Activist SCOTUS

plasticbertrand

Duke status
Jan 12, 2009
21,785
14,596
113
Fecal says the Constitution doesn't take into account women

I say where it says man, we can assume it to mean humans

The right to vote was codified in the 19th Amendment

The whole argument was retarded
Well, why is it then that women weren't allowed to vote until 150 years after the constitution was written?

Why is it then that SCOTUS just made a decision that affects only women?

That's what's retarded.
 

enframed

Tom Curren status
Apr 11, 2006
11,782
6,566
113
Del Boca Vista, Phase III
What does codifying "man" = "human" look like exactly WRT our constitution and the right to vote?
Fecal says the Constitution doesn't take into account women

I say where it says man, we can assume it to mean humans

The right to vote was codified in the 19th Amendment

The whole argument was retarded
I'm not asking Fecal, I'm asking you.

Historically we (the citizens of the USA) didn't assume man meant humans.

If not the amendment process, how else could this right to vote for women have happened?
 
  • Like
Reactions: plasticbertrand

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
89,410
18,392
113
I'm not asking Fecal, I'm asking you.

Historically we (the citizens of the USA) didn't assume man meant humans.

If not the amendment process, how else could this right to vote for women have happened?
Why are you asking me these questions?

Do you think I am against the amendment process?
 

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
89,410
18,392
113
The point is that the Constitution didn't get everything right, not even fucking close.

So stop waving it around as it's the word of God, that can never be questioned.
No one is doing that

The Constitution can be changed, you just have to follow the process
 

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
89,410
18,392
113
Well, why is it then that women weren't allowed to vote until 150 years after the constitution was written?

Why is it then that SCOTUS just made a decision that affects only women?

That's what's retarded.
That decision does not only affect women, nor does it do what you think it does

That’s why we have the 10th Amendment
 

plasticbertrand

Duke status
Jan 12, 2009
21,785
14,596
113
The Constitution can be changed, you just have to follow the process
Tell that to young women who just lost the right that's been the Constitutional right for 50 years.

"Following the process" means "let's wait for the life-time appointed, not-elected SCOTUS justices to die".
 

enframed

Tom Curren status
Apr 11, 2006
11,782
6,566
113
Del Boca Vista, Phase III
Historically we (the citizens of the USA) didn't assume man meant humans.

If not the amendment process, how else could this right to vote for women have happened?
Why are you asking me these questions?

Do you think I am against the amendment process?
If I'm reading you correctly, you are saying that in our constitution that "man" should be taken to mean "human" and so an amendment should not have ever be required to allow for women or anyone else to vote (in all states).

I am asking you how else you think that right could have come about, following the constitution as written, without the amendment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: plasticbertrand

plasticbertrand

Duke status
Jan 12, 2009
21,785
14,596
113
There is a process to do just that. I think you're just mad because you want changes the American people would never go along with.
Uh no, I'm mad because majority of people do want gun control and the right to abortion.

I know that facts don't phase you but holy fuck.
 

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
89,410
18,392
113
If I'm reading you correctly, you are saying that in our constitution that "man" should be taken to mean "human" and so an amendment should not have ever be required to allow for women or anyone else to vote (in all states).

I am asking you how else you think that right could have come about, following the constitution as written, without the amendment.
1. Yes
2. The amendment is better, but the SCOTUS could have had a decision that decided "man" as "human"

Before the amendment, states were allowing women to vote, which is the proper way to go about things as well

What should have not been done was an EO or other ways of cheating the real process

But it's all moot now, right? Gender is a spectrum, correct?