Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Actual Lock - Roe V. Wade repealed with Trump in office -300

  1. #1

    Actual Lock - Roe V. Wade repealed with Trump in office -300

    Hi folks,

    I used to have another name in the NWP days, hello all you fucks, haven't really addressed the forum but I found a good one.

    Betway.com, Roe V Wade to be repealed WHILE TRUMP IS IN OFFICE -300.

    I would take out a mortgage for this one.

    Let me know if you find this bet on any other book. This is a lock. I could go on for hours.

    First off, where is the perfect case that has already gone through all the lower courts? If there isn't one you have to factor in that Trump may be a 1 termer. Also, they may reject a case. Kavanaugh has referred to Roe as "established law" and said that he "respects supreme court precedence". I don't buy the media bullshit about supreme court justices. These people live in a different world.

    FYI Roe V. Wade is based on either the 9th or 14th amendment allowing for enough of a right to privacy for women to terminate their pregnancy. Only the majority 7-2 opinion brought up flimsy biology, attempting to draw a line around 22-23 weeks where it was in the interest of the federal state to disallow abortion. A lot of that sort of stuff was struck down in the 90s in Planned Parenthood V. Casey.

    Scalia wrote at the time that federally restricting the rights of states/regions to ban/limit abortion was "prolonging the anguish".

    The dissenters only had an issue with federal/judicial overreach. Maybe that'll be the flimsy basis that overturns it, but while Trump is still in office?

    Lock at -300.

     
    Comments
      
      Muck Ficon: Hi bottomset!!!

  2. #2
    I was very interested to read the dissenting opinions in Roe v. Wade. None of them were moralistic at all, but they recognized that opinions on abortion were very intense and regional, so they felt federal restrictions were inappropriate.

    Supreme court decisions are interesting.

  3. #3
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    5024
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    35,557
    Blog Entries
    2
    I'm not understanding your post.

    Are you saying that -300 that it will be repealed is a lock? It seems your reasoning is stating that it WON'T be repealed.

    It it really -300 that it will be repealed while Trump is in office, or that it WON'T be?

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    I'm not understanding your post.

    Are you saying that -300 that it will be repealed is a lock? It seems your reasoning is stating that it WON'T be repealed.

    It it really -300 that it will be repealed while Trump is in office, or that it WON'T be?
    To bet AGAINST Roe being repealed WHILE Trump is in office is -300.

    C'mon Druff, is that not gold? Of course they capped me at $38.29 or something.

     
    Comments
      
      Muck Ficon: Bottomset post

  5. #5
    Laying -300 that it'll be repealed sounds like a terrible side to take. That sounds completely off.

    What's the line for it not getting repealed? Or are they even offering one?

  6. #6
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    5024
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    35,557
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Rahrahrasputin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    I'm not understanding your post.

    Are you saying that -300 that it will be repealed is a lock? It seems your reasoning is stating that it WON'T be repealed.

    It it really -300 that it will be repealed while Trump is in office, or that it WON'T be?
    To bet AGAINST Roe being repealed WHILE Trump is in office is -300.

    C'mon Druff, is that not gold? Of course they capped me at $38.29 or something.
    Don't feel too bad that they capped you.

    You're getting paid 1-to-3 on a bet that won't be graded until at least January 21, 2021, and perhaps not until January 21, 2025. In other words, that money isn't going to be yours for a long time, either way... and perhaps that site will be gone by then.

  7. #7
    Master of Props Daly's Avatar
    Reputation
    1763
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    7,361
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Rahrahrasputin View Post

    To bet AGAINST Roe being repealed WHILE Trump is in office is -300.

    C'mon Druff, is that not gold? Of course they capped me at $38.29 or something.
    Don't feel too bad that they capped you.

    You're getting paid 1-to-3 on a bet that won't be graded until at least January 21, 2021, and perhaps not until January 21, 2025. In other words, that money isn't going to be yours for a long time, either way... and perhaps that site will be gone by then.
    This.

  8. #8
    The legal nerd in me cannot help but point out that Roe v. Wade is a legal (Supreme Court) decision. The decision can possibly be overturned, reversed, partially reversed or modified. But the legal decision would not be repealed. Laws enacted by Congress or by a specific State are repealed.

    I suppose I would not be totally shocked if a scummy betting site noted the difference after the fact if big payouts somehow ever became due.

  9. #9
    Nova Scotia's REAL #1 Webcam DJ sonatine's Avatar
    Reputation
    6062
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    27,235
    once again bottomset tried to make you all rich and was greeted with malice and mockery.
    "Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky

    "America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs



    http://www.lolstockaments.com/

  10. #10
    tines grindr account is mockme69

  11. #11
    Diamond mulva's Avatar
    Reputation
    391
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,614
    Blog Entries
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Rahrahrasputin View Post

    To bet AGAINST Roe being repealed WHILE Trump is in office is -300.

    C'mon Druff, is that not gold? Of course they capped me at $38.29 or something.
    Don't feel too bad that they capped you.

    You're getting paid 1-to-3 on a bet that won't be graded until at least January 21, 2021, and perhaps not until January 21, 2025. In other words, that money isn't going to be yours for a long time, either way... and perhaps that site will be gone by then.

    Name:  rickey_and_jose_lol.jpg
Views: 112
Size:  121.0 KB
    Quote Originally Posted by bottomset_69 View Post
    Johnny Manziel will be the 1st pick in the draft. I truly believe not only will Johnny Manziel be rookie of the year, quite possibly he will be MVP as his style will shock defensive coordinators. Manziel may only be 6 feet tall, but he has size 15 feet. And he has HUGE hands. I know some NFL scouts so I know what I am talking about.



  12. #12
    Platinum ftpjesus's Avatar
    Reputation
    337
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,535
    Quote Originally Posted by Rahrahrasputin View Post
    Hi folks,

    I used to have another name in the NWP days, hello all you fucks, haven't really addressed the forum but I found a good one.

    Betway.com, Roe V Wade to be repealed WHILE TRUMP IS IN OFFICE -300.

    I would take out a mortgage for this one.

    Let me know if you find this bet on any other book. This is a lock. I could go on for hours.

    First off, where is the perfect case that has already gone through all the lower courts? If there isn't one you have to factor in that Trump may be a 1 termer. Also, they may reject a case. Kavanaugh has referred to Roe as "established law" and said that he "respects supreme court precedence". I don't buy the media bullshit about supreme court justices. These people live in a different world.

    FYI Roe V. Wade is based on either the 9th or 14th amendment allowing for enough of a right to privacy for women to terminate their pregnancy. Only the majority 7-2 opinion brought up flimsy biology, attempting to draw a line around 22-23 weeks where it was in the interest of the federal state to disallow abortion. A lot of that sort of stuff was struck down in the 90s in Planned Parenthood V. Casey.

    Scalia wrote at the time that federally restricting the rights of states/regions to ban/limit abortion was "prolonging the anguish".

    The dissenters only had an issue with federal/judicial overreach. Maybe that'll be the flimsy basis that overturns it, but while Trump is still in office?

    Lock at -300.
    (I will try and come back and fix what Ive written here its 3am and I basically wrote this via stream of consciousness of which Im not completely so at the moment being 3am.. I just don't have the ability to go back in and put the commas and restructure so its more readable so I apologize for my written spewing with run on stuff ahead of time.. Again later today Thursday Ill try and come back and make it more readable.. second night in a row haven't been able to sleep worth a crap despite taking melatonin and even benedryl to try and knock me the f out pain in lower and upper back is kicking my ass hard.. I was awake till 930am Wed and only got a few hours sleep during the day)

    Im not sure either but I know one thing when SCOTUS invokes the Equal Protection Clause its basically locked in stone forever..Evoking the EPC is basically setting a precedent the future court can likely never reverse.. Usually EPC declarations are reserved for very specific circumstances and usage.. The most recent was the case that legalized Same Sex Marriage in the USA which evoked the EPC in its ruling as well as citing the previous landmark case of Loving V Virginia which overturned and made illegal miscegenation laws (Laws that outlawed interracial marriages in many Southern States). The thing is using the EPC if it was invoked regarding abortion would only technically be possible if the court went so far as outlawing abortion across the country except in exigent circumstances such as rape incest and mothers life because the EPC takes form from this section of the 14th Amendment:

    "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

    And that would require additionally the court to open Pandoras box in a way that would significantly have them define the medical definition of when life begins and I don't think any one of them no matter how Conservative and against Abortion they maybe are ready to or willing to declare judicially that a human is considered alive at X point.. Mainly because a fetus isn't viable even under some strict standards such as the so called heart beat bills until at least just past half full term gestation. While I suppose they could use a similar standard again Judges even Constitutionalist would be reluctant to be making a legal opinion of life..

    Now as for overturning R.V.W. I see the only possible way forward and this could happen would be the argument that Roe V Wade the Judges errored and violated the 10th Amendment of States rights because the compelling argument would be and remains how does the Federal Court see the ICC or another precedent tie into Abortion rights and the rights of states to regulate medical procedures within their states boundries.. Hell in the nursing field each state has a board of nursing and while many states belong to the list of what are known as Compact states there is no legal requirement for states to allow a nurse from out of state be allowed to practice within those states who are not members.. Each state has the right to establish its own requirements for Nursing education programs, Nursing Continuing Education requirements, even how often a licensee is required to renew (back east in VA and NC its every 2 yrs while here in AZ its 4). Same with Medical Schools and students requirements.. California just passed regulations requiring a new license standard starting Jan 2020 for residents and a new minimum requirement for residents no matter what their specialty even if its something very much less patient centric and focused such as Radiologist who spend nearly all time reading Xrays and normally don't spend much time hands on past the first year even with active patient contact and that all now all Resident Physicians are required to have ties to a local medical school program in California even if they went to school elsewhere in another state. I know it seems im comparing apples to oranges but Im not its about States rights to set their own standards regarding medical training, procedures etc within their borders and yes Abortion is a medical procedure inspite of what Planned Parenthood and others claim.. So if Roe is upended itll be most likely as a States Rights issue via the 10th which wouldn't make abortions illegal but would return the issue back to the states to regulate within their borders what they chose to allow and not.. I suspect though if it happens the court will be clear that total ban would be a EPC violation of the mother as refusing to allow for exceptions for mothers health rape and incest while maintaining the states right to limit abortion to only those three exceptions would be unacceptable..

    I don't know if it happens or not.. Certainly the issue will return to the SCOTUS sometimes soon due to the challenges mounted to try and get laws such as Alabama and some others overturned as too broad and overreaching.. The left better pick their battles carefully though otherwise they may indeed be the root cause Roe is overturned by trying to shut down a states legal right to control medical practices within its border by picking the wrong battle over the wrong law to challenge..
    Last edited by ftpjesus; 10-03-2019 at 03:09 AM.
    <This Ad Space for Rent or Sale>

  13. #13
    Gold Jayjami's Avatar
    Reputation
    389
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Wofford Heights, CA
    Posts
    1,296
    Quote Originally Posted by ftpjesus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Rahrahrasputin View Post
    Hi folks,

    I used to have another name in the NWP days, hello all you fucks, haven't really addressed the forum but I found a good one.

    Betway.com, Roe V Wade to be repealed WHILE TRUMP IS IN OFFICE -300.

    I would take out a mortgage for this one.

    Let me know if you find this bet on any other book. This is a lock. I could go on for hours.

    First off, where is the perfect case that has already gone through all the lower courts? If there isn't one you have to factor in that Trump may be a 1 termer. Also, they may reject a case. Kavanaugh has referred to Roe as "established law" and said that he "respects supreme court precedence". I don't buy the media bullshit about supreme court justices. These people live in a different world.

    FYI Roe V. Wade is based on either the 9th or 14th amendment allowing for enough of a right to privacy for women to terminate their pregnancy. Only the majority 7-2 opinion brought up flimsy biology, attempting to draw a line around 22-23 weeks where it was in the interest of the federal state to disallow abortion. A lot of that sort of stuff was struck down in the 90s in Planned Parenthood V. Casey.

    Scalia wrote at the time that federally restricting the rights of states/regions to ban/limit abortion was "prolonging the anguish".

    The dissenters only had an issue with federal/judicial overreach. Maybe that'll be the flimsy basis that overturns it, but while Trump is still in office?

    Lock at -300.
    (I will try and come back and fix what Ive written here its 3am and I basically wrote this via stream of consciousness of which Im not completely so at the moment being 3am.. I just don't have the ability to go back in and put the commas and restructure so its more readable so I apologize for my written spewing with run on stuff ahead of time.. Again later today Thursday Ill try and come back and make it more readable.. second night in a row haven't been able to sleep worth a crap despite taking melatonin and even benedryl to try and knock me the f out pain in lower and upper back is kicking my ass hard.. I was awake till 930am Wed and only got a few hours sleep during the day)

    Im not sure either but I know one thing when SCOTUS invokes the Equal Protection Clause its basically locked in stone forever..Evoking the EPC is basically setting a precedent the future court can likely never reverse.. Usually EPC declarations are reserved for very specific circumstances and usage.. The most recent was the case that legalized Same Sex Marriage in the USA which evoked the EPC in its ruling as well as citing the previous landmark case of Loving V Virginia which overturned and made illegal miscegenation laws (Laws that outlawed interracial marriages in many Southern States). The thing is using the EPC if it was invoked regarding abortion would only technically be possible if the court went so far as outlawing abortion across the country except in exigent circumstances such as rape incest and mothers life because the EPC takes form from this section of the 14th Amendment:

    "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

    And that would require additionally the court to open Pandoras box in a way that would significantly have them define the medical definition of when life begins and I don't think any one of them no matter how Conservative and against Abortion they maybe are ready to or willing to declare judicially that a human is considered alive at X point.. Mainly because a fetus isn't viable even under some strict standards such as the so called heart beat bills until at least just past half full term gestation. While I suppose they could use a similar standard again Judges even Constitutionalist would be reluctant to be making a legal opinion of life..

    Now as for overturning R.V.W. I see the only possible way forward and this could happen would be the argument that Roe V Wade the Judges errored and violated the 10th Amendment of States rights because the compelling argument would be and remains how does the Federal Court see the ICC or another precedent tie into Abortion rights and the rights of states to regulate medical procedures within their states boundries.. Hell in the nursing field each state has a board of nursing and while many states belong to the list of what are known as Compact states there is no legal requirement for states to allow a nurse from out of state be allowed to practice within those states who are not members.. Each state has the right to establish its own requirements for Nursing education programs, Nursing Continuing Education requirements, even how often a licensee is required to renew (back east in VA and NC its every 2 yrs while here in AZ its 4). Same with Medical Schools and students requirements.. California just passed regulations requiring a new license standard starting Jan 2020 for residents and a new minimum requirement for residents no matter what their specialty even if its something very much less patient centric and focused such as Radiologist who spend nearly all time reading Xrays and normally don't spend much time hands on past the first year even with active patient contact and that all now all Resident Physicians are required to have ties to a local medical school program in California even if they went to school elsewhere in another state. I know it seems im comparing apples to oranges but Im not its about States rights to set their own standards regarding medical training, procedures etc within their borders and yes Abortion is a medical procedure inspite of what Planned Parenthood and others claim.. So if Roe is upended itll be most likely as a States Rights issue via the 10th which wouldn't make abortions illegal but would return the issue back to the states to regulate within their borders what they chose to allow and not.. I suspect though if it happens the court will be clear that total ban would be a EPC violation of the mother as refusing to allow for exceptions for mothers health rape and incest while maintaining the states right to limit abortion to only those three exceptions would be unacceptable..

    I don't know if it happens or not.. Certainly the issue will return to the SCOTUS sometimes soon due to the challenges mounted to try and get laws such as Alabama and some others overturned as too broad and overreaching.. The left better pick their battles carefully though otherwise they may indeed be the root cause Roe is overturned by trying to shut down a states legal right to control medical practices within its border by picking the wrong battle over the wrong law to challenge..
    The SCOTUS could not outlaw abortion, but they could turn it back over to the states. All they have to do is overrule Griswold v. Connecticut, which created the “right to privacy”. They won’t do it though. They are loathe to overrule long standing precedent. They need a really compelling reason to do so, like Brown v. Board overruling Plessy v. Ferguson.

  14. #14
    100% Organic MumblesBadly's Avatar
    Reputation
    -97
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    In the many threads of this forum
    Posts
    7,726
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayjami View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ftpjesus View Post

    (I will try and come back and fix what Ive written here its 3am and I basically wrote this via stream of consciousness of which Im not completely so at the moment being 3am.. I just don't have the ability to go back in and put the commas and restructure so its more readable so I apologize for my written spewing with run on stuff ahead of time.. Again later today Thursday Ill try and come back and make it more readable.. second night in a row haven't been able to sleep worth a crap despite taking melatonin and even benedryl to try and knock me the f out pain in lower and upper back is kicking my ass hard.. I was awake till 930am Wed and only got a few hours sleep during the day)

    Im not sure either but I know one thing when SCOTUS invokes the Equal Protection Clause its basically locked in stone forever..Evoking the EPC is basically setting a precedent the future court can likely never reverse.. Usually EPC declarations are reserved for very specific circumstances and usage.. The most recent was the case that legalized Same Sex Marriage in the USA which evoked the EPC in its ruling as well as citing the previous landmark case of Loving V Virginia which overturned and made illegal miscegenation laws (Laws that outlawed interracial marriages in many Southern States). The thing is using the EPC if it was invoked regarding abortion would only technically be possible if the court went so far as outlawing abortion across the country except in exigent circumstances such as rape incest and mothers life because the EPC takes form from this section of the 14th Amendment:

    "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

    And that would require additionally the court to open Pandoras box in a way that would significantly have them define the medical definition of when life begins and I don't think any one of them no matter how Conservative and against Abortion they maybe are ready to or willing to declare judicially that a human is considered alive at X point.. Mainly because a fetus isn't viable even under some strict standards such as the so called heart beat bills until at least just past half full term gestation. While I suppose they could use a similar standard again Judges even Constitutionalist would be reluctant to be making a legal opinion of life..

    Now as for overturning R.V.W. I see the only possible way forward and this could happen would be the argument that Roe V Wade the Judges errored and violated the 10th Amendment of States rights because the compelling argument would be and remains how does the Federal Court see the ICC or another precedent tie into Abortion rights and the rights of states to regulate medical procedures within their states boundries.. Hell in the nursing field each state has a board of nursing and while many states belong to the list of what are known as Compact states there is no legal requirement for states to allow a nurse from out of state be allowed to practice within those states who are not members.. Each state has the right to establish its own requirements for Nursing education programs, Nursing Continuing Education requirements, even how often a licensee is required to renew (back east in VA and NC its every 2 yrs while here in AZ its 4). Same with Medical Schools and students requirements.. California just passed regulations requiring a new license standard starting Jan 2020 for residents and a new minimum requirement for residents no matter what their specialty even if its something very much less patient centric and focused such as Radiologist who spend nearly all time reading Xrays and normally don't spend much time hands on past the first year even with active patient contact and that all now all Resident Physicians are required to have ties to a local medical school program in California even if they went to school elsewhere in another state. I know it seems im comparing apples to oranges but Im not its about States rights to set their own standards regarding medical training, procedures etc within their borders and yes Abortion is a medical procedure inspite of what Planned Parenthood and others claim.. So if Roe is upended itll be most likely as a States Rights issue via the 10th which wouldn't make abortions illegal but would return the issue back to the states to regulate within their borders what they chose to allow and not.. I suspect though if it happens the court will be clear that total ban would be a EPC violation of the mother as refusing to allow for exceptions for mothers health rape and incest while maintaining the states right to limit abortion to only those three exceptions would be unacceptable..

    I don't know if it happens or not.. Certainly the issue will return to the SCOTUS sometimes soon due to the challenges mounted to try and get laws such as Alabama and some others overturned as too broad and overreaching.. The left better pick their battles carefully though otherwise they may indeed be the root cause Roe is overturned by trying to shut down a states legal right to control medical practices within its border by picking the wrong battle over the wrong law to challenge..
    The SCOTUS could not outlaw abortion, but they could turn it back over to the states. All they have to do is overrule Griswold v. Connecticut, which created the “right to privacy”. They won’t do it though. They are loathe to overrule long standing precedent. They need a really compelling reason to do so, like Brown v. Board overruling Plessy v. Ferguson.
    They may be “loathe” to overturn precedent, but it occasionally happens, and to significant effect. Case in point is Brown v. Board of Education (1954) overturning the “separate but equal” ruling of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896). Something to note, though, is that such dramatic changes only happen after even time has passed for the composition of SCOTUS to significantly change. There are other issues when significant precedent was overtrned, and one in particular involving Justice Louis Brandeis in two related rulings separated by about two decades in which he was the sole dissenter in the first case but wrote the majority opinion in the second. The particulars of the issue escape me at the moment, but I’m guessing they can readily be found using the Google machine.
    Last edited by MumblesBadly; 10-04-2019 at 12:32 PM.
    _____________________________________________
    “Nothing is more intolerable than to have admit to yourself your own errors.” —Ludwig van Beethoven

    “[T]he US has a much more sophisticated epidemic disease control system than China, so the risk of [SARS-CoV-2] spreading to a large percentage of the US population is likely very low.” — MumblesBadly, 1/30/20

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-04-2018, 07:33 PM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-02-2017, 04:51 AM
  3. When do you think Trump's last day in office will be?
    By hutmaster in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 140
    Last Post: 06-06-2017, 12:52 PM
  4. CMONEY LOCK OF THE DAY TRUMP WILL WIN
    By cmoney in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 11-11-2016, 07:30 AM
  5. Is this Micon's old friend? (Justin Wade Smith)
    By luckygirl34 in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 03-16-2014, 11:57 PM