WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

479

(post is archived)

[–] 12 pts

It is protected and will be overturned. What we need is for judges to be sanctioned when their decisions are overturned. People suffer real consequences when these bad decisions are made. Judges should suffer real consequences when they are overturned.

[–] [deleted] 11 pts

Judges never, ever suffer any consequences for their bad decisions. They know it so they have no reason at all to make good decisions.

[–] [deleted] 5 pts

It is protected and will be overturned

most likely

Judges should suffer real consequences when they are overturned.

Something different needs to happen. What we've got now certainly isn't working - activist judges finding permanent spots on the bench and handing out decisions that go against the betterment of their community and society.

[–] 1 pt

It was already overturned. Sad that it even had to be on something obvious.

[–] 0 pt

Judges should be penalized if they are overturned. Every overturned decision should come with a semester of schooling and a suspension of pay.

[–] 0 pt

Three overturns and they're out, though.

Penalties should be percentage-based pay cuts and indefinate cancelation of all future raises.

[–] 0 pt

There's an argument for both sides. A judge is often wrong for honest reasons. Having criminal repercussions for making a bad decision or two would make their job impossible. If they consistently make bad decisions they can be removed through existing mechanisms.

The issue is that there are judges who don't give a shit about the law and are doing their best to destroy the country. The solution is to not allow jews and women to be judges.

[–] [deleted] 7 pts

No women or jews in public office.

[–] 5 pts

It's not even free speech. They just ruled for COMPELLED SPEECH. He did not misgender IT. He merely refused to use any gendered terms.

Fucking synagogue of Satan. Some one should do something about that.

[–] 3 pts (edited )

Actually refused the other person's misgendering and spoke the truth.

I will no longer use he she xir etc. I will use

Person with a penis or Person with a clitoris.

[–] 2 pts

From the article it says he compromised and in fact did not call a man a man. He used only the surname.

That is compelling of speech you disagree with. I repeat, he did not misgender. Only refused to gender. Wow this is unbelievable.

The way some are good with castrating themselves, you should amend it to “person born with a penis” or “person born with a clit”

[–] 0 pt

Good point.

BWP (Born With Penis) or NBWP (Not Born With Penis)

[–] 1 pt

So I can call you an asshole, a nigger, a cracker, a kike, a Trump lover, a journalist, or satanic pedophile, but I cannot call you by your biological sex.

Clown world.

[–] 1 pt

This ruling ought to result in an immediate impeachment and criminal charges for failing to uphold her oath to the constitution.

[–] 1 pt

This transgender bullshit seems easily hackable. Just indicate that when you call them sir or madam thatbyou are not referring to their gender. Which you do not contest but rather their biological sex which is immutable.

[–] 1 pt

So basically, not getting it right the first time is now a crime?

It’s your own fault for not realizing this beautiful person is a strong, independent woman.

https://i.imgflip.com/2q6wih.jpg

[–] 0 pt

What a

[–] 0 pt

those judges are enemies of the constitution

[–] 0 pt

Thou shalt not bear false witness. Game over jackboots.

[–] 0 pt

If the college is receiving federal funds, isn't this compelled speech a violation of the first amendment? If the college is purely private, then there's no expectation of protection.

Load more (1 reply)