define your terms" Voltaire <cite>ScazarMeltex posted [p:921946499] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote>The GOP is already on the record as stating that they don't feel that Obergefell V Hodges is settled law. When Roe goes that will be their next target.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Im_JustMe0129 05/15/19 8:00:09 PM #81:	Turbam posted... The 13th amendment is next You do understand that Republicans are responsible for that amendment to begin with right? And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history. <cite>Im_JustMe0129 posted [p:921947069] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Turbam posted...</cite> <quote>The 13th amendment is next</quote> You do understand that Republicans are responsible for that amendment to begin with right? And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Solar_Crimson 05/15/19 8:04:16 PM #82:	Im_JustMe0129 posted... And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history. There was, actually. What political party do White supremacists and neo-Nazis tend to subscribe to? Not to mention the Republican-based voter-suppression efforts that are curiously focused on urban areas. --- Be wary of boarding the hype train, lest you end up on the ruse cruise... - nanobuilder (r/nintendo) http://backloggery.com/SolarCrimson <cite>Solar_Crimson posted [p:921947260] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Im_JustMe0129 posted...</cite> <quote>And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history.</quote> There was, actually. What political party do White supremacists and neo-Nazis tend to subscribe to? Not to mention the Republican-based voter-suppression efforts that are curiously focused on urban areas.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Pyrocitor 05/15/19 8:04:44 PM #83:	Im_JustMe0129 posted... Turbam posted... The 13th amendment is next You do understand that Republicans are responsible for that amendment to begin with right? And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history. The Southern Democrats had completely conservative values and Lincolns party values were rather liberal in nature. In fact, "states rights" were highly valued by the Democrats and a stronger Federal government was prioritized by the liberal Republicans. To say there was no switch of any kind is to completely rewrite history. <cite>Pyrocitor posted [p:921947282] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Im_JustMe0129 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Turbam posted...</cite> <quote>The 13th amendment is next</quote> You do understand that Republicans are responsible for that amendment to begin with right? And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history.</quote> The Southern Democrats had completely conservative values and Lincolns party values were rather liberal in nature. In fact, "states rights" were highly valued by the Democrats and a stronger Federal government was prioritized by the liberal Republicans. To say there was no switch of any kind is to completely rewrite history.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ScazarMeltex 05/15/19 8:04:58 PM #84:	Im_JustMe0129 posted... Turbam posted... The 13th amendment is next You do understand that Republicans are responsible for that amendment to begin with right? And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history. ITP: Nixon's southern strategy wasn't a thing. --- "If you wish to converse with me define your terms" Voltaire <cite>ScazarMeltex posted [p:921947292] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Im_JustMe0129 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Turbam posted...</cite> <quote>The 13th amendment is next</quote> You do understand that Republicans are responsible for that amendment to begin with right? And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history.</quote> ITP: Nixon's southern strategy wasn't a thing.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
brestugo 05/15/19 8:05:58 PM #85:	Im_JustMe0129 posted... Turbam posted... The 13th amendment is next You do understand that Republicans are responsible for that amendment to begin with right? And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history. You couldn't be more wrong. --- It's not the size of the dog in the fight that matters, it's the size of the fight in the dog. <cite>brestugo posted [p:921947334] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Im_JustMe0129 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Turbam posted...</cite> <quote>The 13th amendment is next</quote> You do understand that Republicans are responsible for that amendment to begin with right? And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history.</quote> You couldn't be more wrong.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_Rinku_ 05/15/19 8:06:46 PM #86:	Im_JustMe0129 posted... Turbam posted... The 13th amendment is next You do understand that Republicans are responsible for that amendment to begin with right? And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history. Good lord, it is hilarious seeing you guys blatantly lie and expect to get away with it. <cite>_Rinku_ posted [p:921947355] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Im_JustMe0129 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Turbam posted...</cite> <quote>The 13th amendment is next</quote> You do understand that Republicans are responsible for that amendment to begin with right? And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history.</quote> Good lord, it is hilarious seeing you guys blatantly lie and expect to get away with it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
0xDEFECADE 05/15/19 8:13:07 PM #87:	_Rinku_ posted... Im_JustMe0129 posted... Turbam posted... The 13th amendment is next You do understand that Republicans are responsible for that amendment to begin with right? And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history. Good lord, it is hilarious seeing you guys blatantly lie and expect to get away with it. I think its scary because people literally actually believe this way --- 1101 1110 1111 1110 1100 1010 1101 1110 <cite>0xDEFECADE posted [p:921947642] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>_Rinku_ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Im_JustMe0129 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Turbam posted...</cite> <quote>The 13th amendment is next</quote> You do understand that Republicans are responsible for that amendment to begin with right? And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history.</quote> Good lord, it is hilarious seeing you guys blatantly lie and expect to get away with it.</quote> I think its scary because people literally actually believe this way</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Antifar 05/15/19 8:16:17 PM #88:	Im_JustMe0129 posted... And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history. Between 1880 and 1960: South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana elected a combined 0 Republican Governors, and 0 Republican senators. Since 1980: Those states have elected a combined 21 Republican Governors 11/12 of their current senators are Republicans How do you explain this dramatic shift in party preference? --- kin to all that throbs <cite>Antifar posted [p:921947765] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Im_JustMe0129 posted...</cite> <quote>And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history. </quote> Between 1880 and 1960: South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana elected a combined 0 Republican Governors, and 0 Republican senators. Since 1980: Those states have elected a combined 21 Republican Governors 11/12 of their current senators are Republicans How do you explain this dramatic shift in party preference?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Coastal_elite 05/15/19 8:17:09 PM #89:	Cheater87 posted... Could we really see segregation come back, if so what other races would be segregated? This is scary. I guess it'd go depending on the place: level 1 - white only level 2 - white and east asian only level 3 - everyone <cite>Coastal_elite posted [p:921947811] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Cheater87 posted...</cite> <quote>Could we really see segregation come back, if so what other races would be segregated? This is scary.</quote> I guess it'd go depending on the place: level 1 - white only level 2 - white and east asian only level 3 - everyone</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Coastal_elite 05/15/19 8:18:00 PM #90:	RoboLaserGandhi posted... Anything involving race is off the table. Republicans even in the Trump era are still afraid of being called racist. lol no Steve King, Tom Cotton, Stephen Miller, Jeff Sessions. They wear it like badges of honor <cite>Coastal_elite posted [p:921947842] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote>Anything involving race is off the table. Republicans even in the Trump era are still afraid of being called racist.</quote> lol no Steve King, Tom Cotton, Stephen Miller, Jeff Sessions. They wear it like badges of honor</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ruvan22 05/15/19 10:20:22 PM #91:	RoboLaserGandhi posted... Anything involving race is off the table. Republicans even in the Trump era are still afraid of being called racist. Did you forget about Sheriff Arapaio? (sp) He was even pardoned by Trump... <cite>Ruvan22 posted [p:921953231] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote>Anything involving race is off the table. Republicans even in the Trump era are still afraid of being called racist.</quote> Did you forget about Sheriff Arapaio? (sp) He was even pardoned by Trump...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Pyrocitor 05/15/19 10:21:07 PM #92:	Ruvan22 posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... Anything involving race is off the table. Republicans even in the Trump era are still afraid of being called racist. Did you forget about Sheriff Arapaio? (sp) He was even pardoned by Trump... Trump is pretty openly a racist. <cite>Pyrocitor posted [p:921953265] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Ruvan22 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote>Anything involving race is off the table. Republicans even in the Trump era are still afraid of being called racist.</quote> Did you forget about Sheriff Arapaio? (sp) He was even pardoned by Trump...</quote> Trump is pretty openly a racist.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 05/16/19 4:53:29 AM #93:	Antifar posted... Im_JustMe0129 posted... And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history. Between 1880 and 1960: South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana elected a combined 0 Republican Governors, and 0 Republican senators. Since 1980: Those states have elected a combined 21 Republican Governors 11/12 of their current senators are Republicans How do you explain this dramatic shift in party preference? And he was never seen again --- ^ Hey now that's completely woke! https://imgtc.com/i/bHqCLJF.png https://i.imgtc.com/YnvkpvU.png <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:921963038] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Im_JustMe0129 posted...</cite> <quote>And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history. </quote> Between 1880 and 1960: South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana elected a combined 0 Republican Governors, and 0 Republican senators. Since 1980: Those states have elected a combined 21 Republican Governors 11/12 of their current senators are Republicans How do you explain this dramatic shift in party preference?</quote> And he was never seen again</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#94	Post #94 was unavailable or deleted.
Coastal_elite 05/16/19 10:08:06 AM #95:	Bump <cite>Coastal_elite posted [p:921968971] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote>Bump</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Machete 05/16/19 5:15:43 PM #96:	UnfairRepresent posted... Antifar posted... Im_JustMe0129 posted... And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history. Between 1880 and 1960: South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana elected a combined 0 Republican Governors, and 0 Republican senators. Since 1980: Those states have elected a combined 21 Republican Governors 11/12 of their current senators are Republicans How do you explain this dramatic shift in party preference? And he was never seen again --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>Machete posted [p:921986031] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>UnfairRepresent posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Im_JustMe0129 posted...</cite> <quote>And no, there was no "big switch" that's just a little lie the left tells itself to worm its way out of the wrong side of history. </quote> Between 1880 and 1960: South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana elected a combined 0 Republican Governors, and 0 Republican senators. Since 1980: Those states have elected a combined 21 Republican Governors 11/12 of their current senators are Republicans How do you explain this dramatic shift in party preference?</quote> And he was never seen again</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 05/16/19 5:28:53 PM #97:	Antifar posted... How do you explain this dramatic shift in party preference? LBJ "betrayed" the south by signing the Civil Rights Act, and they've been hate-voting ever since. That's all it is. Nixon was wise to exploit the hell out it. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:921986545] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote>How do you explain this dramatic shift in party preference?</quote> LBJ "betrayed" the south by signing the Civil Rights Act, and they've been hate-voting ever since. That's all it is. Nixon was wise to exploit the hell out it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Solar_Crimson 05/16/19 5:33:23 PM #98:	Questionmarktarius posted... Antifar posted... How do you explain this dramatic shift in party preference? LBJ "betrayed" the south by signing the Civil Rights Act, and they've been hate-voting ever since. That's all it is. Nixon was wise to exploit the hell out it. It is quite appalling how the South's values seem to be defined by their hatred of the idea of Black people (or all minorities, but especially Black people) being granted equal rights by law. --- Be wary of boarding the hype train, lest you end up on the ruse cruise... - nanobuilder (r/nintendo) http://backloggery.com/SolarCrimson <cite>Solar_Crimson posted [p:921986747] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Questionmarktarius posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote>How do you explain this dramatic shift in party preference?</quote> LBJ "betrayed" the south by signing the Civil Rights Act, and they've been hate-voting ever since. That's all it is. Nixon was wise to exploit the hell out it.</quote> It is quite appalling how the South's values seem to be defined by their hatred of the idea of Black people (or all minorities, but especially Black people) being granted equal rights by law.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkphoenix181 05/16/19 5:38:43 PM #99:	Slippery slope only a logical fallacy when not said from a liberal point of fear --- "Yeah that's messed up" - MrK3V <cite>darkphoenix181 posted [p:921986963] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote>Slippery slope only a logical fallacy when not said from a liberal point of fear</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 05/16/19 5:41:11 PM #100:	Solar_Crimson posted... Questionmarktarius posted... Antifar posted... How do you explain this dramatic shift in party preference? LBJ "betrayed" the south by signing the Civil Rights Act, and they've been hate-voting ever since. That's all it is. Nixon was wise to exploit the hell out it. It is quite appalling how the South's values seem to be defined by their hatred of the idea of Black people (or all minorities, but especially Black people) being granted equal rights by law. That's why the Great Migration happened. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:921987064] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>Solar_Crimson posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Questionmarktarius posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote>How do you explain this dramatic shift in party preference?</quote> LBJ "betrayed" the south by signing the Civil Rights Act, and they've been hate-voting ever since. That's all it is. Nixon was wise to exploit the hell out it.</quote> It is quite appalling how the South's values seem to be defined by their hatred of the idea of Black people (or all minorities, but especially Black people) being granted equal rights by law.</quote> That's why the Great Migration happened.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DarkRoast 05/16/19 6:33:22 PM #101:	I checked, and yes, the Bible very explicitly is in favor of interracial marriage. Moses marries a woman from Cush, which is modern day Ethiopia. His sister, Miriam, becomes angry because his wife has dark skin. God responds by giving Miriam leprosy, essentially saying "you want light skin? Here you go". The message seems pretty clear - skin color doesn't matter to God. It's amazing that some evangelicals can twist that. --- Well allons-y, Alonso! <cite>DarkRoast posted [p:921989246] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote>I checked, and yes, the Bible very explicitly is in favor of interracial marriage. Moses marries a woman from Cush, which is modern day Ethiopia. His sister, Miriam, becomes angry because his wife has dark skin. God responds by giving Miriam leprosy, essentially saying "you want light skin? Here you go". The message seems pretty clear - skin color doesn't matter to God. It's amazing that some evangelicals can twist that.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Solar_Crimson 05/16/19 6:48:25 PM #102:	DarkRoast posted... I checked, and yes, the Bible very explicitly is in favor of interracial marriage. Moses marries a woman from Cush, which is modern day Ethiopia. His sister, Miriam, becomes angry because his wife has dark skin. God responds by giving Miriam leprosy, essentially saying "you want light skin? Here you go". The message seems pretty clear - skin color doesn't matter to God. It's amazing that some evangelicals can twist that. At the same time, God also told the Israelites to not lay down with certain other tribes, and even outright told them to commit genocide against those tribes (even children, where even one of the Psalms sung about tearing the unborn children from women's wombs and dashing them against rocks), so it's definitely a mixed message. --- Be wary of boarding the hype train, lest you end up on the ruse cruise... - nanobuilder (r/nintendo) http://backloggery.com/SolarCrimson <cite>Solar_Crimson posted [p:921989790] in So all of ... [t:77715955]...</cite> <quote><cite>DarkRoast posted...</cite> <quote>I checked, and yes, the Bible very explicitly is in favor of interracial marriage. Moses marries a woman from Cush, which is modern day Ethiopia. His sister, Miriam, becomes angry because his wife has dark skin. God responds by giving Miriam leprosy, essentially saying "you want light skin? Here you go". The message seems pretty clear - skin color doesn't matter to God. It's amazing that some evangelicals can twist that.</quote> At the same time, God also told the Israelites to not lay down with certain other tribes, and even outright told them to commit genocide against those tribes (even children, where even one of the Psalms sung about tearing the unborn children from women's wombs and dashing them against rocks), so it's definitely a mixed message.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3

Current Events > So all of a sudden Roe vs Wade is in danger (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > So all of a sudden Roe vs Wade is in danger