Posted on 08/20/2019 12:03:30 PM PDT by Kaslin
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
If post-FDR era, institutionally indoctrinated Supreme Court justices would read Free Republic, they would know that the only sex-related protection that the states have expressly constitutionally authorized the feds to deal with is limited to voting issues, evidenced by the 19th Amendment, that amendment recognizing only biological male and female sexes.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation [emphasis added]."
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Consider that the unconstitutionally big, post-17th Amendment ratification federal government is likewise limited to preventing race discrimination only in the context of voting rights, evidenced by the 15th Amendment.
"15th Amendment:Section 1: The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.Section 2: The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation [emphasis added].”
"(2) whether it is unlawful sex stereotyping to administer a dress code based on biological sex rather than gender identity."
Title VII helped federal career lawmakers to exploit low-information voters by winning their votes so they could stay in power. But politically correct, constitutionally indefensible laws like Title VII need to be taken out of the books imo.
"The Constitution was written to be understood by the voters; its words and phrases were used in their normal and ordinary, as distinguished from technical, meaning; where the intention is clear, there is no room for construction and no excuse for interpolation or addition [emphasis added]." —United States v. Sprague, 1931.
Remember in November 2020!
MAGA! Now KAG! (Keep America Great!)
Sure. It’s what Bill Clinton did not have with that woman. Case closed.
Boys have a penis
Girls have a vagina
any other questions?
“”Will the Supreme Court affirm the definition of “sex” for us?””
If the Supreme Court were to stay in it’s own lane, the answer would be: “HELL NO”
And their time in session could be reduced to a very few weeks out of the year. ... Leaving them time to guest lecture (and debate each other) in Constitutional Law class forums across the country
Ironically, William Clinton was correct (but for an illicit and immoral purpose):
So-called oral sex is not sex. So-called anal sex is not sex.
Coitus is sex.
Everything else is foreplay, afterplay, or sexually-stimulating eroticism of some kind.
Only real coitus - between a sexually-mature male and a sexually-mature female - can produce real zygotes.
By the bye, this means that pedophilia, even between a male and a female, is not legitimate sex, because a pre-pubescent female - or male - cannot produce the gametes necessary to then produce a viable zygote.
Boys are boys, and girls are girls; they are not androgynous, interchangeable, malleable things; they are sexed, not gendered. But they are sexually IMMATURE beings who must protected by adults.
Fifty years ago, secular scientists were emphatic that the only reason for the emotion of love was to bio-chemically induce sexually mature males and females to engage in sexual intercourse, and thus to reproduce.
They asserted that sex was real, and love was illusion. Now, the secular scientists of today assert that love is real, and sex is illusion.
“in 1964, the term ‘sex’ was publicly understood”
What does that matter?
The term “marriage” was understood for thousands of years before that.
Lot a good that did.
That’s the plan for bypassing probate. Marry each of your children and grandchildren and have the estate pass naturally to the surviving spouses.
But when will the Supremes ever tell us what the meaning of “is” is?
Seriously. Jesus cannot come soon enough.
What God says about blindness comes more and more apparant every day.
...............................
So true.
Was reading Romans 1 today.
Verses 18 to 21 say SO much in so few words.
Pray daily for God to deliver you, your friends and your family from evil.
What’s next .... causing the dead to laugh ?
Let’s hope so. No more sexual harassment, and grabbing tits all day long!
My father taught me never to sit if there is a woman standing. If she refuses the chair then the chair goes unused (as it is a woman's prerogative [and tendency] to change her mind).
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.