Just like with immigration, LGBTQ, and all other leftist issues, it will be forced on the population even if 90% of the people in an area support the opposite.

JUST IN 🚨 A federal judge struck down Arkansas' first-in-the-nation ban on gender-affirming care for children as unconstitutional Tuesday

— Insider Paper (@TheInsiderPaper) June 20, 2023

The idea that voting matters anymore is naive as hell. All that matters is who controls the judicial system. You won't even be able to move to a red state to avoid any of this because federal activist judges will just overrule the state and ignore the constitution as usual.

Nanomachines son said:

---

Just like with immigration, LGBTQ, and all other leftist issues, it will be forced on the population even if 90% of the people in an area support the opposite.

JUST IN 🚨 A federal judge struck down Arkansas' first-in-the-nation ban on gender-affirming care for children as unconstitutional Tuesday

— Insider Paper (@TheInsiderPaper) June 20, 2023

The idea that voting matters anymore is naive as hell. All that matters is who controls the judicial system. You won't even be able to move to a red state to avoid any of this because federal activist judges will just overrule the state and ignore the constitution as usual.

---

Voting doesn't matter--reasons: 1. Ballot harvesting / mail in ballots; 2. Activist judges; 3. Congress abdicating power to federal bureaucracy, which is entrenched with leftists.

So this is what happens when you no longer follow the Constitution

This has been the left's way for 50 years. Elections are meaningless to them.

Since this Judge is ignoring the Constitution then this judgement can be ignored.

We need a national divorce in a bad way.

Maybe get the judge's address and protest outside his/her home? There is precedent for that.

Arkansas is in the 8th circuit. The 8th circuit court of appeals is made up of 10 conservatives and 1 Obama appointed liberal.

This ruling will be overturned in short order.

I have no problem breaking the law if they continue this.

Where in the constitution does it say you are allowed to chop your nuts off and make taxpayers pay for it?

FTAG 2000 said:

---

Where in the constitution does it say you are allowed to chop your nuts off and make taxpayers pay for it?

---

Article 1 section 8 To provide and maintain a Navy

Republicans need to get better at filing lawsuits in the right jurisdictions and start playing the same game the as the Democrats. It shouldn't have to be this way, but it's reality.

Posting Political Sock's Twitter thread so he doesn't have to out his TexAgs user name:

Just finished my first review of Judge James Moody, Jr.’s decision in the Brandt v. Rutledge case - permanently enjoining Arkansas’ law which protected kids from transgender butchery.

This decision is unimaginably bad. 1x

— Political Sock (@politicalsock) June 20, 2023

I missed the part in the Constitution where child molestation is protected. Perhaps some liberal poster will enlighten us.

Another case of losing the language.

When "Gender Identity" becomes the same term as "sex" or "gender", then there are no limits.

When the language is infinitely malleable, civilization becomes meaningless.

Activist judges

FTAG 2000 said:

---

Where in the constitution does it say you are allowed to chop your nuts off and make taxpayers pay for it?

---

When will you all understand that the Constitution doesn't matter at all to leftist judges, not even in the slightest. It's not even an impediment, they just make **** up to say some law is bad.

Change one sentence and pass it again. Make them go through the legal process again.

Drahknor03 said:

---

Posting Political Sock's Twitter thread so he doesn't have to out his TexAgs user name:

Just finished my first review of Judge James Moody, Jr.’s decision in the Brandt v. Rutledge case - permanently enjoining Arkansas’ law which protected kids from transgender butchery.

This decision is unimaginably bad. 1x

— Political Sock (@politicalsock) June 20, 2023

---

The right has yet to realize that it's playing a different game than the left. The left ignores the Constitution and doesn't count about the rule of law. Their judges make it all up. There is zero reason an appeals court judge couldn't do exactly the same thing this judge did and throw it all out on the basis that all evidence was ignored in the ruling. Who cares if it's unprecedented, that's exactly what this judge did.

I'm ****ing tired of allowing the left to get away with this **** over and over.

We're going to reach a point if this doesn't stop that people will begin going after judges personally at their own homes.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Change one sentence and pass it again. Make them go through the legal process again.

---

I like this. Pass half a dozen similar bills in order 1-6, each with slightly different wording, and other than the first bill, each successive one would only take effect retroactively if the bill passed immediately prior to it is struck down by the courts.

It will get overturned

Nanomachines son said:

---

Drahknor03 said:

---

Posting Political Sock's Twitter thread so he doesn't have to out his TexAgs user name:

Just finished my first review of Judge James Moody, Jr.’s decision in the Brandt v. Rutledge case - permanently enjoining Arkansas’ law which protected kids from transgender butchery.

This decision is unimaginably bad. 1x

— Political Sock (@politicalsock) June 20, 2023

---

The right has yet to realize that it's playing a different game than the left. The left ignores the Constitution and doesn't count about the rule of law. Their judges make it all up. There is zero reason an appeals court judge couldn't do exactly the same thing this judge did and throw it all out on the basis that all evidence was ignored in the ruling. Who cares if it's unprecedented, that's exactly what this judge did.

I'm ****ing tired of allowing the left to get away with this **** over and over.

We're going to reach a point if this doesn't stop that people will begin going after judges personally at their own homes.

---

Agree with everything you wrote.

This is now a game where the left has 8 yards and 5 downs to get a first down, and the right is still abiding by the original rules.

The left doesn't give two cents about the law or original intent.

Nanomachines son said:

---

Drahknor03 said:

---

Posting Political Sock's Twitter thread so he doesn't have to out his TexAgs user name:

Just finished my first review of Judge James Moody, Jr.’s decision in the Brandt v. Rutledge case - permanently enjoining Arkansas’ law which protected kids from transgender butchery.

This decision is unimaginably bad. 1x

— Political Sock (@politicalsock) June 20, 2023

---

The right has yet to realize that it's playing a different game than the left. The left ignores the Constitution and doesn't count about the rule of law. Their judges make it all up. There is zero reason an appeals court judge couldn't do exactly the same thing this judge did and throw it all out on the basis that all evidence was ignored in the ruling. Who cares if it's unprecedented, that's exactly what this judge did.

I'm ****ing tired of allowing the left to get away with this **** over and over.

We're going to reach a point if this doesn't stop that people will begin going after judges personally at their own homes.

---

Going after judges personally at their own homes, like piece of crap liberals did to conservativ SC justices after the Roe overturning?
I'll say it - nobody should shed a tear for a judge thst gets a new earhole if they're supporting this perverted abuse of minors

Damn, how many judges did Obama appoint???

Logos Stick said:

---

We need a national divorce in a bad way.

---

Ya think?

BaileyAg said:

---

Damn, how many judges did Obama appoint???

---

A lot. He was president for 8 years

its becoming increasingly apparent that if you want to live free, you are going to have to go off grid and withdraw from society to do so.

Asked Chat gpt 4.0 to make sense of all this from the perspective of Jordan Peterson in 200 words or less.

.....

This trans rights movement started in 2020 and is now up to highway speed. It is now affect every corner of society.

It has been disruptive to an order that has lasted for 1000s of years. And that's happened in a very short amount of time. An extreme departure from social order.

And we are living it!

We're bloody right in the middle of it!

So what do you do?

You've got to prepare yourself to limit suffering. But how to do bloody do that?

You do that by preparing yourself for the announcement that we have non-binary alien overlords.

It is also important to remember that as an Al language model, I strive to maintain a standard of professionalism
and respect for all individuals, including all manner of human gender theory. I do not create or endorse
derogatory or offensive content about any individual or group, including trans people and non-binary aliens.

AggDogg61 said:

---

I have no problem breaking the law if they continue this.

---

That is the natural conclusion when you have rule of man instead of rule of law. If there is no law, society is not looking out for your interested in an ordered way, which leads people to take matters into their own hands.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Asked Chat gpt 4.0 to make sense of all this from the perspective of Jordan Peterson in 200 words or less.

.....

This trans rights movement started in 2020 and is now up to highway speed. It is now affect every corner of society.

It has been disruptive to an order that has lasted for 1000s of years. And that's happened in a very short amount of time. An extreme departure from social order.

And we are living it!

We're bloody right in the middle of it!

So what do you do?

You've got to prepare yourself to limit suffering. But how to do bloody do that?

You do that by preparing yourself for the announcement that we have non-binary alien overlords.

It is also important to remember that as an Al language model, I strive to maintain a standard of professionalism
and respect for all individuals, including all manner of human gender theory. I do not create or endorse
derogatory or offensive content about any individual or group, including trans people and non-binary aliens.

---

Holy crap, that's pretty damn good. I even found myself reading it hearing Peterson's voice in my mind.

We have to just do the right thing; the moral thing. The government is not our friend

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Asked Chat gpt 4.0 to make sense of all this from the perspective of Jordan Peterson in 200 words or less.

.....

This trans rights movement started in 2020 and is now up to highway speed. It is now affect every corner of society.

It has been disruptive to an order that has lasted for 1000s of years. And that's happened in a very short amount of time. An extreme departure from social order.

And we are living it!

We're bloody right in the middle of it!

So what do you do?

You've got to prepare yourself to limit suffering. But how to do bloody do that?

You do that by preparing yourself for the announcement that we have non-binary alien overlords.

It is also important to remember that as an Al language model, I strive to maintain a standard of professionalism
and respect for all individuals, including all manner of human gender theory. I do not create or endorse
derogatory or offensive content about any individual or group, including trans people and non-binary aliens.

---

It started before 2020. It was right after Obergefell, while Obama was president, that trans bathroom rights burst onto the scene as a major issue. What had previously been confined to a vanishingly small % of the population and handled on a case by case basis suddenly became the next wedge issue and grievance group. Almost as if by design!

All they wanted was gay marriage.

FTAG 2000 said:

---

Where in the constitution does it say you are allowed to chop your nuts off and make taxpayers pay for it?

---

This is an argument of language, the left calls it healthcare while we call it mutilation. It just depends which side the judge recognizes as legitimate

If the government won't protect children, what is it good for?