Total posts: 8,696
Although Dan Quayle was the main guy who convinced Mike Pence to not go along with the coup, so we can no longer say that Quayle was entirely worthless in his political career.
Created:
Posted in:
The law should apply equally to all persons. If some non-celebrity had jumped on stage and assaulted the host on live television, that assailant would be in prison right now and facing some significant charges. When Smith's name was called to rec'v best actor award, the just result would have been for Smith to be in custody, unavailable for awards. Perhaps his wife could have stood up and given a few remarks on the heartbreak of alopecia in his stead.
Created:
-->
@ILikePie5
Senator, I served with Spartacus. I knew Spartacus. Spartacus was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Spartacus.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
There is not a single law now or ever that does derive its claimed authority from a moral premise nor is any law by definition anything less than a matter of violence.
What is the moral premise authorizing the popular bill to make Daylight Savings time permanent?
If you look at the world around you and wonder why no political disagreements are ever solved
I do not wonder why no political disagreements are ever solved because I see that many political disagreements are frequently resolved by law. Slavery, Women's suffrage, inter-racial marriage, gay marriage, legalization of marijuana, etc.
You say "may not constitutionally" yea where in the US constitution (and that was the immediate context) is that? It's not there,
First Ammendment
If the answer isn't moral it's irrelevant.
False.
There are no problems without goals and no goals without values.
Obv. False. An earthquake is a problem without goals. Surviving an earthquake is a goal without values.
You said "is necessary and appropriate." about a constitutional amendment. Necessary for what?
The same reason as all constitutional amendments- protection from state intrusion.
Appropriate for what ideal outcome? Because people want it? Why do they want it? Why should their wants matter?
When the Constitution was written, the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches was sufficient to ensure a citizen's privacy. Now governments can intrude on persons, houses, documents, and effects without touching any person or property. Extending that protection as designed (an appropriate intention in US law) means making that security paramount and the reasons for intrusion explicit. The state has no right to ask what is going on inside your body or what you plan to do about it.
"patriot act, terrorism isn't a private matter", "killing babies isn't a private matter", "sodomy isn't a private matter".
Your right to swing your arm leaves off where my right not to have my nose struck begins. Terrorism is definitely a threat to my nose. A stranger's pregnancy is not a threat to my nose. A stranger's cock is not a threat to my nose (metaphorically at any rate). Just calling it crime doesn't change one's rights.
Privacy.... only makes any sense as an implication of liberty...
I would think that goes without saying. Autocrats cannot survive in contexts where a right to privacy is enforced.
Created:
Posted in:
I don't know why people continuously fail to realize that moral disagreements have no legal solutions.
Fortunately, moral disagreements require no legal resolution. A politician's morality may not be constitutionally imposed by state instruments on other citizens.
Created:
PRESIDENT VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY's ADDRESS to the UKRAINIAN PEOPLE
21 March 2022 - 00:49
Free people of a free country!
Free people of a free country!
The 25th day has come to an end since the Russian military has gone to the exercise and found themselves on our land. They all say so when taken captive.
It is already the 25th day since the Russian military has been vainly trying to find imaginary “Nazis” from whom they allegedly wanted to defend our people. Just as they are vainly trying to find Ukrainians who would meet them with flowers. At least in one city of our state. At least in one village.
And most importantly - the Russian military cannot find a way home. That is why our soldiers help them with the path to God's judgment.
To God's judgment where I am sure they receive only one punishment, one for all: the eternal cellar. Forever under the bombs. Forever without food, water and heat. For everything they did to our people, ordinary Ukrainians. To peaceful people. In Okhtyrka and Kharkiv, in Borodyanka and Chernihiv. In Volnovakha and Mariupol. And many of our other courageous cities.
In besieged Mariupol, Russian aircraft dropped a bomb on an art school. People were hiding there. Hiding from shelling, from bombing. There were no military positions. There were about four hundred civilians. Mostly women and children, the elderly. They are under the debris. We do not know how many are alive at the moment.
But we know that we will definitely shoot down the pilot who dropped that bomb. As we already did to almost a hundred other similar mass murderers.
Today, in the Knesset, I addressed all deputies and government officials. But first of all, I spoke on your behalf, on behalf of all Ukrainians with the people of Israel, who, I am sure, understand us. As free people understand free people.
Of course, Israel has its own interests, a strategy to protect its citizens. We understand that. Israeli Prime Minister Bennett is trying to find a way to negotiate with Russia. And we are grateful for that. For every effort. So that sooner or later we start talking to Russia, perhaps in Jerusalem. This is the right place to find peace. If it is possible.
Well, Russian propagandists today have a rather difficult task.
After all, for the first time in history, the president of a foreign state spoke in the Knesset via video call. And spoke to the people of Israel. The President of Ukraine accused in Moscow of "Nazism” spoke in the Knesset to the people of Israel.
This fact alone confirms how wrong things are in Moscow.
During the day on March 20, only 4 humanitarian corridors worked. A total of 7,295 people were evacuated. Almost 4,000 Mariupol residents arrived in Zaporizhzhia in one day.
Tomorrow morning we are preparing to send new buses to Mariupol to continue this important mission. More than 3,000 people were rescued in the Kyiv region. But in the Kharkiv region... Russian troops captured our convoy, our humanitarian cargo for the city of Vovchansk. There is no connection now with six people. Five drivers and one doctor. We will release them. We will try again and again to deliver to our people what they need.
The Kherson region fought again today. I am grateful to them. Again on the streets. And as always - for all of us, for Ukraine. With national flags. And with our Ukrainian courage. Unarmed against the occupiers. Against shots and military vehicles. This is a feat that inspires us all. This is Ukraine we are proud of. These are Ukrainians to whom I am immensely grateful. Just as all our people are.
In the afternoon I spoke with Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Boris Johnson. A true friend of Ukraine who does not hesitate and does not seek excuses.
We agreed on concrete support for our country at next week's G7 and NATO summits. Although we are not members of these organizations, I see that Ukraine has at least one vote there.
I also spoke with Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis. A star couple who sincerely believe in us, in our victory, in our future. They help Ukrainian IDPs by raising funds. And the two of them have already raised $ 35 million. I thanked them on behalf of our people, on behalf of all of us. Agree, this is a good result for one couple of our friends in America.
And we are working to make the whole world our friends.
I personally presented state awards to Ukrainian intelligence officers. Please understand - I can't say their names publicly.
But believe me, the contribution of these people to our defense is so significant that the orders and the title of Hero of Ukraine for them is the minimum we can give. Just to express gratitude. To them and to all our heroes. Thanks to which we are holding on. And we’re doing it pretty well.
And Ukraine lives.
Glory to Ukraine!
Created:
PRESIDENT VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY's ADDRESS to the RESIDENTS of UKRAINIAN CITIES
21 March 2022 - 21:17
Great people of great Ukraine!
Great people of great Ukraine!
In this video, I want to appeal separately to the Ukrainian cities and the brave inhabitants of these cities. To the free south of Ukraine, where the sun shines only to welcome guests, not to random "tourists" on tanks. To Berdyansk, Kakhovka, Enerhodar, Melitopol and, of course, Kherson.
To Kherson, where today we saw slaves shooting at free people. Slaves of propaganda that replaces their consciousness. Slaves who used to pack everyone in paddy wagons. Even an old woman with a clean white poster. Even a girl with an A4 sheet on which only one word is written - "peace".
These slaves sent by Russia have never seen so many free people in the squares and streets. They have never seen thousands of people who are not afraid of them, of slaves with weapons in their hands. Slaves perceive freedom as savagery, as danger. They are scared. The fear that propagandists know how to turn into hatred. And then - shots at peaceful free people.
Kherson, hold on! We will never forget these shots. Shots from your city. We were all with you in your square and streets. 40 million Ukrainians of our state. Millions and millions of Ukrainians in the world. We've all seen you stand. We’ve seen who you are. We have all felt how you want to regain your freedom. On land, where, watching the Milky Way, the Chumaks went for salt, the enemies felt terrible.
And as soon as we can break through to you, every occupier who shot at peaceful Kherson residents just for the blue-yellow color will have a black stripe.
And the same awaits the Russian military pale from the fright who were driven out today in Enerhodar. Peaceful Ukrainians drove them out with bare hands.
The occupiers in Berdyansk, Melitopol and Kakhovka will have a black stripe. Wherever the occupiers kidnap our people. Those who they think are organizing the resistance. But we are not Russia. Remember. And there is no need to organize resistance here. Resistance for Ukrainians is a feature of the soul. And I really want you, all our Ukrainians in the south, to never think even for a moment that Ukraine does not remember you.
Whenever you are in pain, when you resist in spite of everything, please know that our hearts are broken at this time, because we are not with you.
And we ask God to support you until we can drive strangers out. This is a feat that you are protesting. This is happiness that we have such people. That we are all Ukraine.
During this invasion, heroes have constantly declared themselves among millions of our people. Once - ordinary Ukrainians, and now - fighters. Men and women who stand up for our state. Everywhere: in the south, in the east, in the north, in the center, in the west and abroad. Stand up so that the enemy does not believe that this is a reality.
But we will make them believe. And we will make them remember that they are not welcome.
And they will never be. In Kyiv, which stands bravely and majestically above the Dnieper. In Kharkiv... Proud, tidy, educated Kharkiv. Which they beat, and it does not obey. Chernihiv. Ancient! Chernihiv, which since the time of the Horde has not faced such atrocities committed by the Russian military now.
Sumy, Okhtyrka and Lebedyn... Izyum, Derhachi ... Volnovakha, Popasna... Borodyanka, Hostomel, Makariv... Mykolaiv...
Mariupol! Hardworking and honest city! Mariupol. Which the occupiers are simply destroying. Destroying to ashes. But it will survive them all. Worthless slaves who do not know how to take care of their own country. Of their own people. And they go to someone else's.
We are fighting for every Ukrainian! And we remember everyone! We are grateful to everyone. Both to the people and to these beautiful cities.
As well as to Lviv, as well as to Ivano-Frankivsk, Khmelnytskyi, Chernivtsi, Ternopil, Lutsk, our Uzhhorod... Kropyvnytskyi, Zaporizhzhia, Dnipro, Kryvyi Rih... Vinnytsia, Rivne... Cherkasy, Poltava... Odesa!
Those who may be infrequently mentioned in speeches. But who care about our common future. About Ukraine. And about freedom - for each of us. Who shelter people who have been forced to leave their home. Who work for defense. Who send humanitarian goods. Who deploy the evacuated businesses. Who heal, who help. Help all of us, and therefore themselves.
Great people of great Ukraine!
And I say this not accidentally - great Ukraine. Because I appeal to everyone in our country and to those abroad. In cities and villages. Those who are free and who are temporarily under occupation. In Crimea, in Donetsk, in Luhansk. Where they must also fight for freedom, not sit and wait.
I appeal to all Ukrainians. Wherever we are. Do everything to protect our state.
To save our people. Fight. Fight and help. Drive these slaves out! Drive the occupiers out! So that Ukraine lives. So that all of us live with it.
Free and peaceful. Which we love so much.
Glory to Ukraine!
Created:
I love that my colleague brought up Constance Baker Motley. You know when she was getting to the floor of the Senate, they were trying to stop her with outrageous accusations. You know what the accusation was back then? She was a communist – dragging up stories, trying to throw anything that they [thought] might stick. But this is what you and I know: Any one of us senators could yell as loud as we want that Venus can’t return a serve; we can yell as loud as we want that Beyoncé can’t sing; we can yell as much as we want that astronaut Mae Jemison didn’t go all that high. But you know what? [Booker brushes off his shoulder] They’ve got nothing to prove.
As it says in the Bible, “Let the work I’ve done speak for me.” Well, you have spoken. You started speaking as a little girl, watching that man right there try to raise a family and study law while your mama supported everybody. You spoke in high school, when you started distinguishing yourself. And you know what you said when they told you you couldn’t go to Harvard? “Watch me.” I went to law school; I didn’t serve on the Law Review – you did. I didn’t clerk at every level of the federal court; you clerked for a Supreme Court justice, one widely respected on both sides, which really shaped you. You left there and you went to private practice, and you know what you found? This is what you told me: That you had those tough choices that working moms have to make, the demands of a private law firm, raising your kids – it just didn’t add up. You went before the Senate three times in a bipartisan manner – god bless America, we don’t do that much stuff bipartisan around here. You went to become a public defender ‘cause you wanted to understand all aspects of the law – who does that? We live in a society that’s very materialistic sometimes, very consumeristic. You went – do people become public defenders for the money? No. Your family and you speak to service, service, service.
And I’m telling you right now, I’m not letting anybody in the Senate steal my joy. I told you this at the beginning, I’m embarrassed. It happened earlier today: I just look at you and I start getting full of emotion. I’m jogging this morning, and at the end of the block I live on – ‘cause I put my music on loud when I’m jogging, trying to block out the noise of the heart attack I’m having – and this woman comes up on me, practically tackles me, an African American woman. And the look on her eyes – she just wanted to touch me, ‘cause I think ‘cause I’m sitting so close to you – and tell me what it meant to her to watch you sitting where you’re sitting. And you did not get there because of some left-wing agenda. You didn’t get here ‘cause of some dark money groups. You got here how every Black woman in America who has gotten anywhere has done: by being like Ginger Rogers said, “I did everything Fred Astaire did but backwards in heels.”
And so I’m just sitting here saying nobody’s stealing my joy, nobody’s going to make me angry, especially not people that are called in a conservative magazine “demagogic” for what they’re bringing up that just doesn’t hold water. I’m not gonna let my joy be stolen, because I know – you and I – we appreciate something that we get that a lot of my colleagues don’t. I know Tim Scott does. When I first came to this place I was the fourth black person ever popularly elected to the United States Senate, and I still remember a lot of mixed people – white folks, Black folks – work here, but at night when people are in line to come in to clean this place, the percentage of minorities shift a lot. So I’m walking here, first week I’m here, and somebody’s been here for decades doing the urgent work of the Senate, but it’s the unglamorous work that goes on no matter who’s in offices, guy comes up to me and all he wants to say, I can tell, is “I’m so happy you’re here.” But he comes up, he can’t get the words out, and this man, my elder, starts crying. And I just hugged him and he just kept telling me, “It’s so good to see you here; it’s so good to see you here. Thank you, thank you, thank you.”
I love my brother Tim Scott, we could write a dissertation on our disagreements. He gave the best speech on race – I wish I could have given as good of a speech – but talking to the challenges and indignities that are still faced. And you’re here.
I was in the White House with my Democratic colleagues – and again, I’m in my joy; I can’t help it – and the president is asking for advice, who should be nominated, whatever. And I look at Kamala, and we have a knowing glance, which we’ve had for years when she and I used to sit on this end of this committee, at times. And then I try to get out to the president what it means – what it means.
And I want to tell you, when I look at you, this is why I get emotional. I’m sorry, you’re a person that is so much more than your race and gender. You’re a Christian, you’re a mom, you’re an intellect, you love books. But for me, I’m sorry, it’s hard for me not to look at you and not see my mom, not to see my cousins, one of them who had to come here and sit behind you. She had to have your back. I see my ancestors and yours. Nobody’s going to steal the joy of that woman in the street, or the calls that I’m getting, or the texts. Nobody’s going to steal that joy. You have earned this spot. You are worthy. You are a great American.
Your hero is Constance Baker Motley. Mine, she’s sat on my desk for my offices that I’ve held. She’s my icon of America. Her name is Harriet Tubman. There’s a love in this country that is extraordinary. You admitted it about your parents. They loved this nation even though there were laws preventing them from getting together. When they were loving, there were laws in this country that would have prevented you from marrying your husband. It wasn’t that long ago; it was the last generation. But they didn’t stop loving this country, even though this country didn’t love them back.
And what were the words of your heroes and mine? What did Constance Baker Motley do? Did she – this country that she saw insults and injuries, when she came out of law school, law firms wouldn’t even hire her because she was a woman. Did she become bitter? Did she try to create a revolution? No, she used the very Constitution of this nation. She loved it so much, she wanted America to be America. As Langston Hughes wrote,
Let America be America, again,
The land that never has been yet,
But yet must be the land where everyone is free.
Oh, yes,
I say it plain,
America never was America to me,
but I swear this oath, America will be!
That is the story of how you got to this desk. You and I and everyone here, generations of folk who came here and said, “America, I’m Irish. You may say no Irish or dogs need apply, but I’m gonna show this country that I can be free here. I can make this country love me as much as I love it.” Chinese Americans – forced into near slave labor building our railroads, connecting our country – saw the ugliest of America. But they were going to build their home here, saying “America, you may not love me yet, but I’m going to make this nation live up to its promise and hope.” LGBTQ Americans from Stonewall, women to Seneca, hidden figures who didn’t even get their play until some Hollywood movie talked about them and how they were critical for us defying gravity. All of these people loved America.
And so you faced insults here that were shocking to me, well actually not shocking. But you are here because of that kind of love, and nobody’s taking this away from me. So you got five more folks to go through, five more of us, and then you can sit back and let us have all the debates. And I’m going to tell you, it’s going to be a well-charted Senate floor, because it’s not going to stop, they’re going to accuse you of this and that. Heck, in honor of your person who shares your birthday, you might be called a communist. But don’t worry, my sister, don’t worry. God has got you. And how do I know that? You’re here, and I know what it’s taken for you to sit in that seat.
Harriet Tubman is one of my heroes because the more I read about this person, the more – I mean, she was viciously beaten. Her whole life she used to fall under spells, cracked skull. She faced starvation, chased by dogs. And when she got to freedom, what did she do? She rested? No, she went back, again and again and again. The sky was full of stars, but she found one that was a harbinger of hope – for better days. Not just for her and those people who were enslaved, but a harbinger of hope for this country. She never gave up on America. She fought in – led troops in the Civil War. She was involved in the suffrage movement. And as I came back from my run, after being near assaulted by someone on the street, I thought about her and how she looked up, she kept looking up. No matter what they did to her, she never stopped looking up. And that star was a harbinger of hope.
Today, you’re my star. You are my harbinger of hope. This country is getting better and better and better. When that final vote happens and you ascend onto the highest court in the land, I’m gonna rejoice. And I’m gonna tell you right now: The greatest country in the world, the United States of America, will be better because of you. Thank you
Created:
Booker: Thank you very much, judge. After me, only 5 to go. But sit back for a second, ‘cause I don’t have questions right away. I actually have a number of things I just want to say, because this has been not a surprise given the history that we all know – not a surprise, but perhaps a little bit of a disappointment, some of the things that’ve been said in this hearing. The way you have dealt with some of these things, that’s why you are a judge and I am a politician because you have sat with grit and grace and have shown us just extraordinary demeanor during the times where people were saying things to you that are actually out of the norm. I had to go up dais to ask some of my more senior colleagues about what I feel like is a dangerous precedent. People are taking a thousand cases you’ve been over – is that right? I’m sorry I said I wouldn’t ask you questions but just give me …
Jackson: Something like that.
Booker: Something like that. And from what I understand, these cases sometimes take days, weeks, sometimes months, right?
Jackson: To decide in a case? Yes.
Booker: There’s a trial sometimes, and folks are taking any of those cases and just trying to pick pieces out. And so my my colleague Senator Hawley has been doing this all into the lead up, and saying things, tweeting things that I think that a lot of us, when I was just trying to get some advice here, is this is what the new standard’s going to be: that any judge coming before us that has ever chosen outside of the sentencing guidelines, below the sentencing guidelines. We’re creating this environment now where I can make myself the hero of people who have been victims of some horrible crime and suddenly put whatever judge I want on the defensive by trying to drag out little bits when they have no context to the case – none of the facts. They’re seeking to exploit the complexities of a criminal justice system, the reason why we have a third branch of government. I feel bad that there was a judge mentioned by name in this hearing that’s from Senator Hawley’s state. What is that judge going to think next time that they have a complicated sexual abuse case that comes before them? And they know that they could possibly be called out if they go below the sentencing guidelines, which I showed you yesterday in my lack of chart – if you remember, I was uncharted – but that you are deciding completely in the norm. Seventy-plus percent in many states are people doing just like you did.
But I’m a Democratic senator. I’ve never quoted from this very well-respected conservative periodical – this is the National Review, very well-respected and not something I agree with all the time. But here’s what the National Review – this is the title: “Senator Hawley’s disingenuous attack against Judge Jackson’s record on child pornography.” I’ll just read the first paragraph:
“I would oppose Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson because of her judicial philosophy for the reasons I outlined last week. I addressed that in a separate post. For now, I wanted to discuss the claim by Senator Josh Hawley that Judge Jackson is appallingly soft on child pornography offenders. The allegations appear meritless to the point of demagoguery.”
I got letters from leaders of victims’ rights groups, survivors of assault. All saying sort of the same thing as the National Review. Feel proud about yourself; you brought together right and left in this calling out of people that will sit up here and try to pull out from cases, and try to put themselves in a position where they’re the defenders of our children to a person who has children, to a person whose family goes out in the streets and defends children. I mean, this is a new low. And what’s especially surprising about this is it didn’t happen last year. You were put on a court that I’m told is considered, like, the second most powerful court in our land, and you were passed with bipartisan support. Nobody brought it up then. Did they not do their homework? Were they lax? Did they make a mistake? I wonder – as they ask you the question, ‘Do you regret?’ – I wonder if they regret that, that they didn’t bring that out. No, why? Because it was an allegation that is ‘meritless to the point of demagoguery.’
You are – I don’t mean this in any way, ‘cause if anybody called me average I would be upset – but you are a mainstream judge. Your sentencing, I’ve looked at the data, falls in the mainstream on everything from child sexual assault to all the other issues that people are trying to bring up. Some of these things that are being cast at you, that you called George Bush a war criminal? Come on, that is painful, especially ‘cause as you said, the brief changed. These are names that you have to put in. And we’re talking about a real issue that goes to the core of our values: torture. Barack Obama was named once he, once Bush left office. There is an absurdity to this that is, it is almost comical if it was not so dangerous. Because the next time a judge comes before us on the right or the left that has a body of work like you do, gosh, one of … some performance artists on our side could pull out one of the cases where they were below the sentencing guidelines. Say, for example, it was on something as horrific as rape, that we all agree is horrific, and they could suddenly put themselves at the defend – “How dare we put someone who’s soft on crime …” Well, are you soft on crime? God Bless America.
I got this great text. I’ve become really good friends with folks at the FOP [Fraternal Order of Police] for my negotiations, and this was my favorite text. You all gotta get this. I think my brother Kennedy might get a kick out of this. He goes, “Things that are uncountable: Stars in the sky, grains of sand on the beach, and the number of times Democrats will mention that the FOP endorsed Judge Jackson in this hearing.” [laughter] But let me mention it again, just in case my people say you’re-rough-on-crime folks really want to try to make that stick. You were endorsed by the largest organization of rank-and-file police officers. You were endorsed by the bosses, the largest organization of chiefs of police. And you were endorsed by NOBLE, who I hope people find out more about that organization. You got uncles that are officers. You got a brother, not just an officer, who went to serve after 9/11. Your family’s not soft on terrorism; he went out there to capture and kill and defend this country from terrorists. I’m actually sitting back here and finding this astonishing, but then I do my homework.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
-->@oromagiI do think that if the Supreme Court strikes down Roe v. Wade in the upcoming term that will greatly improve Democrat's odds for retaining both houses of Congress and perhaps incentivize a movement to pass a privacy amendment to the Constitution.It’s already been effectively struck down imo. Didn’t they allow Texas 6 week abortion ban to remain in place? That’s effectively a ban on abortion…six weeks is like two weeks after a missed period. A lot of women wouldn’t even know they were pregnant at that point^if they let the Texas law stand on just a technicality like lack of standing or something what I wrote above is wrong. But it’s been chipped away at for decades now.
I agree that Roe has been chipped away at for decades and stands as effectively struck down in Texas. I think a constitutional amendment formalizing a citizen's right to privacy, protection from govt control over fundamentally personal decision-making, etc. is necessary and appropriate.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
-->@ebucWell, that why the Republicans picked Thomas to replace Thurgood Marshall—perhaps best known as the first African American Supreme Court justice. They knew he had a White wife.
It's not like there were a lot of other conservative black judges to choose from. If you had decided to elevate from the Court of Appeals and that Marshall's replacement should be Black then Thomas was the first and only Black judge ever elevated to that court by a Republican president and that had only been by Bush himself in the previous year. White wife or no, Thomas was one of only a handful of Black Federal judges and the only one of those to be a reliable Republican Party insider- most of his career had been within the Reagan Administration or as a lobbyist for Monsanto.
Created:
-->
@Incel-chud
-->@oromagiThe FDA simply, honestly, and correctly reported that it would take 75 years to process that particular FOIA request at present staffing levels and current output rates ( 8 minutes/page)Why not just process it upon request and immediately copy and paste the text and email it out. Why would that take more than 30 seconds to send out a PDF?
Because none of these documents are digitalized. Anything worth digitalizing was sent to PHMPT last autumn. This is just patient diaries, surveys, logs, etc- paperwork legally required to be retained but not deemed important enough to scan, store, backup, etc.
Created:
- Which people have been "locked away and deprived of liberty" by the FDA and under what authority? Which prisons?
- Mutilation is the "destruction of body parts" What body parts are being destroyed by what injections?
- What truth has the FDA been suppressing?
Created:
So the FDA which the government used as a basis to lock people away and deprive of liberty to supposedly save life and to mandate the injection of questionable chemicals and mutilation of human bodies has been actively trying to suppress the truth.
- Which people have been "locked away and deprived of liberty" by the FDA and under what authority? Which prisons?
- Mutilation is the "destruction of body parts" What body parts are being destroyed by what injections?
- What truth has the FDA been suppressing?
- The Trump appointed judge didn't find any fault or "suppression" from the FDA. In fact, that judge acknowledged that his request placed an undue burden on a department who's funding was cut by the Trump administration. The FDA simply, honestly, and correctly reported that it would take 75 years to process that particular FOIA request at present staffing levels and current output rates ( 8 minutes/page) with 400 earlier FOIA requests in queue ahead of this request. The judge ruled that this particular report should be prioritized at the expense of copyright and corporate espionage protections so the reports will just be Xeroxed at 55,000 pages/30 days and if the Chinese steal America's patented mRNA secrets, so be it.
- So, as usual, GPs habit of believing what he's told without question has led him to spread a lot of conspiracy-themed disinformation without any evidence of verification or critical thought.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
-->@oromagiWell, I think that soon, Trump will be moving to his new Trump Towers Moscow.
I note that Paul Manafort was pulled off a plane bound for Dubai just yesterday- trying to flee the country with a revoked passport.
How would Trump flee the country with his Secret Service, I wonder? He can't really order them away or lose them and I don't think the SS would let Trump leave the country without notifying White House, Air Force, etc. I'm not sure Trump could flee the country even if he was determined to do so.
Created:
Posted in:
They don't. That's a faulty generalization. Recent examples of progressive movements that did not result in more central planning or more authority include:
- Wall St. reform
- Gay rights/gay marriage
- $15 minimum wage
- College loan forgiveness
- Child tax credit
- Linux/freeware movement
- Women's March
- etc
Created:
Posted in:
Let's recall that Mo Brooks was the first congressman to object to the election certification on Jan 6th. Brooks wore a bulletproof vest on Jan 6th in anticipation of shooting on that day and was the first to speak at Trump's "Stop the Steal" rally and cheered on the insurrectionists from his congressional hiding place. After the coup failed, Brooks blamed Antifa for the attacks on the Capitol until today. Now, Brooks says that Trump asked Brooks for his help in forcing Biden out of office and placing Trump in office illegally.
Trump pulled his endorsement of Brooks for the Arkansas Senate race today after Brooks correctly stated that there is no legal method available for placing Trump in office before the 2024 elections. Trump called that simple, constitutional fact "woke" and pulled his support from one of his most devoted henchmen. Seems like now would be a good time to get Brooks on record under oath regarding Trump's marching orders on Jan 6th. This also suggests that Trump is willing to do his own cause real harm in order to defend his claim to the presidency by illegal or opportunistic acts.
Created:
I've always liked the word FINK which can be used in all the same contexts or even in combination with RAT.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
What a great way to increase the Democratic base.
I do think that if the Supreme Court strikes down Roe v. Wade in the upcoming term that will greatly improve Democrat's odds for retaining both houses of Congress and perhaps incentivize a movement to pass a privacy amendment to the Constitution.
Created:
-->
@Incel-chud
-->@oromagiAbsolutely not. That's a terrible persuasion tactic for anyone who doesn't already agree with you.I would say a lot of the negativity that comes off as genuine, was because I was more interested in tweaking my belief systems, than sharing my belief systems or persuading. Some of it, was also no doubt from edge lording, but that was the minority of that.I have been off the site for some time, because I experienced an ego death. You're not even talking to the same person now.
I assumed you were putrefying in some field on the outskirts of Kyiv.
For all intents and purposes, you are talking to a God. This is a great opportunity for you to get some of those questions that nag us, before we reach enlightenment, off your chest.
I might point out that calling yourself a God is also a terrible persuasion tactic.
Created:
Posted in:
Let's agree that one certainly can't be an American Conservative (which conserves Democracy, Liberty, Equality as fundamental) and endorse Putin (who is actively working to terminate those conservative American principles)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
Most conservatives support the Ukraine, and most of the ones who claim to support Russia are just edge lording and not serious.
Edgelording is a characteristic of internet trolls. No actual human being and certainly no politician gets to hide behind the "just edgelording" defense.
Created:
-->
@Incel-chud
I have recently realized that negativity is an easier sell than positivity.
- So all that negativity you've been spreading over the years was not, in fact, an strategic choice for persuasion?
Created:
+1 disc
- I don't think its nonsense for the state to apologize for any wrongful execution, much less 4,000 wrongful executions.
- Also seems like smart politics considering that Scottish feminists made this a cause on Int'l Women's Day two years ago and demanded
- an apology
- pardons for all (costs a little money)
- a monument (costs a lot of money)
- Seems like any politicians counting on the feminist vote should at least do the free thing that takes 30 seconds and then see if that assuages the feminist vote for another couple years.
- Sure, the misogynists will bitch and moan on reflex but they were never going to vote for women candidates anyway.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Kenneth Copeland has an estimated net worth of $750 million.
Wow.
Created:
Posted in:
Being deferential to somebody that burns people in hell forever is bootlicking.
it is certainly deferential but if the entity that you are deferring to is all powerful then how can we make the judgement of "overly?" If someone is holding a pistol to your head, then nobody would judge you as being overly deferential for doing whatever your assailant demands. Therefore if the pistol is everlasting and the pain of being shot is eternal, so much more the appropriateness of any degree of deference demonstrated.
Created:
Posted in:
Let's agree that any superbeing who would create hell is no good Christian.
I wouldn't call it bootlicking because bootlicking is "excessive obedience, excessive servileness" but if you believe in all powerful being who will judge you according to a fairly vague and uncertifiable set of rules and may sentence you to eternal torture and misery if he finds you wanting, then I submit that no degree of obedience or servility would qualify as excessive under those circumstances.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sum1hugme
I remember this conversation. Here's a debate I did on the invasion of Crimea from 8 years ago:
Now that Russia has actually invaded, what do you think the US should be doing? If you were president, what would you do? Would you respond to international pressure to punish Russia at all?
The question is oddly retrograde. The US response has been highly engaged in the past six weeks and the punishments laid on Russia already are pretty deep- the Russian stock market will partly re-open today after being closed for a month, GDP forecast for 2022 has swung from 2% growth to 7% shrinkage, the Russian internet has been reduced to ballet performances and fishing shows, the Russian people are showing escalating signs of rebellion. Biden has demonstrated a lot of leadership in uniting NATO against Russia while also denying Putin any legitimate new grievance in Europe. Biden led Congress to a bi-partisan condemnation of Russia (splitting off the radical anti-democracy faction) and a giant rapid response arms package.
To ask what we should be doing seems to ignore that we've already done pretty much everything on the list of things we can do short of going to war.
To ask whether we should respond to international pressure suggests that the US was not the nation leading the international pressure over the past six weeks, which we were to a significant extent.
I think Biden has done what he can and should do up to this point, diplomatically & economically. Now it is time to listen to the generals. If I was a general, I might point out that Putin's own life is the single point of failure in all of this genocide and destruction. The minute Putin is gone, this whole crisis ends. However much such a suggestion violates international law, if I was a general I would definitely be offering my President some stealth assassin drone options, some cyanide tea options, etc. I don't think any International court would really fault the assassination of a mad dictator carelessly threatening to nuke everybody.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
Capitalism is "an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state."
Putin and his intelligence, security, and oligarch networks are the state. There no trade or industry that is not subject to state control. To call Putin a capitalist is to misunderstand capitalism.
Created:
-->
@triangle.128k
Putin's the leader of an enormous country why wouldn't he be rich?
You can't complain about US income inequality by holding up a country with far less income equality.
I'm just criticizing the unipolar western neoliberal system.
ne·o·lib·er·al·ismnoun
Sounds good to me. Hooray for democracy, which liberals invented to free the majority of the world from enslavement! Hooray for capitalism, which liberals invented to improve competition, innovation, and churn the money a little so it doesn't all just float to the top. If Putin could steal all the world's wealth and starve all who are not enslaved to him, he clearly would do that.
Democracy and Capitalism dominate because they have contributed more to increased human happiness and prosperity than any other political and economic system, respectively. Hooray for happier humans!
Created:
Posted in:
Wikipedia
In one modern view, trade exists due to specialization and the division of labor, a predominant form of economic activity in which individuals and groups concentrate on a small aspect of production, but use their output in trades for other products and needs. Trade exists between regions because different regions may have a comparative advantage (perceived or real) in the production of some trade-able commodity—including production of natural resources scarce or limited elsewhere. For example: different regions' sizes may encourage mass production. In such circumstances, trade at market prices between locations can benefit both locations.
As I recall, the Confederacy tried to use fact that Britain traded for their cotton as diplomatic leverage, but Britain simply shifted to using India more for cotton.
"For much of Great Britain, however, the Civil War meant disaster for the cotton trade. The manufacture of cotton cloth and thread was by far the country's largest industry in the mid-nineteenth century. It employed more than 600,000 people in England directly. Indirectly (through family units or other trades), nearly four million people, or one sixth of the English population, were dependent upon cotton for their livelihoods. When the Civil War began, the United States supplied about eighty percent of Britain’s raw cotton, and almost all of it arrived through the port of Liverpool. As a result of the Union’s blockade and the Confederacy's embargo, this figure fell to almost zero in August 1861, and American cotton did not exceed three percent of British imports while the war lasted. Although British merchants could obtain cotton from other regions, such as India and Egypt, Britain still received less than fifty percent of the raw material it needed during the war. As a result, mills closed, workers lost their jobs, and England's cotton manufacturing districts in the counties of Lancashire and Cheshire experienced widespread poverty."
So, 16% of all English people ate on what they did with American cotton before the war, that dropped by half after the embargo. So, 8% lost their livelihoods and unemployment went up by maybe 15-20%. Pretty catastrophic, really. Same thing to a lesser degree in France.
The Greeks had the secret of Greek Fire, 'but technology is possible to be discovered by others.
I've read we still haven't figured out exactly what Greek Fire was. We've found the nozzles for it so it was some kind of liquid napalm like stuff but we may never know exactly what.
But WWII Germany can just invent their own soft drink, Fanta.
Fanta was not a knock-off, it was just a rebranding. Coca-Cola still owns Fanta and Fanta colas in Nazi Germany were the same recipe, Coke just didn't honor the US trade embargos (neither did Standard Oil for a while, who were the only ones making the leaded gas necessary for German bombers and fighters).
Detroit made the cars, until they didn't, we all know what happened to Detroit.
Detroit still makes the majority of American motor vehicles and employs better than 2/3rds of all Americans autoworkers. It has declined quite a bit and doesn't pay like it used to but Detroit is still making a lot of cars.
Created:
-->
@triangle.128k
-->@oromagiIt's called Liberty and once people know it, they will gladly kill their tyrants, they will die to preserve their freedoms.Liberty to homo rights, gay pride parades, cultural erasure, massive income inequality, commercialization, consumerism, decadence, onlyfans, estrogen in paper receipts, soy and xenoestrogens in the food supply, transgenderism (aka self-harming mutilation), etc.Ukrainians are so brave to fight for their descendants to become money-worshipping obese transgender homos, collecting funko pops, soylent bottles, and marvel movies, that hate their culture in a world order monopolized by western globohomo.
Hooray for the Western Globohomo party train and the freedom to fuck without any regard for big government interference! Damn the torpedos and pass the lube!
As for income inequality, let's remember that Putin started the year as the richest man in the world in spite of an official salary of $300,000 (worth about half that now)
Created:
-->@oromagiEven Russia itself is not particular Pro-Putin at this point. The only real Pro-Putin people left are Putin's dimwitted henchmen- FOX News, Trump and Trumpists.I can assure you, there are just as many useful idiots on the left who have such an ax to grind with "American neocon imperialism" that they'll turn a blind eye to anything a non-Western power does.It's just that, for obvious reasons, the mainstream media would rather put the spotlight on Putin apologists on the right.
I'm sure you might find one or two but "just as many?" I don't see anything like that. We still have Republicans voting against sanctions in Congress. Plenty of prominent Republicans like Trump, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Matt Gaetz, Tucker Carlson standing by Putin in spite of his warcrimes+genocide in the Ukraine but I'm not seeing anything like that among prominent Democrats. Give me some names of prominent leftists on the order of Trump or Carlson still supporting Putin after his invasion, please.
Created:
By Ilia Krasilshchik
TBILISI, Georgia — “Wake up, Sonya, the war has started.” These were the first words I said to my girlfriend on the morning of Feb. 24, as Russian missiles rained down on Ukraine. The words I’d never thought I’d have to say.
No one in Moscow believed there could be a war, even though it’s painfully clear now that the Kremlin had been gearing up for it for years. Were we, the millions of Russians who were openly or secretly opposed to President Vladimir Putin’s regime, merely silent witnesses to what was happening? Even worse, did we endorse it?
No. In 2011, when it was announced that Mr. Putin would return to the Kremlin as president, tens of thousands took to the streets in protest. In 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea and fomented war in the Donbas, we held huge antiwar rallies. And in 2021 we took to the streets once more throughout the country when Russia’s main opposition figure, Aleksei Navalny, was arrested after his return to Moscow.
I want to believe we did everything in our power to rein in Mr. Putin. But it’s not true. Though we protested, organized, lobbied, spread information and built honest lives in the shadow of a corrupt regime, we must accept the truth: We failed. We failed to prevent a catastrophe, and we failed to change the country for the better. And now we must bear that failure.
No one in Moscow believed there could be a war, even though it’s painfully clear now that the Kremlin had been gearing up for it for years. Were we, the millions of Russians who were openly or secretly opposed to President Vladimir Putin’s regime, merely silent witnesses to what was happening? Even worse, did we endorse it?
No. In 2011, when it was announced that Mr. Putin would return to the Kremlin as president, tens of thousands took to the streets in protest. In 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea and fomented war in the Donbas, we held huge antiwar rallies. And in 2021 we took to the streets once more throughout the country when Russia’s main opposition figure, Aleksei Navalny, was arrested after his return to Moscow.
I want to believe we did everything in our power to rein in Mr. Putin. But it’s not true. Though we protested, organized, lobbied, spread information and built honest lives in the shadow of a corrupt regime, we must accept the truth: We failed. We failed to prevent a catastrophe, and we failed to change the country for the better. And now we must bear that failure.
The Russians who oppose the war now find themselves in a terrible state. It’s not just that we couldn’t stop this senseless and illegal war — we can’t even protest against it. A law passed on March 4 makes the expression of antiwar sentiment in Russia punishable by up to 15 years in prison. (Already, about 15,000 people have been detained for antiwar actions since the invasion began.) Facing an intolerable future, thousands have fled the country. Those who stayed have lost much of what remained of their freedom. After Mastercard and Visa suspended operations in Russia, many can’t even pay for a VPN service to get independent media.
It is as if we’re being viewed as criminals not only by our own state but also by the rest of the world. Yet we are not criminals. We did not start this war, and we did not vote for the people who did. We did not work for the state that is now bombing Ukrainian cities. Time and again, we raised our voices against the government’s policies, even as it became ever more dangerous to do so.
It wasn’t easy. Over the past decade, a plethora of repressive legislation cracked down on public protest, decimated the free press, censored the internet and suppressed free speech. Independent outlets were blocked, journalists were labeled “foreign agents” and human rights organizations were shut down. Thousands were detained and beaten. Prominent critics were driven to exile or killed. Mr. Navalny was imprisoned and could remain in jail for many years. We paid for our defiance.
Even so, it is up to us to start the conversation about what has happened. The invasion of Ukraine marks the end, definitively, of Russia’s postwar era. During the 77 years since World War II, Russia was regarded — no matter what other perceptions it carried — as the country that helped to save humanity from the greatest evil the world has ever known. Russia was the heroic country that defeated fascism, even if that victory forced 45 years of Communism on half of Europe. Not anymore. Russia is now the nation that unleashed a new evil, and unlike the old one, it’s armed with nuclear weapons.
The primary responsibility for this evil lies squarely at the feet of Mr. Putin and his entourage. But for those who opposed the regime, in ways big and small, the responsibility is also ours to bear. How did it happen? What did we do wrong? How do we prevent this from happening again? These are the questions we’re facing. No matter where we are — in Moscow, Tbilisi, Yerevan, Riga, Istanbul, Tel Aviv or New York — and no matter what we do.
Responsibility is the key. There was a lot of good in the country I grew up in, the one that stopped existing two weeks ago. But responsibility was what we lacked. Russia is a very individualistic society, in which people, to quote the cultural historian Andrei Zorin, live with a “Leave me alone” mind-set. We like to isolate ourselves from one another, from the state, from the world. This allowed many of us to build vibrant, hopeful, energetic lives against a grim backdrop of arrests and prison. But in the process, we became insular and lost sight of everyone else’s interests.
We must now put aside our individual concerns and accept our common responsibility for the war. Such an act is, first and foremost, a moral necessity. But it could also be the first step toward a new Russian nation — a nation that could talk to the world in a language other than wars and threats, a nation that others will learn not to fear. It is toward creating this Russia that we, outcast and exiled and persecuted, should bend our efforts.
Mediazona, an independent website that covers criminal proceedings and the penal system, has a haunting slogan: “It will get worse.” For the past decade, that’s been a grimly accurate prediction. As Russia bombards Ukraine, it’s hard to imagine things could be anything other than awful. But we must.
We must now put aside our individual concerns and accept our common responsibility for the war. Such an act is, first and foremost, a moral necessity. But it could also be the first step toward a new Russian nation — a nation that could talk to the world in a language other than wars and threats, a nation that others will learn not to fear. It is toward creating this Russia that we, outcast and exiled and persecuted, should bend our efforts.
Mediazona, an independent website that covers criminal proceedings and the penal system, has a haunting slogan: “It will get worse.” For the past decade, that’s been a grimly accurate prediction. As Russia bombards Ukraine, it’s hard to imagine things could be anything other than awful. But we must.
Created:
Posted in:
I had a friend who caught her uncle, a county court judge, in the act of raping his poodle. She demanded that he find a new home for the dog, never own another pet, and pay for four years of college tuition in exchange for her not going to the police.
Created:
One way you can tell GP is merely trolling is that he pretty consistently waits until after the fact-checkers have debunked his claims before he makes them.
Created:
Russia and China are challenging the unipolar world order of Atlanticist powers such as the United States and northwestern Europe. Through this unipolar world order, western elites possess massive amounts of power over global society. Institutions like the World Bank and IMF enact neoliberal economic policies that continuously screw over 2nd and 3rd world countries. People who descend from 2nd and 3rd world countries are looked down upon by snobbish first worlders.
TRANSLATION:
Putin and Xi are autocrats, tyrant kings who fear and despise the freedom and success of Western democracies. Through capitalism, Western democracies have outpaced the broken corrupt Asian economic models once mislabeled as communism. Institutions like the World Bank (both China and Russia are members) and the IMF have reduced extreme poverty (making less than $2/day in present terms) from 44% of all people in 1981 to less than 10%. Almost all of the third world lives better today than their parents did.
Russia is reclaiming Ukraine from the Atlanticist sphere of influence and reuniting Ukraine with its fellow east Slavs.
TRANSLATION:
Putin has lost this war to a catastrophic degree. In just 3 weeks, Putin has killed off more of his than US forces suffered in 20 years of war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Ukraine still has most of its Air Force intact. Unable to to force a direct engagement with Ukrainian soldiers, Putin is reduced to shelling eastern cities with large Russian populations. Right now, Putin is slaughtering more of his "fellow east Slavs" than he is Ukrainian soldiers and the Russian Army know it and objects. Newscasters in Russia are choosing 15 years in jail rather than lying about Russian losses on nightly tv. Putin is locking up his top intelligence officers lest they try to take him out. Free eastern Slavs across the world are rejecting Putin's tyranny and fighting back and Putin is already realigning with China for protection.
Westerner NPCs continue to seethe, why? They don't want anybody but Germanic Northwestern European neoliberals to hold power over the world. They are both neocolonialist and racist. They demand the entire world bow down to their neoliberal whims and social norms of Germanic countries. They despise anything but liberal western culture. They have snobbish neocolonialist attitudes.
It's called Liberty and once people know it, they will gladly kill their tyrants, they will die to preserve their freedoms.
Pro-Russian sentiments are essentially an Indigenous Peoples' Movement against Anglo-Germanic neocolonial global supremacy.
Even Russia itself is not particular Pro-Putin at this point. The only real Pro-Putin people left are Putin's dimwitted henchmen- FOX News, Trump and Trumpists.
Created:
Posted in:
If you had thought critically about it yourself you could be the source. There is no other rational possibility besides what I have described and I will entertain no alternatives.
Well that certainly goes a long way towards explaining why your conclusions are so whack. Making up your own definitions for things is certainly an easy way of refuting counterarguments but you won't win many debates that way.
Created:
-->
@Benjamin
I said it, democracy is the reason why America suffers under bad leadership.In the US, democracy basically means a shouting contest and a culture war. This is not what the country need. It needs competent politicians and smart policies. They need to fix poverty, a failing educational and healthcare system, rising national debt, police shootings and civillian shootings, crime rates, corporate tax loopholes, homelessness, crumbling infrastructure, climate change and frequent natural catastrophes. These problems are not merely jokes or ammunition in a mind war.
Considering how often the US splits 50/50 or 40/40/20 on most issues- there's not likely to often be any leader that satisfies even 50% of the population. The point of democracy is that the sovereignty, authority, and power necessary to address all the problems you list resides with the people and not the head of state. If you are waiting for a leader with the power and vision to fix all these things for you, then you will likely wait a long time and you are essentially looking for an authoritarian you agree with. The trick is not to vote for charismatic leaders with long agendas you agree with but for moderates with broad appeal that can make deals and compromises for the sake of popular policy change.
Take Bernie, for example. Bernie has a plan to address most of the problems you list but correctly, Bernie would need to raise taxes 5-7%. This is a show stopper because less than 1% of voters support such a tax increase. Only 3% of Bernie voters support a tax increase that high. So you get a competent politician with smart policies but his programs are all dead on arrival. Biden made no such promises but had done more to alleviate childhood poverty in one year than any prior president except Roosevelt. He's poured money into infrastructure and in just the past few weeks has done more to combat climate change than all combined efforts since Paris.
Ultimately, this comes down to voting out senators and representatives who don't care about your concerns (most Republicans) and voting in senators and representatives who do. If we are waiting on a hero to fix our future, we risk waiting too long for heroes who may accomplish nothing. Better to take the possible as it comes and teach everybody that these problems are our responsibility to fix.
Created:
Posted in:
Everything I know of Purim comes from "For Your Consideration" and Maccabeats videos
chag Purim sameach!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
-First, Wikipedia is wrong,....The claim that there is a flying spaghetti monster is without support.
The only epistemologically sound way to define a concept like "burden of proof" is to consult established reference material for the commonly agreed meaning and function of that concept. While we can agree that there are sources superior to Wikipedia, we must also conclude that you are not one of those superior sources. If you don't like Wikipedia's definition of Proof of Concept, you can try another well-sourced definition but you can't simply insert your personal, blinkered notions of how burden of proof works and expect anybody's respect.
Just because you've made a negative claim that is impossible to prove doesn't mean you are relieved of the burden to prove it- it just means that your argument will always fail to live up to that burden.
The burden of proof for your claim: Bestiality is not inherently immoral is yours whether you acknowledge that burden or not. We agree you have no hope of proving your claim.
I don't agree: ancient Egypt, classical Greece, or a period in India during which a temple depicting bestiality was constructed... but then again education isn't great so you might claim those aren't well known cultures.
Depictions in art aren't reliable evidence for legal status. Cleopatra may have put bees in her vibrator gourds but nobody in Egypt or Rome looked to Cleopatra for a moral example. There's reason to believe that shepherds fucked their sheep in Republican Rome but such acts are consistently depicted as a disgusting taboo, a desperate resort, or comic fodder- consistently immoral. The old gods fucked a lot of beasties but those stories weren't offered as a moral example.
,
Since we have agreed that the claim "Bestiality is not inherently immoral" is impossible to prove, that condition can't be used to evaluate legality.
In short this example failed because I see no reason assassination should be illegal if it is the only practicable way to avoid the deprivation of rights to the innocent.
So, if Canadian alt-Righters feel that their rights have been deprived by Vax mandates, you see no moral reason for a law prohibiting them from assassinating Trudeau.
You seem to assume that I would consider this scenario morally different from a sniper taking out a hostage taking bank robber, but I don't.
A hostage-taking bank robber forswears his individual sovereign rights as citizen by violating the sovereignty of his fellow citizen/hostage. Heads of state violate the sovereignty of others all the time and of necessity without necessarily creating a moral justification for any legal remedy, much less execution. Putin qualifies for death by violating the international standards for defense and legal warfare and failing to demonstrate care for his subjects.
Created:
Posted in:
I maintain that:
1. Bestiality is not inherently immoral
2. Anything which is not inherently immoral should not be illegal.
I have no burden of proof for the first statement.
False. Wikipedia advises:
When two parties are in a discussion and one makes a claim that the other disputes, the one who makes the claim typically has a burden of proof to justify or substantiate that claim especially when it challenges a perceived status quo. This is also stated in Hitchens's razor, which declares that "what may be asserted without evidence, may be dismissed without evidence."
Let's agree that the statement "Bestiality is not immoral" challenges the perceived status quo in any well known culture or time period.
To the extent that you have brought no evidence, the onus of proof is on you and this claim may be dismissed without argument until that onus is met.
I do for the second and will provide an argument upon request.
Anything which is not inherently immoral should not be illegal.
Disagree- depends on the framework governing that "should" For example it would not be inherently immoral to assassinate Vladimir Putin today. Such an act would save tens of thousands of live, preserve democracy in the West, preserve Ukrainian and Russian sovereignty, and avoid the threat of nuclear showdown. But assassination should and of a right ought to be illegal in the context of state sovereignty.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
I'm going to presume you're not speaking in favor of Capitalism.
Why would you ever presume that? I am a Liberal- liberals invented free market capitalism.
At present, there's little economic benefit to having and raising smart and healthy kidsThat isn't true at all.
That's in the context of individual benefit. Please detail some of the economic benefits afforded to parents in the US. Yes, there are some tax benefits but those tax benefits don't compensate for the cost of raising smart and healthy kids. I'm looking for total monetary benefits of raising children vs. not raising children.
when that should be the most prioritized/rewarded activity in our society. It should be far more profitable to participate in those activities that build and improve society like parenthood, teaching, nursing and less profitable to participate in those activities that don't.Why do you think this is?
Traditionally, care-taking was assigned to women and women were expected to work without compensation.
Created:
Posted in:
Wikipedia:
Isaiah 35:9 casts a lion as metaphorically forbidden in the future paradise ("No lion shall be there, nor any ravenous beast shall go up thereon, it shall not be found there; but the redeemed shall walk there");[3] yet, Isaiah 65:25 and Isaiah 11:6–7, respectively reference such formerly ravenous beasts as becoming peaceable: "The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, the lion shall eat straw like the ox; but the serpent—its food shall be dust!";[4] "The wolf shall live with the lamb, the leopard shall lie down with the kid, the calf and the lion and the fatling together, and a little child shall lead them."[5]
"In like a lion, out like a lamb" is a proverb having to do with March weather. It has been speculated that its origin is from astrological Leo (lion) being followed by Aries (ram).[6]
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
-Yes, a misleading title (also a “snuck in premise” btw) which the MSM ran with to their disrepute.
- I am refuting GP here. His conclusion is that "Can't say gay" is false. If he offered any premise I can't detect it but to the extent that "can't say gay" is a civil rights argument I don't see how "snuck" or "premise" apply.
Teachers are including LGBT people in age appropriate discussions about civil rights and civic responsibilities and those are the discussions that this Florida law is designed to censor.Cite? I would genuinely be interested to see if there is any truth at all to these claims. Either way, I believe that civil rights are universal in a nation, so the concept can and should be taught without bringing various forms of identity into the concept, especially at a young age.
FLDoE is pretty clear that in K-5 it is not so much about inclusion as not consciously excluding LGBT.
As the Miami Herald reports:
"In practice, it is unclear exactly how things will change in the classroom because sexual orientation and gender identity are not something being taught in grades K-3 at the moment. But what is certain is that the state Department of Education will be required to review and update educator practices and professional conduct principles, and other standards by June 2023."
In the state curriculum for social studies, students learn lessons in history, geography, political science, and economics as applied to a definition of community that expands at each grade:
Kindergarten – My World
Grade 1 – School and Family
Grade 2 – Neighborhoods
Grade 3 – Communities
Grade 4 – Florida
Grade 5 – US History
So a first grader might be called upon to describe their family to the class. Whether children of same sex couples will prohibited from describing their families is left unclear by this legislation. There will be some anti-bullying lessons as a part of civics and law studies. Florida law specifically outlaws bullying on the basis of gender or sexual orientation but this law makes it unclear whether children may be taught that Florida law. Teachers will discuss civil rights movements- whether the gay rights movement is an allowable topic is now rendered uncertain by this legislation. Here is an example of Broward County's core social studies curriculum:
Also in Broward County as part of the sexual health curriculum students discuss the definition of family and how there are many configurations that there are many different structural formations that may be identified as family. Students are asked to bring family pictures in from home. It is not clear under this new legislation whether children with LGBT family members will be permitted to acknowledge their family members in class.
I was just taking issue with your claim about DGSH— a claim you then tried to render as moot. I
The claim is GP's to prove, not mine:
"This [legislation] effectively ends the pedo ring of men dressing up as women for Kindergarten storytime to get a chubby around little kids."
- Neither you or GP has brought one scrap of evidence that this has ever happened even once in any Florida Public School, therefore disproved.
- Neither you or GP has demonstrated that Drag Queen Story Hour would be censored by this legislation- would such a reading qualify as instruction regarding gender identity? discussion of gender identity?
- The point is moot, always was moot until you or GP document your claim.
This is a head-scratcher of a contention....
- No it's not. You don't get to complain about "saying something as if it has been established and agreed upon as true when it has not been" when
- the "something" (i.e. civil rights) is the counterargument refuted in the topic of the forum and the first sentence.
- The instigator has brought up all kinds of random, emotion-laden bullshit that you have ignored and
You persist in conflating “discussion” with “instruction” in the actionable aspect of the law. If you refuse to discuss the issue honestly, I’ll take that as my cue.
- You conceded here that "the summary still states “discussion” If Florida lawmakers think that "prohibiting classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity" is an accurate summary of the law then it is clear that you have zero valid grounds to fault my quoting those lawmakers' description in this forum and you have no good faith argument for any claim of dishonesty on my part, in fact I object to such characterization.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
-->@oromagiI agree prohibiting teachers from instructing students that LGBT have civil rightsHow did civil rights enter our discussion about young children’s education? This is known as “sneaking in a premise”— saying something as if it has been established and agreed upon as true when it has not been. If you had an intellectually honest rebuttal, I’m sure you would have posited it instead.
That is why people call it the "Don't say Gay" bill. Nobody is talking about anal sex to third graders. Teachers are including LGBT people in age appropriate discussions about civil rights and civic responsibilities and those are the discussions that this Florida law is designed to censor.
- Note that I brought up civil rights in my first post- before you entered the conversation.
- I note also that you failed to object to the inclusion of many other totally unrelated subjects- Drag Queen Story Hour, anal sex, masculine looking women, Colorado legislation, etc.
Greyparrot's thesis was "A bill prohibiting sex education to kindergarteners has had about 10% truthful coverage, and 90% fake news." Since nobody in Florida was ever providing sex education to kindergarteners, and the bill makes no mention of sex education, and the bill only prohibits discussion/instruction regarding sexual orientation and gender identity and the only discussion/instruction teachers were providing primary schoolers regarding sexual orientation and gender identity was specific to those groups' civil rights as protected classes under Florida law, Greyparrot's thesis was shown to be inaccurate in the first sentence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
So, let us change the goals.
We speak of economic value as a separate concept from moral value but in a moral society there would not be much separation between the two. If we agree that our first responsibility as nation, society, economy, generation, etc. is to raise the next generation of children and our second responsibility is to improve that generation's quality of life above our own generation and our third responsibility is to plan for the improvement of future generations then we should agree that what we value economically should reflect those moral responsibilities. At present, there's little economic benefit to having and raising smart and healthy kids when that should be the most prioritized/rewarded activity in our society. It should be far more profitable to participate in those activities that build and improve society like parenthood, teaching, nursing and less profitable to participate in those activities that don't.
Do you know Marilyn Waring, the NZ economist and politician? She's quite eloquent and forward thinking on this subject.
Created:
Posted in:
“Drag Queen Story Hour (DQSH) is just what it sounds like—drag queens reading stories to children in libraries, schools, and bookstores. DQSH captures the imagination and play of the gender fluidity of childhood and gives kids glamorous, positive, and unabashedly queer role models. In spaces like this, kids are able to see people who defy rigid gender restrictions and imagine a world where people can present as they wish, where dress up is real.”
I found one example of an appearance in one school from a couple of years back in New York, and that event was voluntary. Let's say again that nothing in this bill prevents drag queens from coming to schools in Florida and reading books and I can't find any examples of that happening in Florida anyway.
You sound as if you don’t want to comprehend the distinction made in my prior post. “Instruction” is prohibited, not “discussion.”
As you said, that is still how FL summarizes the law: prohibiting classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in certain grade levels or in a specified manner;
I agree prohibiting teachers from instructing students that LGBT have civil rights is less vague than "encouraging discussion." As I said before I also generally agree that such topics should be kept pretty broad and generic at that age but I doubt a total ban on teaching about whole classes of people protected by Fla State law is not likely to constitutional muster,
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
I think you are still missing the central point which is that Drag Queen Story Hours happen at public libraries and not schools. That is, Drag Queen Story Hours are totally voluntary events at which it would be illegal to leave a K-3 age child unsupervised. The state probably has no regulatory authority for that library in Houston or any of the libraries in Florida that offer this particular entertainment.
I'll say again that the Florida bill has nothing whatsoever to do with any Drag Queen Story Hour anywhere. Greyparrot's maskirovka adding a years old story from another state to a forum about a current law unconstitutionally restricting the capacity of schoolchildren and teacher to discuss gay rights has deceived and befuddled you just as was intended.
Created: