Posted on 06/30/2022 12:29:39 AM PDT by Morgana
Sad what pigs some people have become.
Disgusting immoral atheists.
Please have your rona papers in order. Oh, and get a few extra booster shots just in case.
Bye
They’re so brilliant.
“Sad that 6 unelected people can make a religion based decision....”
But it was the unelected leftists who made that decision 50 years ago.
The left can only rule through total ignorance.
Let me ask my home boy in Australia about this. I see articles here and there, about Australia. He says a substantial number, are fake news. I don’t know about this.
That image never gets old
Deport the hag back to the desert full of other poisonous animals like her.
Good, I have some friends there they can send here.
How is this a news story?
Well for us its some losers having a meltdown because they don’t like the way we run our country. They don’t like it so they leave. That is wonderful as far as I’m concerned.
BWahaaha....what BS!
Thing to remember, Australia was populated by convicts and other undesirables.
The one thing I’d say they’ve got a point on - perhaps based on their ancestors being very unfairly deported due to activist judges - is, any country where six activist judges can overturn an established legal precedent ruling simply on the basis of faith and personal opinion is treading a dangerous path.
President Donald Trump would appear to agree. His words:
“Judges are not supposed to rewrite the law, reinvent the constitution, or substitute their own opinions for the will of the people expressed through their laws”
Of course this means Roe vs Wade should never have resulted in the federal universal approval of abortion in the first place. But, before people get too excited, it just as equally means that six activist judges shouldn’t have the ability to repeat the overturn of RvW in other legislatory areas... because there are many of those where conservatives would be far less happy with the outcome.
Revoking assumed / de-facto rights once they’ve been allowed for a very long time can have unintended consequences.
I think most Americans would have kittens if federal government or states started banning gas or diesel motorcars and forced everyone to use 20mph electric milk floats for city center driving - yet there’s no codified right to prevent such a ban.
If they tried it, Conservatives might get very angry but the judges might just say “Look, we’re only doing what you did over abortion; you got activist judges to react to abortion and we got activist judges to react to overdependence on fossil fuel.”
Finally - an inflexible mandated prohibition on moral grounds has already been attempted once, in the 1930s, and it was a completely counterproductive endeavor that just created a criminal industry to service a market that didn’t go away.
Banning alcohol consumption is fascist; treating crimes as aggravated if committed while drunk isn’t.
Banning assault weapons completely would be fascist; prosecuting crimes as aggravated if committed with assult weapons wouldn’t be.
That’s why the SCOTUS decision is right, but an outright comprehensive ban on women having any access to any abortion service under any circumstances without a maintained list of allowable exceptions is going to be seen by an awful lot of people as massively fascist so even if my heart says do it, my head says don’t.
Genuine novel thought: Go back to Australia, yeah?!
Catch you later mate!
Goodbye mate
Put a shrimp on the Barbie and GTFO!
Good point
Yup.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.