SCOTUS Thread (News and Discussion) II: Rape Isn't On My Calendar

[Mertron]

por favor.

build the wall

[Melena]

Bitch i got a 7 day banOh cmon Keeping Up With The Cardassians was funny

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

That was a top tier spam post and we all know what mods are, but i'm sure as shit not saying it so I don't get infracted.

[Day]

[Fondue]

Mods are blind until posts are reported.

nobody believes this btw

[Qalbert]

https://twitter.com/KFILE/status/1316513391029219331

[Kirin]

I guess abortion was on the calendar after rape.

Makes sense.

Spoiler: show

Though honestly, why were they not noticed 3 years ago?

[6souls]

nobody believes this btw

[6souls]

https://twitter.com/LissaJoStewart/s...96502567641089

[Gredival]

Also fuck the snitch that snitched on HC, not that im gonna spend time defending HC

Everyone except me wanted to be rid of HC for bad faith for months now. I never acted on either because I thought HC and guartz were just legitimately that dumb, but they pretty much crossed the line for everyone else where the legitimacy of their stupidity was no longer an excuse for shitty token disagreement.

Neither of them did anything more substantial than come in and drop really stupid links or videos to support their points. HC was already timed out twice when I would review his crap and find no support for his points in the source material so he was in 3rd strike nuke territory.

I mean... i don't know why ya'll would ban him right now? Have you no interest in seeing his reaction when trump most likely loses in a couple weeks?

No thought whatsoever towards properly enjoying others disappointment and I hate you retards for it.

I would support unbanning them after Biden's inauguration to see the salt. But they will probably be insufferable in the lame duck period and Bane would nuke them both again.

[Aerin]

#MakeTrollingGreatAgain

[Tomiko]

Neither of them did anything more substantial than come in and drop really stupid links or videos to support their points. HC was already timed out twice when I would review his crap and find no support for his points in the source material so he was in 3rd strike nuke territory.

HC's "usefulness" was when it came to medical conversation where he would type out actual responses. Between him and the rest of BG Med, those conversations seemed to be productive more often than not.

His posts dropping a link/video and nothing else were trash though, so I can't defend those.

[carlweathers]

Is this judges ethical rules about not answering hypotheticals worth it? It’s frustrating to see nominees opting out of answer important questions when I’d think there must be some way to ask that question without compromising them ethically. Not sure how I’d ask the question but there’s gotta be some way to ask the questions we all want. Like, what rights do you believe people have that’s not in the Constituion.

[Zealot]

So Barrett doesn't think the n-word constitutes a hostile work environment, won't engage in questions about voter intimidation or suppression because they're hypothetical, describes her biological kids as smart and talented and her adopted kids as trauma victims she's rescued, forgot the right to protest is guaranteed under the First Amendment, and doesn't consider Roe v. Wade a super precedent like Brown v. Board that can't be overturned but would also reconsider Brown v. Board were a state to reinstate segregation.

She's the perfect Republican Justice.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

[Kaslo]

So Barrett doesn't think the n-word constitutes a hostile work environment,

To be fair, that's not what she held. She said saying the n-word, without evidence that it affected the employee, does not constitute a hostile work environment.

[Zealot]

To be fair, that's not what she held. She said saying the n-word, without evidence that it affected the employee, does not constitute a hostile work environment.

Ok but the context was an employee who had been affected by it.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

[Kaslo]

Ok but the context was an employee who had been affected by it.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

I remember reading that opinion and the employee did not testify that the person saying that affected him. It's legal shit, but its a classic case of "prove your fucking case" and don't assume you did.

[Jaybar]

Idk why we need to prove that hate speech does or does not constitute a hostile work environment.

[Dimmauk]

Shouldn't calling a black person the hard R N word be a super precedent for it affecting them?

[Guyverarmor]

I remember reading that opinion and the employee did not testify that the person saying that affected him. It's legal shit, but its a classic case of "prove your fucking case" and don't assume you did.

Pretty sure though that if my boss just started addressing me as 'Hey Spic' or 'Hey Wetback' when talking to me, I would consider that a hostile work environment and would be really close to decking his shit, position be damned.

[Kaslo]

Pretty sure though that if my boss just started addressing me as 'Hey Spic' or 'Hey Wetback' when talking to me, I would consider that a hostile work environment and would be really close to decking his shit, position be damned.

Okay, then testify about how it affected you.