Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Caribbean Hen wrote: ↑Sun Nov 09, 2025 11:02 am

UNI88 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 12, 2025 6:39 pm

Victor so dumb

If 90 % of the illegals are Latinos, you target Latinos

But math is racist

Trust me on something, if you look at a Latino but don’t recognize the person as Latino, chances are you offended that Latino because they’re proud of being Latino…

UNI88 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 09, 2025 7:04 pm

Caribbean Hen wrote: ↑Sun Nov 09, 2025 11:02 am

Victor so dumb

If 90 % of the illegals are Latinos, you target Latinos

But math is racist

Trust me on something, if you look at a Latino but don’t recognize the person as Latino, chances are you offended that Latino because they’re proud of being Latino…

The problem with that approach is that they're catching and detaining Latino citizens without giving them their right to due process.

This forces citizens to have to carry their proof of citizenship with them. MAQA yahoos don't want to be called fascists but they have no problem forcing Latino citizens to be able to respond to a "papers please!" order. This is the United States of America, why should Latino citizens have to carry their papers? Why should I believe that this will stop with Latinos?

First they came for the Latinos and I did not speak out because I was not a Latino.
Then they came for the ...

UNI88 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 09, 2025 7:04 pm

Caribbean Hen wrote: ↑Sun Nov 09, 2025 11:02 am

Victor so dumb

If 90 % of the illegals are Latinos, you target Latinos

But math is racist

Trust me on something, if you look at a Latino but don’t recognize the person as Latino, chances are you offended that Latino because they’re proud of being Latino…

The problem with that approach is that they're catching and detaining Latino citizens without giving them their right to due process.

This forces citizens to have to carry their proof of citizenship with them. MAQA yahoos don't want to be called fascists but they have no problem forcing Latino citizens to be able to respond to a "papers please!" order. This is the United States of America, why should Latino citizens have to carry their papers? Why should I believe that this will stop with Latinos?

First they came for the Latinos and I did not speak out because I was not a Latino.
Then they came for the ...

kalm wrote: ↑Sun Nov 09, 2025 7:29 pm

UNI88 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 09, 2025 7:04 pm

The problem with that approach is that they're catching and detaining Latino citizens without giving them their right to due process.

This forces citizens to have to carry their proof of citizenship with them. MAQA yahoos don't want to be called fascists but they have no problem forcing Latino citizens to be able to respond to a "papers please!" order. This is the United States of America, why should Latino citizens have to carry their papers? Why should I believe that this will stop with Latinos?

First they came for the Latinos and I did not speak out because I was not a Latino.
Then they came for the ...

Latino, Arab, Filipino, Indian….?

Caribbean Hen wrote: ↑Sun Nov 09, 2025 7:37 pm

UNI88 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 09, 2025 7:04 pm

The problem with that approach is that they're catching and detaining Latino citizens without giving them their right to due process.

This forces citizens to have to carry their proof of citizenship with them. MAQA yahoos don't want to be called fascists but they have no problem forcing Latino citizens to be able to respond to a "papers please!" order. This is the United States of America, why should Latino citizens have to carry their papers? Why should I believe that this will stop with Latinos?

First they came for the Latinos and I did not speak out because I was not a Latino.
Then they came for the ...

The Latinos I know have no concerns because they’re not illegals or law breakers and they have valid ID’s

Your hyperbole is generated in basements for the overwhelming most part

kalm wrote: ↑Sun Nov 09, 2025 7:29 pm

UNI88 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 09, 2025 7:04 pm

The problem with that approach is that they're catching and detaining Latino citizens without giving them their right to due process.

This forces citizens to have to carry their proof of citizenship with them. MAQA yahoos don't want to be called fascists but they have no problem forcing Latino citizens to be able to respond to a "papers please!" order. This is the United States of America, why should Latino citizens have to carry their papers? Why should I believe that this will stop with Latinos?

First they came for the Latinos and I did not speak out because I was not a Latino.
Then they came for the ...

Latino, Arab, Filipino, Indian….?

The justices, without comment, turned away an appeal from Kim Davis, the former Kentucky court clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples after the high court's 2015 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges.

Davis had been trying to get the court to overturn a lower-court order for her to pay $360,000 in damages and attorney's fees to a couple denied a marriage license.

Her lawyers repeatedly invoked the words of Justice Clarence Thomas, who alone among the nine justices has called for erasing the same-sex marriage ruling.

Thomas was among four dissenting justices in 2015. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito are the other dissenters who are on the court today.

Roberts has been silent on the subject since he wrote a dissenting opinion in the case. Alito has continued to criticize the decision, but he said recently he was not advocating that it be overturned.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who was not on the court in 2015, has said that there are times when the court should correct mistakes and overturn decisions, as it did in the 2022 case that ended a constitutional right to abortion.

But Barrett has suggested recently that same-sex marriage might be in a different category than abortion because people have relied on the decision when they married and had children.

UNI88 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 10, 2025 12:09 pm Supreme Court rejects call to overturn its decision legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide

The justices, without comment, turned away an appeal from Kim Davis, the former Kentucky court clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples after the high court's 2015 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges.

Davis had been trying to get the court to overturn a lower-court order for her to pay $360,000 in damages and attorney's fees to a couple denied a marriage license.

Her lawyers repeatedly invoked the words of Justice Clarence Thomas, who alone among the nine justices has called for erasing the same-sex marriage ruling.

Thomas was among four dissenting justices in 2015. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito are the other dissenters who are on the court today.

Roberts has been silent on the subject since he wrote a dissenting opinion in the case. Alito has continued to criticize the decision, but he said recently he was not advocating that it be overturned.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who was not on the court in 2015, has said that there are times when the court should correct mistakes and overturn decisions, as it did in the 2022 case that ended a constitutional right to abortion.

But Barrett has suggested recently that same-sex marriage might be in a different category than abortion because people have relied on the decision when they married and had children.