@blucomazz@zebadia7@questionableway You’re not getting me. The county fired him because he was attracted to the same sex. Comparing a gay man to a straight woman is asinine. The comparison should be between a gay man and a lesbian woman. If they would fire one but not the other, it would be incongruent.
@blucomazz@zebadia7@questionableway A decision of dubious logic, even if a preferred outcome. Of course, the county did not fire Bostock because of his liking men, but because of his same-sex attraction. Presumably, they would fire a lesbian woman as well.
@ASFleischman The irony on both sides is hilarious. Now that the conservative justices attempt to exert broad judicial authority, you find it bad? I would imagine you agree with Obergefell, Roe, etc., despite those cases relying EVEN less on precedent than these dissents.
@alt_ccc You have to be the single biggest larper on this website. You created your "country club conservative" persona and subsequently opine in ways to match it. It is clear you have no principles, besides potentially maximizing GDP growth.
@questionableway it's a pretty glaring flaw in the constitution that the president can select and appoint judges but he cannot protect their independence or disempower them
@kylegriffin1 In your perfect world, the president would essentially be a useless figurehead with little ability to execute laws as chief executive. Bloated bureaucracy is a scourge on democracy, and it is up to the Court to intervene.
@ellonico The answer is punishment of and deterrence for crimes as well as promoting a safer public life. You begin to understand with your second point: current punishment is not severe enough. Removing repeat offenders from society who continually evade justice would improve society.
@Braylon_Breeze One of the worst commentating duos I have ever heard. I don't know who I hate more between the play-by-play guy and the color commentator. Both shit and don't understand the moment. I hope they don't have any important assignments later in the knockouts.