Laughably Small Penis?
Enlarge it At Home
Using Just Your Hands!

Male Multiple Orgasm
Discover your full Abilities!

Become an expert in
pussy licking!
She'll Beg You For More!

Stay Hard as Steel!!!

Supreme Court horror stories

This is an Adult Discussion Forum of Show It Off Site
If you wish to participate you should register on that site and write there

Started by bil47 at 25,Jun,22 01:48  other posts of bil47
How long before Justice Thomas and his fellow far-right social conservatives repeal previous rulings legalizing contraception, consensual gay sex, and same-sex marriage?



Similar topics: 1.who likes sex outdoors   2.EDGING Stories   3.Dating/Hookup sites.   4.Any sissy cumslut stories?   5.Best stories of getting caught  

New Comment

Comments:
By Ananas2xLekker at 25,Jun,22 15:07 other posts of Ananas2xLekker 
How about interracial marriage? It's protected by the same constitution as abortion, contraception, consensual gay sex and same-sex marriage; the 14th. They are already talking about banning contraception and same-sex marriage, which is obviously protected by the 14th:

"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

But they probably won't abandon interracial marriage, because Justice Clarence Thomas is married to a white woman and hypocrites like him never do something that hurts themselves.
By phart at 25,Jun,22 21:19 other posts of phart 
As I told cat, these other issues like interracial marriage and protection, do not take lives.
And I doubt politicians who set bad examples like Bill clinton and even Trump, aren't going to cut out their side pussy.
By Ananas2xLekker at 26,Jun,22 15:57 other posts of Ananas2xLekker 
So, you didn't hear then?
only registered users can see external links
By phart at 26,Jun,22 16:05 other posts of phart 
Um,so I guess it is a wait and see.

In the 1840s, advertisements for condoms began to appear in British newspapers, and in 1861 a condom advertisement appeared in the New York Times. The discovery of the rubber vulcanization process is disputed. Some contest that it was invented by Charles Goodyear in America 1839, and patented in 1844.

History of condoms - Wikipedia
only registered users can see external links › wiki › History_of_condom

When did condoms start being sold in stores?
By 1870, condoms were available through almost any outlet you can imagine–drug suppliers, doctors, pharmacies, dry-goods retailers and mail-order houses. It may seem suprising today, but sexual products were openly sold and distributed during much of the 19th century.Aug 16, 2012


By SAGGY_GRANNY at 26,Jun,22 16:23 other posts of SAGGY_GRANNY 
But, Phart, before, a woman had a choice. She was not forced to have an abortion. Now, she is FORCED to have a child. And don’t come back with her keeping her legs closed or insist on protection. That argument belongs in the 1800’s religious dogmas.
By phart at 26,Jun,22 17:53 other posts of phart 
No it does not belong in in the 1800's, it is as relevant today as it was then .Moreso now really.
IF you can't feed them ,don't breed them.
What makes you think any thing has changed that keeping her legs closed is not a choice any more?
Are you saying I can go to town and walk down a street and say "Hey lady I want some pussy, and she is REQUIRED by some obscure law to provide me with sex? Really? you know better than that.
She does not have to do anything. She can refrain from sex as easily as refraining from a cigarette or a starbucks coffee.
By SAGGY_GRANNY at 26,Jun,22 22:33 other posts of SAGGY_GRANNY 
Studies suggest that the chance of getting pregnant from one-time, unprotected intercourse is between 3.1-5%13, depending on a multitude of factors, including the time of month intercourse occurs, whether contraceptives are used, and the age of the female. The average number of rapes and sexual assaults against females of childbearing age is approximately 250,000.1 Thus, the number of children conceived from **** each year in the United States might range from 7,750—12,500.12 This is a very general estimate, and the actual number may differ. This statistic presents information from a number of different studies.

Phart, you are out of sinc with reality
By phart at 27,Jun,22 00:22 other posts of phart 
To a degree I am glad I am out of sinc because reality sucks. When men think they can force their way into a woman's body it is time to break them from that shit.
Why r@pe is not worthy of 20 years or more in jail for a first offense is beyond me.
By SAGGY_GRANNY at 27,Jun,22 00:24 other posts of SAGGY_GRANNY 
That’s for another discussion. Women’s rights is now.






By Sir-Skittles at 26,Jun,22 01:32 other posts of Sir-Skittles 
Another Euro donkey that pretends to be an expert at American politics and law.

Please cut and paste more information!
By Ananas2xLekker at 26,Jun,22 16:00 other posts of Ananas2xLekker 
Maybe you didn't recognize it, but what I cut and pasted there was your
14th amendment and nothing more.

I don't have to be an expert at American politics and law, to understand that your supreme court judges are full of shit. I am able to just understand what I read.

Explain how 'nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property' contains any reason to ban contraceptives.

Explain how 'nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.' contains any reason to ban same-sex marriage.
By phart at 26,Jun,22 16:09 other posts of phart 
Explain how it says those rights can't be denied?
if you already own the property,then it says the state can't deprive.
But you have to go buy a condom ,so if it is not on the market, you can't buy it to own it, there for the state isn't depriving you of it, you simply can't get it.
The constitution says they can't take it away,but does not say they have to allow you to get it in the first place..
By Ananas2xLekker at 26,Jun,22 18:20 other posts of Ananas2xLekker 
Because it says: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;". How clear should it be?

"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, LIBERTY, or property".
Contraceptives are a LIBERTY, to choose when or if people want children.
That is one of the most fundamental rights in life.
I'm really surprised you would argue against that.

And in the case of condoms, they protect people from AIDS.
If you thing taking that right away is not 'depriving any person of life',
than you should get your head examined.
Or you should just join Al Qaeda, because you're promoting sharia law.
By phart at 26,Jun,22 18:58 other posts of phart 
Liberty definition,
the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views.
ok
Does it define what privileges? As in what are you allowed to do?

Does it define oppressive? is it oppressive to ask you not to kill?
Does it define restriction? does it say restriction is house arrest or what?

Does it define authority or does it tell who holds it? Does it tell us who or what can tell us what is right and wrong?
By Ananas2xLekker at 26,Jun,22 21:35 other posts of Ananas2xLekker 
No, it doesn't say all those things, it just says very generally that "No State shall make or enforce ANY LAW which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States". Your questions are irrelevant.

There are off course limits. People don't have the freedom to be oppressive, because that diminishes the freedom of other people, who have the same rights.

Killing of any person is not allowed, because any PERSON cannot be deprived of LIFE, liberty, or property. A zygote is not a person. A woman IS a person and cannot be deprived of life, LIBERTY, or PROPERTY. Therefore, under the 14th amendment the LIBERTY of a to make choices about her future LIFE and her PROPERTY; her body, should be priority.

Does the second amendment define that you can have assault rifles?
When the 2nd amendment was written, there were no assault rifles.
However, abortion practices were in use as early as the 1600s. If the founding fathers didn't consider abortion a liberty, they would have written it down.

Just like 'arms' in the 2nd amendment, 'privileges' and 'immunities' are not specified in the 14th. However, in the 2nd, it does say 'well regulated militia', which should prohibit your personal unregulated ownership of arms. But the supreme court just decided that gun regulations are against the 2nd amendment, while 'well regulated' is in the 2nd amendment. Your supreme court judges are huge hypocrites, because they are specifically picked and payed to be huge hypocrites.
They also lied under oath, which should be reason for their impeachment.
The founding fathers are turning in their graves over your corrupt supreme court.
By phart at 26,Jun,22 22:24 other posts of phart 
In the 1770's, weapons were primitive. Had assault rifles been around, they would have been mentioned if to be denied with your logic perhaps?
Primitive as the weapons were at that time,many men are buried in the ground that died from them.
By Ananas2xLekker at 04,Jul,22 13:10 other posts of Ananas2xLekker 
Don't you think that had assault rifles been around back then, the founding fathers might have limited their use?
The founding fathers intended the 2nd amendment as protection against an authoritarian government. It's necessary to the security of a free State.
However, your military has such power, that people having assault rifles is useless to protect the security of a free State. They have tanks, fighter jets, guided missiles and drones. Your only protection against an authoritarian government is the rule of law, but Republicans are destroying that completely. You either wake up or find yourself in a theocracy, very soon.






By Sir-Skittles at 27,Jun,22 00:26 other posts of Sir-Skittles 
Better do some research on Federalism ...





By bil47 at 25,Jun,22 12:44 other posts of bil47 
They want to take us back to the time, not so long ago, when you could go to prison for having gay sex.
By SAGGY_GRANNY at 27,Jun,22 00:25 other posts of SAGGY_GRANNY 
That’s scary



By Gntlmn at 25,Jun,22 14:55 other posts of Gntlmn 
SYD/C will be monitored... I'm outta' here.


By JustWill at 25,Jun,22 12:28 other posts of JustWill 
They are already talking about it, so give them until the end of the year.
Welcome to the Theocratic States of America!





Adult Discussion Forum