Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Horse with no Name

(33,956 posts)
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 12:46 PM Jul 2014

If we lose 2014...women might as well kiss their status as human beings goodbye.

It really is that simple. If we win, we must demand impeachment of the 5 members of the SCOTUS that want nothing more than to remove our rights. We are in a Constitutional Crisis folks. I daresay it is the worst one of this generation.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/03/scalia-women-discrimination-constitution_n_803813.html

>>>>snip
"In these comments, Justice Scalia says if Congress wants to protect laws that prohibit sex discrimination, that's up to them," she said. "But what if they want to pass laws that discriminate? Then he says that there's nothing the court will do to protect women from government-sanctioned discrimination against them. And that's a pretty shocking position to take in 2011. It's especially shocking in light of the decades of precedents and the numbers of justices who have agreed that there is protection in the 14th Amendment against sex discrimination, and struck down many, many laws in many, many areas on the basis of that protection."

Greenberger added that under Scalia's doctrine, women could be legally barred from juries, paid less by the government, receive fewer benefits in the armed forces, and be excluded from state-run schools -- all things that have happened in the past, before their rights to equal protection were enforced.

44 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
If we lose 2014...women might as well kiss their status as human beings goodbye. (Original Post) Horse with no Name Jul 2014 OP
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Jul 2014 #1
We need a serious review in the US as to the methodology and RKP5637 Jul 2014 #2
Agreed. Horse with no Name Jul 2014 #5
Actually no...but by losing our rights this week it has int ensified it greatly. Horse with no Name Jul 2014 #4
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Jul 2014 #6
Move on. Horse with no Name Jul 2014 #8
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Jul 2014 #11
then get on board with Democratic Women are Kindly STFU. Tired of the bullshit. Tuesday Afternoon Jul 2014 #13
Women's rights are important to me and the rest of the party. conservaphobe Jul 2014 #18
Hell no.... daleanime Jul 2014 #3
Maybe just a wee bit hyperbolic... quinnox Jul 2014 #7
You think a powerful SCOTUS justice stating that women are NOT protected under the 14th Amendent is Horse with no Name Jul 2014 #10
Well, I don't think women will end up being turned into slave labor and rounded up and put in camps quinnox Jul 2014 #12
I get the images of not so long ago Horse with no Name Jul 2014 #17
Ok, I guess I just see different things with that phrase quinnox Jul 2014 #20
you know Skittles Jul 2014 #21
Of course quinnox Jul 2014 #22
five middle-aged white men just told us an employer's religion is more important Skittles Jul 2014 #24
we all are entitled to our opinions quinnox Jul 2014 #25
WTF Skittles Jul 2014 #28
It is terrifying me Horse with no Name Jul 2014 #26
At least he didn't call us hysterical Bobbie Jo Jul 2014 #15
In your view, what is the proper 14th amendment view of the male only draft registration? n/t lumberjack_jeff Jul 2014 #16
When we actually have a draft, we can talk about that. Horse with no Name Jul 2014 #19
... and until then, unequal protection is okey-dokey? lumberjack_jeff Jul 2014 #27
Dude...what I am saying is that there isn't a snowball chance in hell that the draft is going to be Horse with no Name Jul 2014 #32
Nothing except the opportunity to go to college. lumberjack_jeff Jul 2014 #36
Then change it like we are trying to do Horse with no Name Jul 2014 #39
I'll help you collect signatures for the ERA. lumberjack_jeff Jul 2014 #41
OMG IT'S ALL ABOUT MEN AGAIN Skittles Jul 2014 #23
See? Finally you understand! Orrex Jul 2014 #34
oh I have understood THAT ONE for quite some time Skittles Jul 2014 #42
More than a wee bit... HooptieWagon Jul 2014 #38
On the plus side... Orrex Jul 2014 #9
Let's see... Jeff In Milwaukee Jul 2014 #30
The 14th amendment isn't being applied to sex now. lumberjack_jeff Jul 2014 #14
Oh this should be good. dilby Jul 2014 #29
I go with the wrench. lumberjack_jeff Jul 2014 #35
Am I the only one who thinks the 19th amendment is in trouble? Nt maryellen99 Jul 2014 #31
I agree get the red out Jul 2014 #33
yes samsingh Jul 2014 #37
Message auto-removed Name removed Jul 2014 #40
I suspect no one believes any Justice will be impeached if the dems win in 2014 Enrique Jul 2014 #43
Yup. MohRokTah Jul 2014 #44

Response to Horse with no Name (Original post)

RKP5637

(67,104 posts)
2. We need a serious review in the US as to the methodology and
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 12:53 PM
Jul 2014

functionality of SCOTUS, as well as a discussion on term limits. How, that will come about I have no idea, but IMO the current SCOTUS has veered far off track and has become a political arm, rather than a Justice arm.

Horse with no Name

(33,956 posts)
4. Actually no...but by losing our rights this week it has int ensified it greatly.
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 12:55 PM
Jul 2014

So save your face palm...

Response to Horse with no Name (Reply #4)

Horse with no Name

(33,956 posts)
8. Move on.
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 12:57 PM
Jul 2014

You are obviously male and if you don't understand this...well, this doesn't concern ya. Crawl back to where you oozed from.

Response to Horse with no Name (Reply #8)

 

conservaphobe

(1,284 posts)
18. Women's rights are important to me and the rest of the party.
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 01:05 PM
Jul 2014

Women's rights will be a central issue in 2014, as well as 2016.

Those who don't feel that way need a moment of introspection before getting in line or getting out of the way.

Horse with no Name

(33,956 posts)
10. You think a powerful SCOTUS justice stating that women are NOT protected under the 14th Amendent is
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 12:58 PM
Jul 2014

hyperbolic?

What happened to this place....

 

quinnox

(20,600 posts)
12. Well, I don't think women will end up being turned into slave labor and rounded up and put in camps
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 01:00 PM
Jul 2014

Those are the images that come to my mind when I hear "losing status as human beings" anyway.

Horse with no Name

(33,956 posts)
17. I get the images of not so long ago
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 01:04 PM
Jul 2014

when we had to have our husband's permission to do anything....barefoot and pregnant, yada yada yada.

Not so long ago women were the property of their fathers and then their husbands. In my obvious limited world view that is losing my status as a human being.

 

quinnox

(20,600 posts)
20. Ok, I guess I just see different things with that phrase
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 01:11 PM
Jul 2014

Like I said, it makes me think of some kind of nightmare fascism scenario, where people are doing slave labor in camps, literally behind barbed wire, and so on.

Skittles

(153,148 posts)
24. five middle-aged white men just told us an employer's religion is more important
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 01:15 PM
Jul 2014

than a woman's rights - that is VERY ominous - very ominous INDEED

Horse with no Name

(33,956 posts)
26. It is terrifying me
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 01:17 PM
Jul 2014

the implications of this are endless. There are 5 uteruses in my house and I will go down fighting for every one of them.

Horse with no Name

(33,956 posts)
19. When we actually have a draft, we can talk about that.
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 01:07 PM
Jul 2014

However, we don't so it is basically a moot point. Right now I have 5 SCOTUS justices staking claim on MY uterus and it is pissing me off.

Horse with no Name

(33,956 posts)
32. Dude...what I am saying is that there isn't a snowball chance in hell that the draft is going to be
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 01:24 PM
Jul 2014

implemented.

You lose NOTHING by this being there. Nothing. Right now, I am trying to protect my daughters and granddaughters from REAL harm, not imagined harm. And simply put, right now I don't give a shit that this "unequal protection" exists for you in this particular instance. There is no harm attached to it. If you don't like it, lace those bad boy boots up and work to have it removed. Since women obviously voluntarily sign up to serve, it is a non-issue.

 

lumberjack_jeff

(33,224 posts)
36. Nothing except the opportunity to go to college.
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 01:36 PM
Jul 2014

Guys who don't sign up for involuntary conscription are ineligible to apply for FAFSA.

So your capacity for giving a shit about equal protection depends on who is holding the unsanitary end of the stick?

"Equality" as used here is a head fake, it actually means "more for me".

Horse with no Name

(33,956 posts)
39. Then change it like we are trying to do
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 01:41 PM
Jul 2014

Don't sit back and whine about how men are discriminated against. Do something about it. It isn't like men don't have a political voice....

 

lumberjack_jeff

(33,224 posts)
41. I'll help you collect signatures for the ERA.
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 01:48 PM
Jul 2014

So long as we all understand the laws that would be invalidated by it.

 

HooptieWagon

(17,064 posts)
38. More than a wee bit...
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 01:40 PM
Jul 2014

OP is completely ignoring the fact that no matter what happens in House and Senate in 2014, Dems most certainly will keep the WH and veto-pen for at least 2 more years. Plus, not a chance in hell of impeaching a SCOTUS Justice.

Orrex

(63,203 posts)
9. On the plus side...
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 12:57 PM
Jul 2014

The won't be alone. If a Repub takes the Whitehouse and gets to appoint a few more to the SCOTUS, we can write off the nation as a whole, aside from a handful of one percenters.

Interesting times.

Jeff In Milwaukee

(13,992 posts)
30. Let's see...
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 01:21 PM
Jul 2014

Women. Check!
GLBT. Check!
Immigrants. Check!
Latinos. Check!
African Americans. Check!


Who's left?

 

lumberjack_jeff

(33,224 posts)
14. The 14th amendment isn't being applied to sex now.
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 01:02 PM
Jul 2014

US law and policy is rife with examples.
- why does the ACA guarantee contraception, STD testing, HIV counseling and IPV counseling to women but not men?
- why does the draft registration only include men (and only young ones at that)?
- why is there an office of women's health and a white house office for women and girls but nothing analagous for men?
- VAWA and the WIC program.

Set aside for the moment whether you think these inequalities are justified, do these not represent examples of "unequal protection under the law"?

In this case Scalia's view on the matter is demonstrably accurate. These are all examples of "laws that discriminate."

Personally, I'd be strongly in favor of passage of the Equal Rights Amendment, but it's apparent that perceived incursions into women's issues will be the only effective catalyst.

Response to Horse with no Name (Original post)

Enrique

(27,461 posts)
43. I suspect no one believes any Justice will be impeached if the dems win in 2014
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 02:07 PM
Jul 2014

nor that any attempt will be made to do that.

It's hard to imagine that the OP or anyone giving it a thumbsup could believe such a thing might happen. What would be the basis for it?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»If we lose 2014...women m...