demos
Legend
Posts: 9,194
|
Post by demos on Jun 15, 2020 17:43:40 GMT
SourceEveryone who held their nose and voted for Trump because of the Supreme Court, must be thrilled right now. Lol.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2020 18:28:43 GMT
SourceEveryone who held their nose and voted for Trump because of the Supreme Court, must be thrilled right now. Lol. I agree with Ben Shapiro: "This Gorsuch decision is not originalist in any way; he acknowledges as much. It is simply a bad, outcome-driven legal decision. And it throws religious liberty, free speech, and employment law into complete turmoil" — Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) June 15, 2020 This is SCOTUS adding provisions to a law passed by the Congress; left or right, we should all be concerned with this perverted judicial activism. Gorsuch, like Roberts, is a major disappointment to those of us that know that judges should not be making laws. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,094
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 15, 2020 18:46:24 GMT
SourceEveryone who held their nose and voted for Trump because of the Supreme Court, must be thrilled right now. Lol. I agree with Ben Shapiro: "This Gorsuch decision is not originalist in any way; he acknowledges as much. It is simply a bad, outcome-driven legal decision. And it throws religious liberty, free speech, and employment law into complete turmoil" — Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) June 15, 2020 This is SCOTUS adding provisions to a law passed by the Congress; left or right, we should all be concerned with this perverted judicial activism. Gorsuch, like Roberts, is a major disappointment to those of us that know that judges should not be making laws. Please explain how SCOTUS affirming that anti-discrimination law applies equally to all our citizens is "perverted judicial activism"...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2020 22:42:58 GMT
I agree with Ben Shapiro: "This Gorsuch decision is not originalist in any way; he acknowledges as much. It is simply a bad, outcome-driven legal decision. And it throws religious liberty, free speech, and employment law into complete turmoil" — Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) June 15, 2020 This is SCOTUS adding provisions to a law passed by the Congress; left or right, we should all be concerned with this perverted judicial activism. Gorsuch, like Roberts, is a major disappointment to those of us that know that judges should not be making laws. Please explain how SCOTUS affirming that anti-discrimination law applies equally to all our citizens is "perverted judicial activism"...
The definition of those who were covered under the law was codified in the law. Any additions should have been through our elected bodies, not an unelected judicial tyrant. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,094
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 16, 2020 0:40:15 GMT
Please explain how SCOTUS affirming that anti-discrimination law applies equally to all our citizens is "perverted judicial activism"...
The definition of those who were covered under the law was codified in the law. Any additions should have been through our elected bodies, not an unelected judicial tyrant. WRONG!!!
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act that bars discrimination based on sex. What is LBGTQ about, except about sex???
Grow up.
|
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Jun 16, 2020 1:58:17 GMT
SourceEveryone who held their nose and voted for Trump because of the Supreme Court, must be thrilled right now. Lol. I agree with Ben Shapiro: "This Gorsuch decision is not originalist in any way; he acknowledges as much. It is simply a bad, outcome-driven legal decision. And it throws religious liberty, free speech, and employment law into complete turmoil" — Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) June 15, 2020 This is SCOTUS adding provisions to a law passed by the Congress; left or right, we should all be concerned with this perverted judicial activism. Gorsuch, like Roberts, is a major disappointment to those of us that know that judges should not be making laws. Why would "religious liberty" trump personal safety and wellbeing? Should American Sudanese parents be allowed to mutilate their daughters' genitals because it's religiously important to them? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2020 0:29:40 GMT
SourceEveryone who held their nose and voted for Trump because of the Supreme Court, must be thrilled right now. Lol. I agree with Ben Shapiro: "This Gorsuch decision is not originalist in any way; he acknowledges as much. It is simply a bad, outcome-driven legal decision. And it throws religious liberty, free speech, and employment law into complete turmoil" — Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) June 15, 2020 This is SCOTUS adding provisions to a law passed by the Congress; left or right, we should all be concerned with this perverted judicial activism. Gorsuch, like Roberts, is a major disappointment to those of us that know that judges should not be making laws.
This is one that I definitely disagree with Shapiro on. And I listened to the whole podcast shaking my head at his over the top attempts at rationalization. He got a lot wrong in that episode.
The intent of the Civil Rights Act was clear. To protect the rights of citizens that don't conform to the majority demographic.
Just because the people of 1964 didn't acknowledge homosexuals and transgenders doesn't mean they didn't exist and weren't citizens deserving of equal treatment under the law
Queshank
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2020 0:31:46 GMT
Having said that ... I'm not hiring one of those severely impacted victims of gender dysphoria who look positively ridiculous with sloppily put on makeup and a crooked wig saying "I'm a woman now!" Businesses should be able to hire people who *don't* drive away customers. And fire those who decide to deliberately drive away customers after they're hired.
But that's not firing someone because they're transgender. It's firing someone for alienating customers.
Queshank
|
|
