22 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

Too many dopes in the world. Time to thin the herd. 

They had those giant heads made really fast.

 

 

5 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

I went to Drexel too, and that's just gross. 

I had one class that did its assignments in VB.
 

It was some intro to computing course for freshmen business students that I took as a blow off credit my last term of senior year  

3 hours ago, TEW said:

We have lefties in here right now saying that if anyone dares to actually read the constitution as written and with its intent, rather than let sh**libs make up whatever moronic and insane laws and meaning they want, they’re going to break up the country.

 

I totally missed this earlier where you completely misrepresented what I said, which was 

10 hours ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

You are a strict originalist; I am not. The notion of implied rights has existed and been repeatedly recognized by the Court since long before Roe. It would be impractical and, quite frankly, impossible to enumerate every single individual right in the Constitution. The document intentionally provides room for interpretation so to provide a framework for rights and immunities that is flexible enough to be workable across history. That flexibility has made it the longest-surviving constitution in history. But if the right insists on applying the Constitution to the 21st Century in a manner exclusively consistent with 18th-Century social and legal standards, then I would not bet on us remaining a country very much longer. But you can argue that the Court went too far in how they made the ruling, as this is probably the most extreme application of implied substantive due process, and you are correct that the true remedy here is an amendment.

 

You either can't read or were being completely disingenuous. The obvious point I'm making here is that if the Constitution is not interpreted with the minimal amount of flexibility required to keep up with the needs of an industrialized nation in the 21st Century, then we will fail sooner rather than later. This isn't a threat, it is a bet. I won't be burning sh** down, but the outright refusal to meet the basic needs and expectations of your citizenry in the context the times and the denial of rights that they have previously enjoyed for half a century is precisely the kind of thing that leads to economic decay and social upheaval. We need a legal framework to be clear and consistent while dynamic enough to ensure stability. The nakedly regressive approach that the right is currently beholden to is a recipe for disaster.

But hey, I know, you're the guy chomping at the bit to break out the Insurrection Act on protestors and border crossers, so we know how you'd handle the situation at the slightest hint of popular unrest. TEW: the libertarian fascist 

22 minutes ago, paco said:

I had one class that did its assignments in VB.
 

It was some intro to computing course for freshmen business students that I took as a blow off credit my last term of senior year  

sounds like they're building towards the best thing ever: macros in Excel

19 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

I totally missed this earlier where you completely misrepresented what I said, which was 

 

You either can't read or were being completely disingenuous. The obvious point I'm making here is that if the Constitution is not interpreted with the minimal amount of flexibility required to keep up with the needs of an industrialized nation in the 21st Century, then we will fail sooner rather than later. This isn't a threat, it is a bet. I won't be burning sh** down, but the outright refusal to meet the basic needs and expectations of your citizenry in the context the times and the denial of rights that they have previously enjoyed for half a century is precisely the kind of thing that leads to economic decay and social upheaval. We need a legal framework to be clear and consistent while dynamic enough to ensure stability. The nakedly regressive approach that the right is currently beholden to is a recipe for disaster.

But hey, I know, you're the guy chomping at the bit to break out the Insurrection Act on protestors and border crossers, so we know how you'd handle the situation at the slightest hint of popular unrest. TEW: the libertarian fascist 

The same guy who wants to machine gun people trying to cross the border is against women in America being able to get an abortion.  It’s quite the balancing act.

The wife brought up that I didn’t vote for Hillary today.

    

11 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

The same guy who wants to machine gun people trying to cross the border is against women in America being able to get an abortion.  It’s quite the balancing act.

7 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

The pro-life and pro-death dichotomy is what I’m here for

31 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

The wife brought up that I didn’t vote for Hillary today.

    

Good for her! I'm an O.G. Hillary hater, but I've been bringing that up to everyone I can on Facebook. I mean, I've been doing that since 2016, but especially the past few days. 

 

Damnit, Moss, 

 

 

"Being impregnated via rape is an opportunity for the victim" is some next-level yikes.

Haven't you heard, guys? Rape babies are gifts from the heavens!

I gotta be honest, I don’t get the argument that a woman should still have the baby if she gets pregnant from rape or incest.

2 hours ago, 20dawk4life said:

I’m still pro abortion. Not pro choice or pro life, I am pro abortion. 

This reminds me of

 

1 hour ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

I doubt you'll get both wishes. Enjoy!

Well abortion wont be banned so…

10 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

Good for her! I'm an O.G. Hillary hater, but I've been bringing that up to everyone I can on Facebook. I mean, I've been doing that since 2016, but especially the past few days. 

 

Dammit, Moss, 

 

 

She usually builds up to it, but something like today’s news will set her off.  By the time she’s done with her rant my vote for Gary Johnson is characterized as a vote against Hillary and firmly puts me in the white male patriarchy camp.

Just now, Dave Moss said:

my vote for Gary Johnson

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

She usually builds up to it, but something like today’s news will set her off.  By the time she’s done with her rant my vote for Gary Johnson is characterized as a vote against Hillary and firmly puts me in the white male patriarchy camp.

Sounds like somebody's sleeping on the couch.

 

 

Make sure you give her a blanket.

Hmmm it’s almost like if you think abortion is murder of an innocent life, that doesn’t change based on the circumstances of how that life came to be 🤔  How weird that some of us don’t think we should slaughter people based on something they weren’t involved in. It’s almost like genocide is wrong or something. 

 

19 minutes ago, binkybink77 said:

Hmmm it’s almost like if you think abortion is murder of an innocent life, that doesn’t change based on the circumstances of how that life came to be 🤔  How weird that some of us don’t think we should slaughter people based on something they weren’t involved in. It’s almost like genocide is wrong or something. 

 

 

So, we can mark you down for having the state force women to bring rape babies to term?

You can mark me down as someone who believes that rape babies are as valuable as non rape babies. 

Biden went off message again 

 

 

6 hours ago, Dave Moss said:

I gotta be honest, I don’t get the argument that a woman should still have the baby if she gets pregnant from rape or incest.

There's nothing to get. It's a stupid Fing argument.

8 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

sounds like they're building towards the best thing ever: macros in Excel

Oh no, that was "Intro to computing 102" (or whatever it was called).  For my "final" I built a slot machine for my grandmother.  Way too practical.  Damn shame I graduated immediately after taking that class.

 

  

8 hours ago, Dave Moss said:

The wife brought up that I didn’t vote for Hillary today.

    

Which restaurant did you take her to to apologize  

8 hours ago, Dave Moss said:

I gotta be honest, I don’t get the argument that a woman should still have the baby if she gets pregnant from rape or incest.

I don’t get why incest is involved. If the person willingly had sex with their brother cousin and got pregnant then it’s not rape and they knew the consequences of their actions. If they didn’t want teh sex with their brother cousin then it’s rape.