|
Post by libtard on May 5, 2022 5:43:09 GMT
Oh dearAmerica takes another step toward a one-party evangelical theocracy thanks to Republican pet judges, and against the wishes of 70% of Americans. It's time to dissolve the Senate and give power to the regional Moffs, Joe.
|
|
|
Post by cyphersmith on May 5, 2022 16:24:29 GMT
Oh dearAmerica takes another step toward a one-party evangelical theocracy thanks to Republican pet judges, and against the wishes of 70% of Americans. It's time to dissolve the Senate and give power to the regional Moffs, Joe. Interesting thing happening there. Republican Representatives and Senators are just so concerned about the leak and don't want to talk about the content of the leak.
|
|
|
Post by libtard on May 6, 2022 9:37:21 GMT
|
|
|
Post by evileeyore on May 7, 2022 16:04:50 GMT
Oh dearAmerica takes another step toward a one-party evangelical theocracy thanks to Republican pet judges, and against the wishes of 70% of Americans. It's time to dissolve the Senate and give power to the regional Moffs, Joe. Cheeseless crisp 'tard, clutch those pearls any harder and you'll squeeze them into diamonds. Everything has cycles, we're ('Murica! Fuck yeah!) going through the backlash phase to the Left's crazed "progressive" push and Roe v Wade is currently weakly defended (in the Supreme Court anyway). This too will pass and will settle down with a new spate of reactionary heads rolling from positions of power and being replaced with more centrist views (I hope it's centrist and not a full pendular swing).
|
|
|
Post by Devoid on May 7, 2022 17:24:43 GMT
With any society, regardless of scale (local, regional, national, even global) the question is (and always has been): - how far will the political pendulum continue to swing (in this case toward conservatism) before reversing course and moving back toward the center;
- The more radical the swing, the duration of the political momentum (months, years, decades, even generations) also becomes concerning; and
- will the amplitude of the pendulum oscillation grow (increasing instability / partisanship) or diminish (increasing stability / non-partisanship)?
Each of these aspects are subjective depending how politically and/or philosophically favorable/unfavorable toward the ideology of individual/groups involved. When instability continues to grow unabated, the frequency and magnitude of violent acts increase in kind.
|
|
|
Post by libtard on May 7, 2022 19:17:33 GMT
Oh dearAmerica takes another step toward a one-party evangelical theocracy thanks to Republican pet judges, and against the wishes of 70% of Americans. It's time to dissolve the Senate and give power to the regional Moffs, Joe. Cheeseless crisp 'tard, clutch those pearls any harder and you'll squeeze them into diamonds. Everything has cycles, we're ('Murica! Fuck yeah!) going through the backlash phase to the Left's crazed "progressive" push and Roe v Wade is currently weakly defended (in the Supreme Court anyway). This too will pass and will settle down with a new spate of reactionary heads rolling from positions of power and being replaced with more centrist views (I hope it's centrist and not a full pendular swing). My pearls are just fine - I don’t need to be concerned about an individual’s rights and autonomy over their own body being violated, and subject to the whims of a bunch of religious fundies. Your shithole country is sinking further down the pan, however. That you fail to recognise the magnitude of this decision, and its implications for millions of American women, demonstrates quite adequately just how shallow and selective your outrage against “oppression” and “state interference” really is.
|
|
|
Post by evileeyore on May 9, 2022 5:47:25 GMT
My pearls are just fine - I don’t need to be concerned about an individual’s rights and autonomy over their own body being violated, and subject to the whims of a bunch of religious fundies. Your shithole country is sinking further down the pan, however. Call when we're helping faggots learn to fly by tossing them off of buildings... and doing far, far worse to the women of our country while we're at it. I realize the magnitude just fine. I also recognize that your bogeyman (CONSEERVATIVES!!11!) has reared it's head again and you're imagining the overblown outcome of something that hasn't even happened yet. Bro, it was Alito's decision that was leaked, but we haven't actually seen how the Court rules.... and if that's how it goes, well okay. We'll see how the States handle themselves. Some *cough*Texas*cough* will no doubt be fairly regressive, but I'm sure others won't budge. And I'm equally sure we'll eventually be seeing reactionary heads rolling at the state levels in States that do decide it's a free-for-all on terminating abortion rights at this very, very late stage... And the performative outrage has been ... blegh. Even my Trumpeteering Mother has been making "I didn't burn my bra for these whippersnappers to make this terrible decision" noises. *sigh*
|
|
|
Post by Devoid on May 9, 2022 13:37:20 GMT
My pearls are just fine - I don’t need to be concerned about an individual’s rights and autonomy over their own body being violated, and subject to the whims of a bunch of religious fundies. Your shithole country is sinking further down the pan, however. Call when we're helping faggots learn to fly by tossing them off of buildings... and doing far, far worse to the women of our country while we're at it. So 'call you' should we fall as far as Afghanistan? If so, that is a long fall before you grow concerned. I realize the magnitude just fine. I also recognize that your bogeyman (CONSEERVATIVES!!11!) has reared it's head again and you're imagining the overblown outcome of something that hasn't even happened yet. Bro, it was Alito's decision that was leaked, but we haven't actually seen how the Court rules.... and if that's how it goes, well okay. We'll see how the States handle themselves. Some *cough*Texas*cough* will no doubt be fairly regressive, but I'm sure others won't budge. And I'm equally sure we'll eventually be seeing reactionary heads rolling at the state levels in States that do decide it's a free-for-all on terminating abortion rights at this very, very late stage... And the performative outrage has been ... blegh. Even my Trumpeteering Mother has been making "I didn't burn my bra for these whippersnappers to make this terrible decision" noises. *sigh* Although it is not certain, the likelihood of Roe v. Wade being overturned is significant. Some would claim it as a win for States' Rights. For those who do, how many of those would also support a national ban?
|
|
|
Post by evileeyore on May 10, 2022 14:00:30 GMT
So 'call you' should we fall as far as Afghanistan? Mos def. If we fall back to that barbarity, we should all be concerned. We've already been falling, but your side hasn't been concerned as you're the ones who've been metaphorically throwing people off the tops of buildings (cancel culture, degeneracy in the schools, increasing the race tensions, Antifa terrorism, everything that's happened in California, etc). We've been in pushback now for about 5 years or so. Expect more before it lessens. It's possible the leak was a deliberate testing the waters. How much of the deep red base is against it? A bunch*, with a different bunch being very, very, very happy... * Keep in mind, the Republicans have a lot of classical liberals in it now, people who think "My body my right" is correct, but just aren't the type to be performative about it. Or because they were hippies in the 60s-70s.... ergh. That's all we need, bunch of hippy grandmas running around naked in Washington screaming about their reproductive rights. /shudder I'm so glad I refuse to watch the news anymore. Yes I will. Oh sure, bunches. Because for them "States Rights" isn't a belief they hold but a means to an end, that being "end national the national right to murder unborn children". But then there is (I hope) a larger number on the Right that do hold States Rights as a foundational platform and would band with the Left to oppose any such thing.
|
|
|
Post by cyphersmith on May 10, 2022 16:27:13 GMT
Some would claim it as a win for States' Rights. Yes I will. Oh sure, bunches. Because for them "States Rights" isn't a belief they hold but a means to an end, that being "end national the national right to murder unborn children". But then there is (I hope) a larger number on the Right that do hold States Rights as a foundational platform and would band with the Left to oppose any such thing. There is, or should be, an individual right to do with their body as they please so long as they aren't hurting anyone. Abortion is included in this right, especially since the right to how your body is used is allowed even when you're no longer alive (they can't take organs from your body without your explicit permission), because it is forcing a woman to host an organism when she doesn't want to. Vaccines aren't included in this because not being vaccinated helps the disease to spread thus harming others. This becomes less true once the fetus reaches viability. After that point, it doesn't have to have a host. If we had artificial wombs like you find in science fiction, and we could transfer a fetus from a woman to said artificial womb, then and only then would it make sense for abortion to be illegal.
|
|
|
Post by libtard on May 10, 2022 22:58:41 GMT
Ehh...
Using homophobic slurs "ironically" or "in jest" - or as a means to incite teh libs, or distract from the issue - is still a homophobic asshole move, and still makes you a homophobic asshole. Sorry.
Your argument is asinine and infantile. In order to prevent a shift toward a society with values governed by retrograde, fundamentalist, religious nuts, you need to act promptly and decisively. If you wait until burkhas and the defenestration of heretics, then it is too late. If you think your bullshit Constitution will protect you, then you're an idiot - that is precisely what is being challenged with Roe v Wade.
Your side. My side. Yawn. Instead of contributing to bullshit culture wars, why not get over it and forge a way forward?
When you realize that faggots are "us" and women are "us" - and not "them" - then you will have taken your first, tentative steps.
Oh noes! But teh libs is gonna drone strike teh good ol boys livin' in teh swamp is the limit of your defense of civil rights.
It's fucking pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by 3catcircus on May 10, 2022 23:25:50 GMT
Yes I will. Oh sure, bunches. Because for them "States Rights" isn't a belief they hold but a means to an end, that being "end national the national right to murder unborn children". But then there is (I hope) a larger number on the Right that do hold States Rights as a foundational platform and would band with the Left to oppose any such thing. There is, or should be, an individual right to do with their body as they please so long as they aren't hurting anyone. Abortion is included in this right, especially since the right to how your body is used is allowed even when you're no longer alive (they can't take organs from your body without your explicit permission), because it is forcing a woman to host an organism when she doesn't want to. Vaccines aren't included in this because not being vaccinated helps the disease to spread thus harming others. This becomes less true once the fetus reaches viability. After that point, it doesn't have to have a host. If we had artificial wombs like you find in science fiction, and we could transfer a fetus from a woman to said artificial womb, then and only then would it make sense for abortion to be illegal. So then it should be legal to kill any living things' fetus and not have any protected species - let's abort bald eagles by smashing the eggs just as they're poking their beaks through the shell. Let's beat pregnant female seals in the abdomen. Let's suck out rhinoceros and tiger fetuses... Once there is a heartbeat, there is life - at that point what is inside the body is not itself the person's body.
|
|
|
Post by Devoid on May 11, 2022 4:17:17 GMT
There is, or should be, an individual right to do with their body as they please so long as they aren't hurting anyone. Abortion is included in this right, especially since the right to how your body is used is allowed even when you're no longer alive (they can't take organs from your body without your explicit permission), because it is forcing a woman to host an organism when she doesn't want to. Vaccines aren't included in this because not being vaccinated helps the disease to spread thus harming others. This becomes less true once the fetus reaches viability. After that point, it doesn't have to have a host. If we had artificial wombs like you find in science fiction, and we could transfer a fetus from a woman to said artificial womb, then and only then would it make sense for abortion to be illegal. So then it should be legal to kill any living things' fetus and not have any protected species - let's abort bald eagles by smashing the eggs just as they're poking their beaks through the shell. Let's beat pregnant female seals in the abdomen. Let's suck out rhinoceros and tiger fetuses... Once there is a heartbeat, there is life - at that point what is inside the body is not itself the person's body. Poor analogy 3cat. To force a woman to miscarry against her will is not the same as her making the choice to end her pregnancy (preferably with medical advice/assistance for her own safety).
I have no problem with cows (seal and rhinoceros) and tigresses willfully terminating their own pregnancies by their own methods. Likewise, a pregnant woman should be afforded the choice as well.
Perhaps we should focus on those who are already born? If society forces a woman to carry to term in order to protect the sanctity of life, will society take the necessary steps to protect (and enrich) that life after birth?
|
|
|
Post by cyphersmith on May 11, 2022 4:22:08 GMT
There is, or should be, an individual right to do with their body as they please so long as they aren't hurting anyone. Abortion is included in this right, especially since the right to how your body is used is allowed even when you're no longer alive (they can't take organs from your body without your explicit permission), because it is forcing a woman to host an organism when she doesn't want to. Vaccines aren't included in this because not being vaccinated helps the disease to spread thus harming others. This becomes less true once the fetus reaches viability. After that point, it doesn't have to have a host. If we had artificial wombs like you find in science fiction, and we could transfer a fetus from a woman to said artificial womb, then and only then would it make sense for abortion to be illegal. So then it should be legal to kill any living things' fetus and not have any protected species - let's abort bald eagles by smashing the eggs just as they're poking their beaks through the shell. Let's beat pregnant female seals in the abdomen. Let's suck out rhinoceros and tiger fetuses... Yeah, this is a bullshit argument. It's reductio ad absurdem and a logical fallacy. Until it's viable, it's not a person. And a lot of the things that make a person a person are not there until about that point in any case. So, until we get uterine replicators, abortion should remain legal. And easy to access. Of course, education about sex, birth control, and how to use the birth control should also be not only allowed but required (tbh, fuck religious sensibility on this one). As should easy access to birth control. These things, NOT making abortion illegal, will make the number of abortions decrease. And that should be the goal. As well as making them safe. Because making abortion illegal just means that poor people will try abortion methods that are unreliable and dangerous. EDIT: Making abortion illegal by state won't effect the upper class or even the upper middle class. They will easily be able to go where it is legal. Even making it illegal country wide won't effect them. They will just go outside the country.
|
|
|
Post by evileeyore on May 12, 2022 6:16:11 GMT
Using homophobic slurs "ironically" or "in jest" - or as a means to incite teh libs, or distract from the issue - is still a homophobic asshole move, and still makes you a homophobic asshole. Nah, it just means I don't give a shit about your definitions and figured it would trigger one of you. Points to me. Yup, and when I see that happening, I'll move. Hell, I'll probably move before then, at least on the local and state level. I voted mostly Dem and Green last time around because the local Repubs have been stupidly useless (except DeSantis, I voted for him but he has gone insane since his wife was diagnosed with cancer). Not even a little bit. Roe V Wade was never a Constitutional issue. Whether or not it should be is another matter.
|
|