Tom Goldstein: "most significant SCOTUS cases of all time
| dashing voyeur | 11/30/12 | | Multi-colored rigpig | 12/01/12 | | chrome cuckold | 12/01/12 | | magical odious crackhouse hominid | 12/01/12 | | chrome cuckold | 12/01/12 | | dashing voyeur | 12/01/12 | | Multi-colored rigpig | 12/03/12 | | Multi-colored rigpig | 12/03/12 | | Mustard sweet tailpipe space | 12/03/12 | | Multi-colored rigpig | 12/03/12 | | dashing voyeur | 12/07/12 | | dashing voyeur | 03/02/13 | | snowy circlehead dilemma | 03/02/13 | | blue thriller legal warrant | 03/02/13 | | Rose Filthpig National | 05/20/13 | | poppy gay wizard state | 03/02/13 | | dashing voyeur | 05/20/13 | | dashing voyeur | 06/26/13 | | Electric Olive Trailer Park Ape | 06/26/13 | | Metal famous landscape painting mediation | 06/26/13 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: November 30th, 2012 9:24 AM Author: dashing voyeur
"is whether some people who put dicks in each other's assholes will be allowed in most states to get a piece of paper that says it's defined as marriage, something they can already get in a few states, and behavior that isn't criminalized anywhere."
http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/11/history/
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2126175&forum_id=2#22140135) |
Date: December 3rd, 2012 8:20 PM Author: Mustard sweet tailpipe space
180 credited OP
I seriously thought this article was being sarcastic for the first couple of paragraphs but then the other shoe never dropped and I was like wtfffffffff
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2126175&forum_id=2#22161278) |
Date: March 2nd, 2013 1:48 PM Author: blue thriller legal warrant
To be fair,
This is one of the most painfully stupid articles that I have ever read. Jesus Christ.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2126175&forum_id=2#22740743) |
Date: March 2nd, 2013 1:50 PM Author: poppy gay wizard state
"most significant case of all time" =/= "these are the most significant cases these nine Justices have ever considered, and probably that they will ever decide"
If they create a new class of people who fall into strict scrutiny then, yeah, that's pretty fucking significant.
Healthcare is close.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2126175&forum_id=2#22740765) |
Date: June 26th, 2013 10:06 AM Author: Electric Olive Trailer Park Ape
That's what it really boils down to. This society has lost its head. There is no compelling moral reason to protect those who CHOOSE to engage in the conduct that gives rise to discrimination. Laws against homosexual marriage are no worse than laws against sibling marriage. The biggest irony of all is that states aren't discriminating against homosexuals at all because no law stops them from marrying the opposite sex. Conversely, the law prohibits two heterosexuals of the same sex from marrying each other, and that can't possibly be "discrimination." But the Supreme Court has banned states from "legislating morality" - at least whenever the law would offend liberals. Liberals are still free to discriminate against white people in the name of "diversity," use tax revenue to pay for abortions, force children to attend sex ed, ban soda, popcorn, plastic bags, paper bags, guns, bullets, etc., etc.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2126175&forum_id=2#23478296) |
|
|