3 ms·
I would just rather the people be represented than decided for. As such, I don’t like that Roe v. Wade was decided for the US by nine dipshits and I don’t like
by jimbob45 5y ago
I would just rather the people be represented than decided for. As such, I don’t like that Roe v. Wade was decided for the US by nine dipshits and I don’t like that nine new dipshits may strike it down in the near future, none of whom were even indirectly elected.
Why do you consider my argument well-poisoning?
- GavinMcG 5y agoNot indirectly elected? Many, many U.S. conservatives voted for Republican senatorial and presidential candidates specifically having in mind that they would shape a Supreme Court willing to strike down Roe. Trump promised to only appoint justices who would do so.
- anigbrowl 5y agoThat's the constitutional order that prevails in the US and most republics/parliamentary democracies have something pretty similar. I'd be fascinated to hear about alternative proposals, but if you're just going to go on and on about 'dipshits' then you're probably not here for an actual discussion.
- teachingassist 5y ago> I don’t like that Roe v. Wade was decided for the US by nine dipshits It wasn't, not really. And this is exactly my point: Most countries have successfully legislated abortion law. The USA's federal legislature failed to do so directly and left it to their supreme court to decide something from their ambiguity: as is their job. This decision can still today be written clearly into law, in either direction, by representatives. So, it's an ongoing failure of the legislature.
- jimbob45 5y agoI disagree that they failed to do so. It was left up to the states, as it should have been.