Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
RavenHawk

RBG dead at 87

168 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

susieice

I just saw this too. She was such a fighter. What a life she led. This is sad. My condolences to her family.

https://6abc.com/politics/justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-dies-at-87-supreme-court-says/6442638/?fbclid=IwAR0cI6BGNT9HzVai9jIMsgTOLCvlcfjS08RWtq_-FuBq-uUnq6pUCMBXWKs

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
5 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

Normally, I'd say there's not enough time before the election to go through that process so he just needs to wait but considering the real possibility that this election isn't going to be settled until well over into 2021, I say put up a nominee and get McConnell busy.  Even if the lose the Senate, which I don't think is likely, there would be enough time to place another Justice.  Of course, someone might have to club Romney and hide him in a basement or something but... whatever it takes ;) 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peter B
13 minutes ago, and then said:

Normally, I'd say there's not enough time before the election to go through that process so he just needs to wait but considering the real possibility that this election isn't going to be settled until well over into 2021, I say put up a nominee and get McConnell busy.  Even if the lose the Senate, which I don't think is likely, there would be enough time to place another Justice.  Of course, someone might have to club Romney and hide him in a basement or something but... whatever it takes ;) 

Just out of interest, if a (hypothetical) Democratic-controlled Senate held up the nomination of a Republican President's nomination for the Supreme Court for more than eight months, but rushed through a Democrat President's nomination in under two months, would you be happy with that process?

In the case of Justice Scalia's replacement, Mitch McConnell said in March 2016 that the electoral cycle had already started and therefore the Senate shouldn't vote on Obama's replacement nomination. Shouldn't that interpretation apply this time too?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
2 minutes ago, Peter B said:

Shouldn't that interpretation apply this time too?

I believe that situation had a precedent.  Truthfully?  I grew up as a person who believed in honesty and HONOR in our government.  That doesn't exist at any level now.  I see the point you're making and I acknowledge that pushing through a Justice under these circumstances would not be following the precedent McConnell used with the last Obama nominee.  Hypocrisy?  Sure.  Considering the absolute train wreck that the Dems have created for 4 years because they lost an election, I say if he can seat a Justice before the end of the year, he should.  It isn't like the Left/Dems are going to show any restraint in any way going forward.  It's straight up bare knuckle street fighting now.  BTW... the guy in the Oval Office right now, is excellent at that.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thedutchiedutch

R.I.P.  Notorious RBG.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spartan max2

I'm going to be p***ed if a conservative is put on the supreme court and then gay marriage and abortion gets overturned. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
susieice
19 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

I'm going to be p***ed if a conservative is put on the supreme court and then gay marriage and abortion gets overturned. 

 

Her death was just announced an hour ago when RavenHawk posted. Let's not rewrite her story yet. 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
18 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

I'm going to be p***ed if a conservative is put on the supreme court and then gay marriage and abortion gets overturned. 

 

I'm pretty sure that isn't going to happen.  But you do realize that it has been the Left that has slowly been overturning Roe V Wade.

  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spartan max2
11 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

I'm pretty sure that isn't going to happen.  But you do realize that it has been the Left that has slowly been overturning Roe V Wade.

How so?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
23 minutes ago, thedutchiedutch said:

R.I.P.  Notorious RBG.

She certainly was a cultural icon.  Most Conservatives considered her beliefs to be those of some kind of arch-villain.  I disagreed with nearly every stance she held but I give respect to anyone who serves the nation according to their beliefs.  I think the Left in the Twitter-sphere is probably going to melt down in the coming days.  If Trump nominates another Justice and McConnell takes it to a vote we'll see riots in DC.  Watch it happen...  

 

20 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

I'm going to be p***ed if a conservative is put on the supreme court and then gay marriage and abortion gets overturned. 

 

I don't believe that can happen at this point.  At worst, we'd see the states taking sovereignty on those issues. 

If Planned Parenthood, for example, has a mission of "reproductive health" and they are being funded by taxpayers, why not have them take on the role of expediting this "care" for women who live in states where the majority reject abortion altogether or at least they reject terminating a life beyond a certain period of gestation?  I mean, is their mission to profit from their services or to actually help poor women?

I don't think Abortion availability will be fundamentally changed.  

As for Gay marriage, I don't believe the government has any role whatever in deciding who can get married.  The whole concept of marriage has always been based in religion/spirituality.  Government's mission is to ensure that citizens are treated equally under the law.  IIRC, the states already recognized civil partnerships and the legal rights that go with them.  Why is it necessary to demand a religious ceremony?  Again, I don't think the states have a role there BUT, if the individual states agree with the right of all people to be married in a religious service by a consenting religious figure like a Priest or Rabbi or Imam, then so be it.  My only caveat would be that the person who officiates do so VOLUNTARILY.  OTOH, if the majority in a given state reject the idea of same sex marriage then their beliefs should be honored as well.  I'm speaking of religious sanctification of the union, NOT a denial of legal rights that all other married couples would enjoy.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
susieice

Politicians are reacting to her death. The flags at the White House and the Capital are at half staff.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/18/thank-you-rbg-leaders-react-with-sadness-shock-to-ruth-bader-ginsburgs-death.html

41 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

I'm going to be p***ed if a conservative is put on the supreme court and then gay marriage and abortion gets overturned. 

 

I don't think this will happen either spartan.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
20 minutes ago, susieice said:

Her death was just announced an hour ago when RavenHawk posted. Let's not rewrite her story yet. 

I agree, no need to be seen as gloating though I recall exactly that kind of behavior when Antonin Scalia died suddenly.  For better or worse, her story was written up and put in the can a few years ago, probably.  It's just the nature of our politics now.  Mores the pity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
3 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

How so?

RvW established the three trimesters as categories in determining different approaches to abortion.  In the first trimester, a woman could get an abortion as needed.  Most of lost pregnancies occur in the first trimester anyway.  In the second trimester, the woman needed a good medical reason.  If the woman doesn't want a pregnancy, she should decide in the first trimester.  And then in the third trimester, only in the cases of threat to the woman's life.  Ever since the 80s, the Left has been blurring these boundaries.  And now they push late term abortions and even post-birth abortions.  I believe that a more conservative court, if challenged can return RvW back to the original intent.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
docyabut2

Sorry to hear she died for the rights of women, but not for the support of life abortions  :( the right to life and the Constitution  right of the Pursuit Of Happiness

See the source image

 

Edited by docyabut2
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spartan max2
35 minutes ago, susieice said:

Her death was just announced an hour ago when RavenHawk posted. Let's not rewrite her story yet. 

Mcconnell already stated he is going to move ahead to fill the seat

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/517178-mcconnell-says-trump-nominee-to-replace-ginsburg-will-get-senate-vote

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
7 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

After the hair-on-fire chaos the Dems have pushed for 4 years, does it seem "unfair" that the Republicans would play hardball as well?

This from ABC:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trump-put-nominee-replace-justice-ruth-bader/story?id=73107862

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
docyabut2
29 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

lets us get a supreme court to support the right to life to survive , a person is a baby "(

Image result for a person Is a Baby

 

Edited by docyabut2
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
docyabut2

I don't think the supreme court will ever deny gay marriages, love is love:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
Just now, docyabut2 said:

I don't think the supreme court will ever deny gay marriages, love is love:)

I agree.  I don't think it's any government's business to decide who can or cannot be married.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats

I have to agree with Trump, amazing woman who’d led an amazing life.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

Not sure if this is accurate but something to think about in a crazy year already

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Autochthon1990

Hey Republicans, just warning you: If you guys do fill this seat and violate the precedent you set, and we do win in a landslide...well we're gonna pack the **** out of the court, so have fun with THAT. Unless you're willing to say, actually do the right thing here, in which case, we'll have no reason to pull that trigger...

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.