Ruth B Ginsburg Has Passed

[Bobby Jo]

... The courts can only legislate with a hammer and not a scalpel. Which is why it's not ...

... CONSTITUTIONAL! :)

Bobby Jo

 

[Bobby Jo]

... roughly about 61% of people voted yes to legalize it and 39% voted no ...

Kinda sounds like the "vote" to CRUCIFY! :)

Apparently K. Harris (Biden's V.P. pick) specifically wrote the California BALLOT Voter Guide to make the voters think they were voting AGAINST something when they were actually voting FOR something THEY DIDN'T WANT. It happens all the time with a Politician's rhetoric, with Voter Guides, and those with "smooth words".

Bobby Jo

 

[JohnDB]

Here in Australia laws can vary state by state, but there are also federal laws, either way they are usually debated on in parliament before different laws get through or don't make it through and majority wins in parliament.

There was the rare occasion though, when same-sex marriage was passed, they handed a plebiscite to the Australian people to vote on, and roughly about 61% of people voted yes to legalize it and 39% voted no, and then it was handed back to the politicians to finalize, I think most promised to vote what the people in their electorate voted for, and a few went their own way, Scott Morrison walked out and didn't vote. They didn't do a full referendum because I think it was going to cost too much.

I kinda like this system...but it would require a constitutional amendment to change things here. And once a constitutional convention session is opened just about anything can come out... something worse than what we have.

 

[APAK]

From an ex-Jew to Christianity on Ginsburg

Brother Nathanael

 

[Josho]

Kinda sounds like the "vote" to CRUCIFY! :)

Apparently K. Harris (Biden's V.P. pick) specifically wrote the California BALLOT Voter Guide to make the voters think they were voting AGAINST something when they were actually voting FOR something THEY DIDN'T WANT. It happens all the time with a Politician's rhetoric, with Voter Guides, and those with "smooth words".

Bobby Jo

Well let's just just say, it might not have gotten through if the public voted 10 years ago, and definitely wouldn't have passed 15 years ago.

It's a result of a minority continually pushing an agenda, and more and more agreed each time...

A bit like this...

 

[Bobby Jo]

... It's a result of a minority continually pushing an agenda, and more and more agreed each time...

It's no different than Nebuchadnezzar's Metropolis Model, where he was the first to actively regulate Trade, build an Infrastructure (roads, libraries, etc.) and also create the FIRST Amusement Park in the "Hanging Gardens", -- but today this same "Model" regulates the size of dispensed carbonated drinks, and some people actually buy homes in communities where they tell you what color you can paint your house.

It cannot continue unabated, and that culmination won't be pretty.
Bobby Jo

 

[kcnalp]

Political Hell is dead ahead. Remember how they "trashed" the last nominee! Just a glimpse of the future.

 

[Candidus]

What kind of people speak evil of the dead so quickly? I am appalled by the bitterness and crudeness of people who call themselves Christians.

Ginsburg held a position that has to be filled. Why are liberals speaking evil of a nominee before one is even selected? Who has rushed out and used here death as a political prop? Her body wasn't cold before the Democrats started to parade her around like A Weekend at Bernie's.

 

[Candidus]

It could result in another impeachment of Trump. That would be one way to try to stop him. I doubt the Democrats would do that, but it's a thought.

They didn't need a crime or wrongdoing to impeach him the first time, they could impeach him because he likes two scoops of ice cream instead of one.

Let them Double-down on stupid!

 

[Candidus]

Ginsburg was a political hack that legislated from the bench. I would not be surprised that her last words (as reported by Chuck Schumer) was that Trump not replace her. She was trying to live until the next Democrat could replace her before she croaked. She made a miscalculation.

Trump should appoint a political hack equally from the opposite side to make up for Ruth's 27 years of legislating from the bench! We want thing to be "fair..." right?

 

[Bobby Jo]

Ginsburg ... made a miscalculation. ...

I prefer to think of it as: GOD made the CORRECT calculation! :)

Bobby Jo

 

[Giuliano]

And I am appalled that you have the nerve to talk that way about your fellow brothers and sisters in Christ.








I love you most of all. :) (of the ones that aren't in my biological or official adopted family)









Neither are you.













In the words of Michelle Tanner off of Full House,.. you've got a bad attitude.

Time to put you on ignore. Go ahead, exercise your "free speech."

You amaze me, really. After calling other people snowflakes, you asked the moderators to lock a thread here. You don't make much sense to me.

 

[Giuliano]

The top two-thirds of the results were CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, and other left-wing MSM. YouTube does this on purpose. Just another underhanded move by El Goog. All this is nothing more than propaganda. The MSM in Canada is the same.
I respect the office she held, but sorry, not her. I've watched what she did for far too long. Shalom.
P.S. For more info, check out Liz Crokin, the Christian investigative reporter whose stories have never been challenged. BTW Pizzagate was never debunked, the MSM just made it look that way.
P.P.S. Due to having Lupus, I've been on hydroxycroquine, and it may be the safest drug I've ever taken. It also gave me my one and only remission from it. Now that it's been politicized, my Trump-hating doctor won't give it to me, even when he thought I had the Chinese flu. He was the one who introduced me to it. Go figure. Ron

I give up trying to hold a conversation with you. I notice you make lots of allegations but seldom if ever give actual links to anything. As for Liz Crokin? She's not right in the head.

Now you think your doctor hates Trump and you talk about the "Chinese flu." I object to that kind of nasty talk -- I also object to people calling it the "Trump flu."

Sorry, but your posts aren't making sense. I don't see the value of reading your posts anymore. You are also going on my ignore list.

 

[Giuliano]

They have no grounds to do that. As president, he has the right to nominate a new scotus justice.

I agree he has the right to nominate whoever he wants; and the Senate has the right to vote -- and it looks as if they will. The rest of it tends to be more talk and show than reality. I wouldn't say, however, that they have no grounds to impeach him again. I think they have lots of grounds; but it would be a waste of time since for now Republicans control the Senate. Better to let things ride since it looks as if Trump will lose -- leave prosecuting him to the prosecutors.

 

[Giuliano]

I Guess you would have given Hitler a state funeral too? When One lives a life of evil, then Evil is their eulogy, You reap what you sow. What she did in darkness needs to come to the light so that all the world can see the evil she propagated.

You are comparing Ginsberg to Hitler? Check to see if your brain is still connected.

Hitler wrecked Germany so bad, there was no question about whether to give him a state funeral. There was no German government left to do it.

Most people have a mixture of good and evil deeds. You want to see only the things you didn't like about Ginsberg. You want to vilify her.

 

[Giuliano]

You are reading something into what I said that is completely off base. You're talking to someone who was the victim of child porn. And someone whose own children were hurt because I went against my abusers. We (myself and my children) were abducted and drugged on Mother's Day 2009, and punished ....while some of them took photos. Do you understand??
They do not stop with just art or photos ...we can't justify any of it.

What I understand from that is that you are saying real things got done to real children. People guilty of such deeds need to be prosecuted and put in prison to make the world a safer place. Someone who drew pictures? Still sick -- but not as bad.

Are movies about violent murder as bad as violent murder? Both are bad -- I don't watch violent movies since they disgust me -- but I still think really murdering someone is a lot worse than making a movie about it or writing a story.

Wow, can you not show love here to someone you are at odds with? You need to step back and see the doublemindedness...preaching that we should "love" someone by smoothing over their evil deeds. Yet you struggle to love someone who is here, living, breathing....how is this consistent?

If you do not understand how my words to you may be loving, perhaps I should stop trying to encourage you to be a more loving person. If I think I see something in you that possibly causes you and others around you problems, I should ignore it and pay you compliments? You do not see reproof as being loving? Perhaps that's the result of how you were reared?

I did not "smooth" over any evil deeds. That is, to be blunt, a lie. I can see some good in Ginsberg, and I see some evil too. I don't say she's a saint, but I also don't say she's a devil.

 

[TLHKAJ]

What I understand from that is that you are saying real things got done to real children. People guilty of such deeds need to be prosecuted and put in prison to make the world a safer place. Someone who drew pictures? Still sick -- but not as bad.

Are movies about violent murder as bad as violent murder? Both are bad -- I don't watch violent movies since they disgust me -- but I still think really murdering someone is a lot worse than making a movie about it or writing a story.

If you do not understand how my words to you may be loving, perhaps I should stop trying to encourage you to be a more loving person. If I think I see something in you that possibly causes you and others around you problems, I should ignore it and pay you compliments? You do not see reproof as being loving? Perhaps that's the result of how you were reared?

I did not "smooth" over any evil deeds. That is, to be blunt, a lie. I can see some good in Ginsberg, and I see some evil too. I don't say she's a saint, but I also don't say she's a devil.

Alright. I do see your point.

My stance on art that depicts the rape and molestation of children is that it's just as bad. And this is why ...
Pedophiles feed on that stuff. And then they go out and do it. Who else would even think to create such art, but a pedophile? Having "art" such as that should be a crime, as it increases the danger of children being victimized. It is also very degrading. Children should not be seen as something to use for gratification of an adult's perversions. IMO, it only feeds their fantasies more. But you are entitled to your opinion.

I'm not sure where you think I'm being unloving(?). I didn't see reproof in your words to another member here. I saw anger and unkindness.

Anyway, I'm sure the back and forth isn't profitable. So don't be too surprised if I don't engage too much. :)

 

[Bobby Jo]

... I don't say she's a saint, but I also don't say she's a devil.

Jesus said:

Matt. 13:24 ... “The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field; 25 but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat and went his way. ​

... and of such is RBG, and the liberal mindset.
Bobby Jo

 

[Giuliano]

Alright. I do see your point.

My stance on art that depicts the rape and molestation of children is just as bad. And this is why ...
Pedophiles feed on that stuff. And then they go out and do it. Who else would even think to create such art, but a pedophile? Having "art" such as that should be a crime, as it increases the danger of children being victimized. It is also very degrading. Children should not be seen as something to use for gratification of an adult's perversions. IMO, it only feeds their fantasies more. But you are entitled to your opinion.

So if someone has such pictures, he would have nothing to lose by molesting or raping children.

I'm not sure where you think I'm being unloving(?). I didn't see reproof in your words to another member here. I saw anger and unkindness.

Anyway, I'm sure the back and forth isn't profitable. So don't be too surprised if I don't engage too much. :)

I think it unwise and unloving to blur lines and say someone drawing child porn is as bad as actually abusing children so you can photograph it.

What people see in others? When you see me put someone on ignore, that should tell you something. I feel I have nothing more I could say to them of any value. I prefer to give up on people over being angry and unkind. If I feel distaste for someone, it's a red flag to me that I might be going in the wrong direction with him -- first it's distaste, then dislike, and then hate. I have degrees for things. It is better for me to cease talking to someone when I start feeling mild distaste. Similarly, someone with "mental fantasies" about sex with children should realize that's a red flag. One thing can lead to another: First it's just in their heads; but that could lead to drawing pictures or buying pictures that were drawn. Next it could be child porn made with real children. They could wind up molesting or raping children themselves.

When you want to stop that slide down the slope, you don't make the penalties as severe for everything. No, you want people with wrong ideas to go get help. Threatening the lesser things with the most severe penalties means people would be afraid to go get help. They hide things, feel shame and don't go get help.

 

[Bobby Jo]

@TLHKAJ

... I think it unwise and unloving to blur lines and say someone drawing child porn is as bad as actually abusing children ...

It would seem to me that EVERYONE who has THAT fixation is destined for HELL. And people can argue whether that person is in MILD torment or SEVERE torment. But in either case, they're still in HELL -- And they made life choices which resulted in their circumstance.


So in regards to @Giuliano 's council, -- maybe the SOLUTION is not to be "unloving"/"silent"/"non-judgemental" for those who are destined to HELL, but to be even MORE VOCAL in our WARNINGS so that they repent BEFORE receiving their "penalty".

Bobby Jo


PS I don't know if anyone else is insulted by someone who would defend such a PERVERSION, -- but I multiply that by 10 when that person asserts they're a Christian, because THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR HARMING A CHILD, and Jesus said TWO things:

1. Matt. 18:6 “But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
2. Matt. 5:28 But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman [ and especially a CHILD ] lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

And apparently those who do such, -- defend such.