Don't forget that Trump gets to choose the next Supreme Court Justice because there's no way Obama's selection is...

Don't forget that Trump gets to choose the next Supreme Court Justice because there's no way Obama's selection is getting senate approval. This means SCOTUS gets a conservative edge again which helps Trump get his platforms declared legal not to mention helping with the repeal of Obongo care and maybe even getting fag marriage repealed. Not to mention that the jew Ginsberg is at either death's or retirements door due to her encroaching senility so Trump might get to appoint another Conservative judge


This gets sweeter and sweeter

>This means SCOTUS gets a conservative
Trump's not a conservative, but he'll have to work with the Republicans in the Senate. We'll see.

>getting fag marriage repealed.
>overturn roe v wade
dream come true

Trumps list of his preferred SCOTUS nominees are all conservative judges so any way to spin it, the court is going to have a conservative majority again which might get larger since three of the judges are at advanced ages and might either die or retire soon.

why do you want to repeal gay marriage?

Good, the supreme court won't stop the wall from being build.

o

He promised to stop the abortionists and fags.
Onward,
For the greater glory of God

I just hope they stay away from women's rights. One of the few things I disagree with Trump on, though I kinda think he's pro choice and just acting (but i guess it doesn't matter when he appoints a conservative justice) MAGA

Seriously. What the fuck does it matter banana slammers and donut bumpers can get married?

because sodomites shouldn't have equal rights moron

How many old fucks are on it? Didn't that Jew Ginsberg say she was leaving America if trump won? She needs to fucking go.

Load this bitch up with conservatives and all the lefty pipe dreams of gun control can't happen for 20 years plus.

nothing could have gone better unless hillary had shot herself on live television

same with trannies, their mental illness should be treated, not enabled and celebrated

I think they shouldn't call it marriage. Call it civil unions and give them visitation/tax rights and let them be.

The only thing that pisses me off is fags and faghags claiming a word and an institution which has sacramental, historical and cultural value, as their own.

those tax rights were set up to promote the nuclear family, they shouldn't be entitled to them

I'll take a stab it this:
Because "marriage" is a specific religious ceremony with deliberate meaning to a lot of people. Marriage is a Christian ceremony and it is supposed to join a man and a woman together in the eyes of god. Gays should not be getting married because marriage specifically refers to the Christian ritual which as described in the bible and followed for centuries is between a male and female only.
Gays, and atheists, and other religions should not be getting married because it's a Christian tradition. They can have civil unions, or make their own traditions, which are entirely equivalent from a legal perspective but simply aren't marriages. Requiring them to be able to get married strikes me as an affront to Christians, the government meddling in private spiritual matters where it shouldn't. Marriage isn't a right, civil unions are a right, and marriage is just one type, a type which according to Christians should remain m/f only. See?
I'm a straight atheist, in case that matters.

>there will never be another judge quite like Antonin Scalia
F

gimme 30 years tho

Isn't it....uh....just easier to allow gay marriage?

Gays will endlessly protest "civil union" bullshit. Better just to concede "marriage". Probably less government waste will result.

Just leave gay marriage to the Church. If they want to marry people they can, if they don't want to they can as well. That's a nice middle ground that both sides can get behind.

>helping with the repeal of Obongo care
They don't need SCOTUS for that. They just need to repeal it, and given the GOP has taken the presidency and both houses, there's no need whatsoever to overturn the case, which as a pure matter of constitutional law, was a bellweather conservative victory in limiting the commerce power. Except of course, it was found legal under the taxation power... but there's really nothing inconsistent there. It's tremendously unlikely to be overturned in this century.

He's not going touch gay marriage and abortion. and these are losing issue in the grand scheme of things.

to "tolerate" evil is to approve of it!

to scandalize defined ~ to cause others to fall into heresy, the public acceptance of sin and its replication
public scandal causes the ruination of souls and ultimately of entire civilizations.
the Church does not "discuss" the Church does not "dialog" the Church of God teaches. Period.

TRADITION
FAMILY
PROPERTY

But only the people who are so wrapped up in their sexuality that there's nothing else to them are the problem. Why should it matter to you if a dude likes cock if he's otherwise a productive and decent person?

Reclassify all marriages as civil unions with the exact same rights and tax breaks? Works for me.

But im cool with fag marriage
as long as nothing is forced on anyone

Is he going to nominate Rato for the Supreme Court? I kinda want that to happen

Let's temper our expectations here.

As of right now, he's only getting to replace the absolute best conservative judge with another conservative judge. Anthony Kennedy has always been sympathetic to the LGBT community and Roberts has already made it clear that he supports a liberal interpretation of the commerce clause.

Kagan and Sotamayor will be on the bench for a very, very long time. Your absolute best hope is to replace an aging Kennedy and Ginsburg with more conservative judges. Even then, Ginsburg would be the only true pick up because Kennedy (mostly) votes with the conservative wing of the court.

When bush was in power he expanded on his presidential powers greatly. Obama couldn't do much to real that.

Now Trump gets all that presidential power, a republican senate and house, AND supreme court justice. Several justices are old and gonna retire soon so he'll have even more before his term is up.

(OP)
I liked Garland, he was a pretty middle-of-the-road guy who doesn't legislate from the bench. It was a pretty pragmatic nomination on Obama's part. I hope Trump renominates him.
Neither of those things will happen.
Atheists and all sorts of other religions get married too. That argument really doesn't hold any water. In 2016, marriage is more of a legal contract that relates to money and child custody than a spiritual/religious thing.

Ginsburg has cancer too so we might get two. Three isn't out of the question either

What's so positive about women's rights?

I've been saying this forever. Give gay civil unions the exact same benefits as a straight marriage, and just be careful not to call it marriage. Problem solved.

Fucking retard
the tax rights were made to support families

>these are losing issue in the grand scheme of things
i hear this meme a lot, what does it even mean?
especially in regards to abortion, the country's always around 50/50 in favor/against outlawing it.

yeah just like trump will never be president
yeah just like trump will never be president

It should be up to the religions themselves, not the govt. Separation of church and state. Just like no one should be forced to bake a cake for someone.

These should be left up to the people and the clergy. If Protestants or Catholics or jews want to marry gays, that's their choice. But none should he forced to.

State/federal imposed gay marriage is unconstitutional in every way when it involves religion. If the state wants to recognize a civil union for tax and benefit reasons, no one is stopping them. In fact, they already had that, but fags wanted to have it in a sacred church and rub it in everyone's face like the fags they are. Pic related.

I am non-religious and used to have a live and let live mentality. But after all this fag and transgenered shit I am extremely anti-gay and other freak rights simply from being reactionary to their actions.

You give them gay marriage, now they want gay adoption, then they want trans rights, then pedophilia, beastiality, etc. It will NEVER end. You give into one demand and they have another lined up.

So I said no more.

Hope that helps.

There's no limit on justices. Can't he just put 20 of his buddies on it?

>the exact same benefits as a straight marriage
why?
benefits should be for families, for children
not married people
and gay people will never have children

>Marriage is a Christian ceremony
Jesus christ you fucking retard pagans got married before Christians even existed

i fucking hate Christians and their insistence on rewriting history to make their cancer religion more important

this is going to be great, he must stay the course.
there is no reason why he should chicken out, this is his last chance to save his soul, to do something honourable that will echo in eternity

A long-shot run at elected office and overturning judicial precedent as policy are two very different things.

I said the same thing about Bernie and Hillary claiming "we'll overturn Citizens United!".

What about Breyer..he's 78.

>i fucking hate Christians
the guy you're replying to stated he was an atheist intellectual like yourself.

So is it absolutely certain he will be able to replace one judge? And if so, what happens to this guy?

And why doesn't that old hag Ginsberg just die???

Also this

What about straight couples who can't have kids for some medical reason?

adoption, friend. And I'd rather see a kid raised comfortably by two faggots than an overworked single mother, or in foster care

Gay people can adopt children. What do you say about the straight but infertile? Can two elderly people not get married because they're unlikely to conceive?

>I hope Trump renominates him.
It would be pretty funny to see that bitch McConnell's reaction to this, but it more than likely won't happen.

typical brit

>oh I hate christians!!!
>muslims? sure, we have to respect them

this
don't stop at "an edge"
>roe vs wade has been overturned in a 105-4 decision

They are an anomaly and should have the same rights of the straight families.

That's like saying we shouldn't have glasses because some kids are born blind.

Outside of substance, the case law itself is fucking retarded and predicated upon bullshit straw grasping

The case that was granted had no grounding whatsoever and is an embarrassment

Go read it yourself

Anything can happen, but I fully expect he'll try to make it through four years of Trump and get to the next Democrat in office. Supreme Court Justices have unusual longevity for the most part.

I'm more worried about roe v wade

>ban abortion
>millions of people xtra new Democrats now born every year

Okay, Germany is in that aspect far more conservative than you Americucks
If AfD wins the will abolish tax benefits for married people and introduce family benefits

I would rather see a guy who doesn't rock the boat instead of some crazy Scalia-tier right-winger. I don't like the idea of the Supreme Court pulling new laws out of their assholes.
IIRC the Court's maximum limit is 15 but there is no law requiring a particular number of judges at any given time.

Nothing happens to him. They haven't even given him a hearing to reject his nomination and they still don't have to.

Good point. Trumps not really anti abortion so I wouldn't worry about it.

>conversely
>abortion doesn't encourage the rampant degeneration and society is better off
Niggers, while always relatively worse, never used to be this bad

Women are also awful generally because of it

I can only imagine what it's like to live with such a decision

This. I am against abortion on a moral level, but the vast majority of people getting them are blacks and browns. Even the white ones getting abortions are usually left wing freaks.

But I am anti-abortion in white countries, for obvious reasons.

The court doesn't have a maximum limit. FDR threatened to pack the court when he wasn't getting his New Deal legislation through, and nobody has ever set a limit on it. We were originally at 3 and it's gradually evolved over the years.

Bigger fish to fry, all combating fags does is give them more sympathy b8 to use on normies, ignore shit and make it irrelevant, focus on the big shit like immigration before the gov can go blue again

So, just to understand this process, the senate has to review him, reject his nomination and then President Trump can pick a nice young pro-second amendment judge?

>I don't like the idea of the Supreme Court pulling new laws out of their assholes.
That's all the fucking Supreme Court does! See: Abortion, Birth-right citizenship, Obamacare is/is not a tax etc etc.

>roe vs wade has been overturned in a 105-4 decision

>people actually think making abortion illegal is a GOOD idea
it's like you retards WANT an explosion of the latino and nigger populations

>Sup Forums hates black people
>Sup Forums hates abortion despite black women getting abortions more than any other demographic

>Sup Forums hates women
>Sup Forums hates abortion, so more dumb bitches can entrap men for then next 18 years

I love this board's cognitive dissonance sometimes.

I support this, it should be encouraging stable families instead of simple marriages. There's really no sense in getting married today unless you have children.

Can't lower courts just...stop sending cases up to the Supreme Court? They can only rule on what they're given.

And RBG is on her way out. I can't believe I doubted the power of kek. Let's make this country great again, pol.

Women shouldn't have rights.

stfu jew, you know the raison d'etre for shitskin immigration is "whites aren't having enough babies"

There's a good argument for adding justices

They can't handle the case load as is

This could be scandalously hilarious

The SC only hears cases it wants to, though anyone can appeal a case to that level if you spend enough time, effort and money.

They never have to review him at all. In fact, for an extra "fuck you", Trump could send 3 new nominations right now, they review and approve those, and STILL leave Garland without even a yes or no. Poor guy.

these "democrat" parents will be held accountable for their unclean sexuality, no more cutting up little babies now they will have to feed and raise them and in the process, suffer immensely, mature and ultimately - become republican

man is a thoughtless, careless, selfish child until bitter tears makes him an adult standing at the foot of the Cross

Indissolubility of marriage is to civilization like bricks are to a wall, a great big, wonderful wall.

this. Fags can fag all they want. Build wall

You've got it the other way around my man. Anything can be sent up, but the Supreme Court has to grant cert before it's heard. Only a fraction of the cases actually sent up actually get looked at.

Citizens are the ones who appeal cases upwards, not courts

i hate murder, whether it's committed against a white or a black, that's why i'm pro-life.

America is fucking saved senpai

Can't kill what isn't truly alive.

we can play the personhood game, but to claim it isn't alive is just stupid

Is Trump aware of this guy?

I don't think they would repeal gay marriage

You say womens rights to sugar coat abortion and to distract us from the core issue, the rights of the unborn.

Is that Gowdy?

Why don't you pull a six-month fetus out of the womb and cut the cord, see how long it survives without mom?

It's a mass of cells in a parasitic relationship until it survives on it's own. Regardless of your feelings nonsense, the state should not extend inside your body.

Gay marriage is privilege not a right. Let the state determine it.

He is actually going to make America great again the absolute madman

>it requires sustenance
>therefore it isn't alive
dumb

>it's a mass of cells
so are you

>parasitic relationship
no, it's the same species as the "host" and raises the "hosts" darwinian fitness, can't be a parasite by definition.

>feelings
you're the one using hyperbolic rhetoric like "parasite"

>should not reach inside your body
Is of course hyperbole

Up until the minute before birth would apply to that

Debate certain terms instead of leftist hyperbole you piece of trash

If trump wants to axe Ryan I feel like gowdy would make a much better speaker of the house for a trump presidency