[www.reuters.com]

... so in other words, take your medicine, deal with it, we know what's best for you.

If that's not condescension, I don't know what is. With respect, I don't know that he should be in a position to be part of making a decision that will affect millions of Americans, when it is so obviously a political decision and not one actually based on the Constitution, existing laws, and precedents (which is his job!).

---

Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)

“Just lay back and enjoy it.”

Quote
deckeda
“Just lay back and enjoy it.”

Yup, I was thinking that too, but wasn't quite brazen enough to come out and say it.

Other, similar sayings that come to mind:

"Take it like a man."

"Suck it up, snowflake."

"Man up and take your punishment."

"Thank you sir, may I have another?"

... we are all literally getting fracked from behind and it appears we're regressing to the 1950's (or even further back). That seems to be the goal.

---

Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/07/2022 06:04PM by PeterB.

Saw this and had the same reaction.

---

Is that the attitude he took with Roe v. Wade? Of course, not. If it was, he would have been satisfied with Roe v. Wade as a particular outcome. Pure ludicrous hypocrisy.

---

e pluribus unum

Quote
Ted King
Is that the attitude he took with Roe v. Wade? Of course, not. If it was, he would have been satisfied with Roe v. Wade as a particular outcome. Pure ludicrous hypocrisy.

Yes, and with an added touch of superiority. (As might be expected for a SC judge being in the position they're in, but really shouldn't be demonstrated, as a matter of decorum.) And also a teensy bit, or more than a teensy bit, of insecure defiance... "we're the Supreme Court, you can't bully us!"

I am reminded of the fact that at least one other of his fellow Justices who sided with Alito in the decision has been accused of sexual harassment, and three of them were nominated by someone who has himself been repeatedly accused of sexual harassment. One cannot imagine that this doesn't factor into their decision making, and comments like those made by Justice Thomas really undermine the court's credibility.

Edit: I just ran across this article, back from December 2021. Boy, did they call it!: [www.rollingstone.com]

---

Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/07/2022 06:39PM by PeterB.

The caption for the photo, “Pro-abortion demonstrators”, should be “Pro-choice demonstrators” unless there is a way to backdate an abortion to Justice Thomas’ birth.

---

Saint Cloud, Minnesota, where the weather is wonderful even when it isn't.

Quote
PeterB
... so in other words, take your medicine, deal with it, we know what's best for you.

If that's not condescension, I don't know what is.

Careful, that’s what the anti-vaxers argue.

Quote
DeusxMac

Quote
PeterB
... so in other words, take your medicine, deal with it, we know what's best for you.

If that's not condescension, I don't know what is.

Careful, that’s what the anti-vaxers argue.

True, and they might be entitled to their feelings, but you're talking about two wildly different things:

1) Requiring that folks take a vaccine to save their lives and the lives of their fellow Americans, as a matter of public health policy (and as determined by scientists/medical/public health experts);

2) Telling women that they have no choice but to give birth to a child, even if that child is the product of rape or incest (against 50 years of established precedent).

While both questions involve issues of body autonomy, you can't have it both ways. If someone wants to argue that they shouldn't have to get vaccinated, then they have absolutely no business telling a woman what she can and cannot do with her body. That's exactly what the anti-vaxxers believe:

---

Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/07/2022 07:38PM by PeterB.

Hmmm...there's no long-standing recognized right to refuse vaccines either...hold 'em down and give 'em everything including the two boosters.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/08/2022 06:56AM by Bill in NC.

Quote
PeterB

Quote
DeusxMac

Quote
PeterB
... so in other words, take your medicine, deal with it, we know what's best for you.

If that's not condescension, I don't know what is.

Careful, that’s what the anti-vaxers argue.

While both questions involve issues of body autonomy, you can't have it both ways. If someone wants to argue that they shouldn't have to get vaccinated have the right to determine what’s done to their body, then they have absolutely no business telling a woman what she anyone else what they can and cannot do with her their body.

As I said, anti-vaxers have no trouble flipping that argument.

As a society, "we are becoming addicted to wanting particular outcomes, not living with the outcomes we don't like," Thomas said.

"We can't be an institution that can be bullied into giving you just the outcomes you want. The events from earlier this week are a symptom of that."

Says the man whose wife tried to bully Congress because she didn't like the particular outcome of the 2020 election.

---

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/08/2022 11:43AM by $tevie.

Quote
DeusxMac

Quote
PeterB

Quote
DeusxMac

Quote
PeterB
... so in other words, take your medicine, deal with it, we know what's best for you.

If that's not condescension, I don't know what is.

Careful, that’s what the anti-vaxers argue.

While both questions involve issues of body autonomy, you can't have it both ways. If someone wants to argue that they shouldn't have to get vaccinated have the right to determine what’s done to their body, then they have absolutely no business telling a woman what she anyone else what they can and cannot do with her their body.

As I said, anti-vaxers have no trouble flipping that argument.

You don't see the hypocrisy illustrated by my cartoon?

The hypocrisy of the antivaxxers' stance is evident in lots of other ways too... as is the hypocrisy of the "pro-life" movement. (Which should really be renamed "pro-birth", because they don't really care so much about life, it seems... just birth... who cares what happens to the child after that.)

---

Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/08/2022 11:49AM by PeterB.

Quote
PeterB
You don't see the hypocrisy illustrated by my cartoon?

Unfortunately, in the most simplistic way, the "hypocrisy" goes both ways. Which is the way all the anti-vaxers want to, or are capable of understanding.

The real difference between those two "positions" is that PREGNANCY IS NOT A CONTAGIOUS DISEASE.

Your daughter is not at risk of becoming pregnant because my daughter is. However, your daughter (and everyone else) IS at risk of becoming infected with Covid-19 if my daughter is.

Quote
DeusxMac

Quote
PeterB
You don't see the hypocrisy illustrated by my cartoon?

Unfortunately, in the most simplistic way, the "hypocrisy" goes both ways. Which is the way all the anti-vaxers want to, or are capable of understanding.

The real difference between those two "positions" is that PREGNANCY IS NOT A CONTAGIOUS DISEASE.

Your daughter is not at risk of becoming pregnant because my daughter is. However, your daughter (and everyone else) IS at risk of becoming infected with Covid-19 if my daughter is.

But ultimately, anyone (antivaxxer or not) who wants to confabulate issues or take hypocritical stances will, anyway. The antiabortion crowd would say that even though pregnancy isn't a contagious disease, the unborn victims of abortion must be protected, and that abortion represents an existential moral issue-- if you allow some to do it, the acceptance of it will become widespread (that is, that it IS a contagious disease). The antivaxxers would also claim that corona has been far overblown and is not really a threat.

Ultimately, all of this boils down to the lack of acceptance of facts and the truth... which has been the big problem all along. I think we all know who, in part, we can thank for that:

[www.newsweek.com]
[abcnews.go.com]

---

Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)

I'm sure this is a component of many mass shootings too. Not liking an outcome, thinking "I'll show them" and being very irrational about it.

---

********************************************
“A sword never kills anybody; it is a tool in the killer's hand.” Seneca the Younger

The police have no duty to respond. See Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005) or Warren v. District of Columbia[1] (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981)

Judge Lee wrote that “we cannot jettison our constitutional rights, even if the goal behind a law is laudable." 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

[www.youtube.com]

I wonder how he would vote if someone challenges the privacy of interracial marriages.

---

In tha 360. MRF User Map

Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
I wonder how he would vote if someone challenges the privacy of interracial marriages.

I asked about that a while back. Wouldn't Thomas be required to recuse himself?

---

********************************************
“A sword never kills anybody; it is a tool in the killer's hand.” Seneca the Younger

The police have no duty to respond. See Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005) or Warren v. District of Columbia[1] (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981)

Judge Lee wrote that “we cannot jettison our constitutional rights, even if the goal behind a law is laudable." 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

[www.youtube.com]

Quote
Racer X

Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
I wonder how he would vote if someone challenges the privacy of interracial marriages.

I asked about that a while back. Wouldn't Thomas be required to recuse himself?

Thomas dissented in a case that could have implicated his wife’s involvement in the failed coup, so maybe not.

---

In tha 360. MRF User Map