Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 89550

When the Supreme Court rendered its Lawrence opinion, every U.S. Congressmen from the state of Texas should have issued an Indictment of Impeachment to have the Supreme Court Justices, responsible for such an abomination, to be kicked off the bench for sexual deviant behavior under Article III Section. I of the Constitution. Across the nation reprobate federal judges sit on the bench at the behest of our U.S. Congressmen and U.S. Senators.

Jim Rudd, Covenant News 24 Comments [9/15/2012 3:59:12 AM]
Fundie Index: 40
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1
A Buddhist

So...all who willingly tolerate homosexuality are engaging in homosexual acts? If only that were so!

9/15/2012 4:13:20 AM

Filin De Blanc

The Judges did not actually have gay sex themselves, you nimrod.

9/15/2012 4:14:59 AM

Ebon

And impeachment doesn't work like that either.

9/15/2012 4:26:42 AM

John_in_Oz

Jim's a bit unclear on Jodie's 'submitting to authority bit'.

9/15/2012 4:31:47 AM

Mudak

In the last fifty years or so, I really only see one SCOTUS judge who even warrants consideration for impeachment: Clarence Thomas. He never says anything, never participates, and has sat on multiple cases where he really should have recused himself.

9/15/2012 4:32:17 AM

Ebon

@Mudak:

Add Scalia on the grounds that he simply picks the most right-wing thing that he can loosely connect to the case (see Citizen's United) and then constructs a legal figleaf around it; constantly disregards settled questions of law and frequently has conflicts of interest (such as duck hunting with Cheney while Cheney was the defendant in a SCOTUS case).

9/15/2012 4:51:55 AM

Percy Q. Shunn

How about we just remove the conservative Justices and let the country move forward?

9/15/2012 5:04:51 AM

Rabbit of Caerbannog

Writing court opinions is sexually deviant behavior?

9/15/2012 7:01:07 AM

Doubting Thomas

When are these conservative idiots going to learn that impeachment means to bring up on charges of high crimes and misdemeanors, and doesn't mean you can just kick someone out of office because you disagree with them?

9/15/2012 8:14:08 AM

UHM

"What? You don't agree with me? You are unfit for office!"

9/15/2012 8:45:56 AM

Street Sharks

Click the link and read the whole article. This quote honestly isn't even that offensive compared to some of the other shit he is saying. I mean, the article is actually entitled "Put Homosexuals to the Sword.", holy fuck.

9/15/2012 8:46:05 AM

Sasha

Rendering opinions is not "sexual deviant behavior". Unless you're still a virgin, Jim.

9/15/2012 1:17:26 PM

John

Even a Texas Republican isn't stupid enough to make a fool of himself trying to impeach Supreme Court justices for a decision he didn't like.

9/15/2012 1:37:48 PM

Captainsweatervest

Time for a Constitution lesson for the fundies out there; the US Supreme Court hasn't done anything contrary to the "hold their Offices during good Behavior..." by ruling against the Texas Sodomy laws in Lawrence v. Texas. The Court, having jurisdiction over any and all laws, amongst other things, within the United States, did their job. Fundamentalists, read Article III section II.

9/15/2012 1:47:48 PM

Jordab the Folf

They disagree with me! FIRE THE-- Oh, UHM already did something like this.

9/15/2012 1:48:07 PM

Fundies Make Me Sick

Just because you think anal sex is icky doesn't mean people shouldn't be allowed to do it.

9/15/2012 3:38:48 PM



Its a good thing then that the USA has a supreme court that supports the rule of law , rather than religous doctrine and the constitution provides freedom of religion.

That means that Christians dont get to make the rules.

By the way, when did you last stone an adulterer or fornicator to death , as God also commands, or an eater of shellfish or wearer of mixed fibres ?

9/15/2012 6:14:07 PM

Old Viking

Is sexually deviant behavior the reason they wear those robes?

9/15/2012 6:18:19 PM

cheese007

Can't they impeach them just for not liking them? I remember reading that one didn't have to have a specific reason for impeachment, only the political will and numbers.

9/15/2012 9:16:25 PM

Berny

Who has sex with whom has never been any business of the state. Simply because your favorite book of fairy tales (aka the Bible) tells you that your god feels homosexuality (actually only guy on guy sex, he says nothing about girl on girl) is an abomination means fuck-all to a secular nation.
The decision was a sound one. Texas politicians are by and large assholes.

9/16/2012 9:39:49 AM



". . . federal judges sit on the bench at the behest of our U.S. Congressmen and U.S. Senators."

That's a bit misleading. They may be voted into these positions after a Presidential nomination, but they do no serve at the whims of Congress. And since those elected officials know how the process works, if they don't like the results, they should just STFU about it.

9/17/2012 4:42:16 AM

Mister Spak

" every U.S. Congressmen from the state of Texas should have issued an Indictment of Impeachment to have the Supreme Court Justices, responsible for such an abomination,"

Bigots tried that after the Brown decision 50 years ago. It won't work any better for you.

9/17/2012 6:19:45 AM

Anon-e-moose

Ah, if wishes were currency little Jimmy, you'd be homeless and starving.

Reality doesn't work that way, pal. Deal with it.

9/17/2012 7:31:56 AM




9/20/2012 9:50:25 PM
1