- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: And Here We Go...Obama Will Look For Ways To Circumvent SCOTUS Ruling
Posted on 6/30/14 at 9:52 pm to Rex
Posted on 6/30/14 at 9:52 pm to Rex
Rex. The reasoning is clear as day. It is a common type of reasoning used in the law. "No further analysis is necessary" or "we don't decide that issue here" are all over rulings from state appellate courts to the scotus. I cannot help if you don't understand it. As the decision gets interpreted by experts you may respect, I look forward to you being open to the ruling as I have explained it to you.
Btw....for someone who complains about personal attacks....you have ended nearly every post to me with one. Forgive me if I don't lose any sleep losing the respect of someone so hypocritical.
Btw....for someone who complains about personal attacks....you have ended nearly every post to me with one. Forgive me if I don't lose any sleep losing the respect of someone so hypocritical.
2
Posted on 6/30/14 at 9:54 pm to BBONDS25
quote:Alito wrote it as explicit as it gets. He states it word-for-word.
I cannot help if you don't understand it.
You, too, have re-explained it for Rex.
But, unfortunately, none of us can understand it for Rex.
This post was edited on 6/30/14 at 9:55 pm
Posted on 6/30/14 at 9:57 pm to Taxing Authority
It's like trying to explain English to a puppy
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:09 pm to BBONDS25
You called me both stupid and a liar last night, when I'm neither... so forgive me if I don't respect your whining.
Yes, and you've gotten it wrong from the get go. His RFRA approach and solution to THIS case wouldn't necessarily apply to all religious claims. He says so clear as day.
"No further analysis is necessary" is because he already reached a solution... the one he already suggested that satisfies RFRA. He says so clear as day.
You still haven't answered why Alito would say "there is none" reason the accommodation for non-profits wouldn't protect women. Wouldn't unconstitutionality be a reason? Wouldn't illegality be a reason? Wouldn't inapplicability be a reason? He says "there is none", clear as day.
quote:
The reasoning is clear as day.
Yes, and you've gotten it wrong from the get go. His RFRA approach and solution to THIS case wouldn't necessarily apply to all religious claims. He says so clear as day.
"No further analysis is necessary" is because he already reached a solution... the one he already suggested that satisfies RFRA. He says so clear as day.
You still haven't answered why Alito would say "there is none" reason the accommodation for non-profits wouldn't protect women. Wouldn't unconstitutionality be a reason? Wouldn't illegality be a reason? Wouldn't inapplicability be a reason? He says "there is none", clear as day.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:12 pm to Rex
quote:Yes, yes you are you social fricking mooch.
You called me both stupid and a liar last night, when I'm neither...
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:12 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
Alito wrote it as explicit as it gets.
Alito explicitly says the accommodation approach that satisfies this Hobby Lobby case wouldn't necessary work for all cases.
quote:
You, too, have re-explained it for Rex.
His explanation is wrong.
quote:
But, unfortunately, none of us can understand it for Rex.
None of you have as much brainpower, frankly.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:13 pm to Rex
Rex can you hit the benghazi thread when you get a moment? I believe my question pertains to something you stated previously. No hurry. 
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:14 pm to Rex
I have never whined about name calling. That is your forte. I was not whining...merely pointing out you hypocrisy.
I am not going to argue the interpretation of the ruling anymore. It appears clear to me. Perhaps we can revisit after some attorneys you may respect weigh in.
I am not going to argue the interpretation of the ruling anymore. It appears clear to me. Perhaps we can revisit after some attorneys you may respect weigh in.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:14 pm to Rex
quote:
None of you have as much brainpower, frankly.
Sperm burper gotta burp.Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:20 pm to Rex
Oh Lord....fricking Rec in here trying to claim victory out of SCOTUS pissing in Obamacare's cereal.
What a dumb frick. Geez
Listen small man, instead of begging for pinholes of light and assessing how this might one day help the liberal fricks make us pay for whores who seek abortions, why don't you look the other way and see the floodgates open on ALL private companies using this as a cost savings method and demolishing the fricktards plan to fund this abortion of a health bill.
This is over! Get ready
What a dumb frick. Geez
Listen small man, instead of begging for pinholes of light and assessing how this might one day help the liberal fricks make us pay for whores who seek abortions, why don't you look the other way and see the floodgates open on ALL private companies using this as a cost savings method and demolishing the fricktards plan to fund this abortion of a health bill.
This is over! Get ready
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:23 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
I am not going to argue the interpretation of the ruling anymore. It appears clear to me. Perhaps we can revisit after some attorneys you may respect weigh in.
Set that all aside for the moment.
Explain why Alito would say "there is none" reason that the non-profit accommodation would not protect women if he doesn't believe it's a valid one.
Explain why Alito would say the government could use the non-profit accommodation when in fact they can not if it's illegal, unconstitutional, or inappropriate?
I'll stay tuned.
This post was edited on 6/30/14 at 10:32 pm
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:25 pm to Rex
quote:FIFY
I'll stay affixed to Odrama's crank.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:28 pm to Rex
The court could not decide a matter not in front of them. That is why Alito said they are not deciding that in this ruling. Unless you are claiming that Alito can rule on issues not in front of the court without the entire court voting...I am positive that isn't what you are saying. There is a reason the rules are the way they are and Alito clarifies that the court was not ruling on anything other than the hobby Lobby case. Could you imagine the mess if whichever justice was writing an opinion could throw in additional rulings without the court considering them?
Like I said Rex....it appears clear. But we won't agree...
Like I said Rex....it appears clear. But we won't agree...
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:30 pm to Jbird
What it boils down to is Hobby Lobby cannot be forced into spending their money the way Obama was dictating that they do.
What it boils down to is Hobby Lobby can invest their pension funds in anything they please and if Rex doesn't like it, there's nothing he can do about it. He can whine and call names, but neither he Barack nor Eric Holder can do anything about it.
Sam Alito can issue any opinion he pleases, and all Rex can do is whine. Can't change it,and his opinion means no more than anyone else's.
What it boils down to is Hobby Lobby can invest their pension funds in anything they please and if Rex doesn't like it, there's nothing he can do about it. He can whine and call names, but neither he Barack nor Eric Holder can do anything about it.
Sam Alito can issue any opinion he pleases, and all Rex can do is whine. Can't change it,and his opinion means no more than anyone else's.
This post was edited on 6/30/14 at 10:31 pm
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:31 pm to antibarner
That's why Rexy is pissing on a tree.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:35 pm to Jbird
Let Barack continue attacking and belittling SCOTUS,
and when that GOP lawsuit gets in front of them,watch out.
And Rex will immediately run on here and whine, but there will be NOTHING he can do about it.
Come November when the Dems lose the Senate, and soon after Harry Reid gives up the gavel, it will be payback time. Once again, Rex will rush over here to whine, and once again it will mean NOTHING.
and when that GOP lawsuit gets in front of them,watch out.
And Rex will immediately run on here and whine, but there will be NOTHING he can do about it.
Come November when the Dems lose the Senate, and soon after Harry Reid gives up the gavel, it will be payback time. Once again, Rex will rush over here to whine, and once again it will mean NOTHING.
This post was edited on 6/30/14 at 10:37 pm
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:37 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
The court could not decide a matter not in front of them.
You didn't answer my questions.
quote:
That is why Alito said they are not deciding that in this ruling.
What he actually said is that he is not deciding ALL religious claims with the RFRA accomodation approach that settled this one.
And, I'll remind you... you didn't answer my questions.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:38 pm to Rex
People have had enough of this manure that the dog and his heroes are spreading, and he will learn that to his sorrow come November.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:39 pm to antibarner
quote:frick head did it last night calling the SCOTUS corrupt, he is a fricking idiot.
And Rex will immediately run on here and whine
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:41 pm to Jbird
He really isn't worth the fuss, because after November he won't be here any more.
This post was edited on 6/30/14 at 10:42 pm
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News