either of the articles

also, when the supreme court makes a ruling, it's not up to congress to decide

like with federal legalization of gay marriage

seperation of power, how does it fucking work

"Following a unanimous recommendation by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta announced, on January 24, 2013, the end of the direct ground combat exclusion rule for female service members. The service branches continue to move forward with a plan to eliminate all unnecessary gender-based barriers to service. Ongoing project is still underway. ª

@Polekov yes it is, actualy. congress could have decided to abolish all marriage instead of allowing gay marriage.

no they couldnt

you understand SCOTUS has final say on everything right?

Tfw in UK parliament can just change laws and go 'lolno supreme court'

Congress cant just say no to scotus

yeah the uk doesnt have free speech either

or any rights really

so

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

UK is a backwards nation with backwards law

SCOTUS never tells anyone anything other than that X is unconstitutional as it exists now

they were good 200 years ago

Yeah

and we arent even talking about SCOTUs

and if they say

@JackH670 the parliament is a tyrannt! roll em heads!

its the supreme court of TEXAS not the US

UK political structure hasnt changed in the past 200 years though

yeah that's why is bad

and what was in effect 3 years ago was what youu linked which had nothing to do with the draft

and yeah redneo, your'e right about that

my mistake

but it still shows that the process is underways

For once I agree with Redneo

Wtf

and again, if we're going back into the main argument

i say, bring back monarchic absolutism, it worked for centuries, it will work again @JackH670

which was that feminists support inequality

we will need someone like oliver cromwell

most feminists support the draft for women too

oliver cromwell wasnt a monarch tho

1599-1658

Prince Charles for supreme leader

(September)

@Polekov that's what he said

yeah