Alito strikes

[SkyDekker 1,465]

[SkyDekker 1,465]

At the same time there is new video of family values representative Cawthorn humping some dude's face naked.

Not sure how to describe US politics anymore.

[Phil1111 1,149]

5 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

...Not sure how to describe US politics anymore.

Dizzying, exhausting.

[JoeWeber 2,720]

47 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

At the same time there is new video of family values representative Cawthorn humping some dude's face naked.

Not sure how to describe US politics anymore.

Fair enough. Some of us southerners aren't sure how to describe Canadian politics. Maybe, and  without referencing our banana republics failings, you could enlightenment us.

[ryoder 1,590]

2 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

At the same time there is new video of family values representative Cawthorn humping some dude's face naked.

Not sure how to describe US politics anymore.

Omigawd; I made the mistake of searching Reddit for that, and now I can't unsee it.

Meanwhile on my Twitter feed:

 

[Phil1111 1,149]

1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

Fair enough. Some of us southerners aren't sure how to describe Canadian politics. Maybe, and  without referencing our banana republics failings, you could enlightenment us.

A big scandal today. The conservatives are accusing the PM of using the F*&k adjective during commons debate. Its rocking the very foundation of government.

In other news Trudeau doesn't really believe people should have a choice in medical decisions The government further stated that women can and should lose their jobs. If they refuse to follow government directives on their bodies!

Edited May 5, 2022 by Phil1111

[gowlerk 2,190]

7 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

In other news Trudeau doesn't really believe people should have a choice in medical decisions The government further stated that women can and should lose their jobs. If they refuse to follow government directives on their bodies!

Both sides chanting "my body my choice". How delicious.

[headoverheels 333]

1 hour ago, Phil1111 said:

A big scandal today. The conservatives are accusing the PM of using the F*&k adjective during commons debate. Its rocking the very foundation of government.

In other news Trudeau doesn't really believe people should have a choice in medical decisions The government further stated that women can and should lose their jobs. If they refuse to follow government directives on their bodies!

Yeah, someone that was pregnant got my grandma pregnant just by breathing on them, just like COVID.

[NewGuy2005 53]

On 5/4/2022 at 7:01 PM, SkyDekker said:

At the same time there is new video of family values representative Cawthorn humping some dude's face naked.

Not sure how to describe US politics anymore.

Revelatory

[JoeWeber 2,720]

On 5/4/2022 at 8:01 AM, GeorgiaDon said:

I fully expect a legislative attack on gay rights, including same-sex marriage, to follow in some especially conservative states.  Alito and Thomas have already signaled that they believe those cases were wrongly decided, and all but invited new challenges so they can get another bite at the apple.  I doubt that any state legislatures will risk a direct attack on interracial marriage, or on access to contraception.  That does not mean those things are in any way safe, though.  All it would take would be some conservative entity to file a lawsuit and then (if/when they lose) appeal it all the way to the SC.  Having already decided that there is no constitutional right to "privacy" (assuming this draft opinion makes it largely intact into the final ruling) there would be no basis left to rule that people have any right to interracial marriage or contraception.  Given that, and the current mood to throw everything back to the states to pass legislation, the SC could very well end up overruling Loving v Virginia and Griswold v Connecticut.  We could see sodomy laws and criminalization of gay sex being revived as well.  All it would take would be someone willing to initiate a lawsuit.  Of course that someone would have to establish standing, but if the SC continues its current path of extending religious freedom to include the freedom to never be offended by other people rejecting your religious preferences then standing might not be an obstacle. 

Be it an  Ecclesiastical Court or the United States Supreme Court there is ample precedent for religious fanatics taking the law into their own hands. What's new?

[brenthutch 444]

 I’m not going to get vaccinated or wear a mask

You have to get vaccinated and wear a mask 

My body, my choice 

Not if it threatens another life!

 

[JoeWeber 2,720]

25 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

 I’m not going to get vaccinated or wear a mask

You have to get vaccinated and wear a mask 

My body, my choice 

Not if it threatens another life!

 

You'll need to clarify threatens another life. For example, to date no aborted fetus has been convicted of mayhem or assault whereas many children have been caught squashing lizards and pulling the wings off flies. 

[ryoder 1,590]

What if the SCOTUS decision didn't make much difference, because there was an end-run around it?

Vox: The abortion provider that Republicans are struggling to stop

[JoeWeber 2,720]

28 minutes ago, ryoder said:

What if the SCOTUS decision didn't make much difference, because there was an end-run around it?

Vox: The abortion provider that Republicans are struggling to stop

Mifepristone and Misoprostol each have 2 year shelf lives, although it's probably longer and I don't think taking a double dose is a great risk if potency is a worry. Really, concerned mothers and fathers and sexually active women and men in crazy America might just lay in a stock while the getting is good.

But it still doesn't change the assault on other privacy based rights to come unless, obviously, they come up with a gay, trans, or black pill and then just imagine the Matrix level stress wondering if it's the Red one that cures you or the Blue one that converts you. 

[TriGirl 318]

On 5/4/2022 at 3:30 PM, ryoder said:

A former co-workers thoughts on this in a discussion years go:

The government made a mistake when it recognized "marriage", (a religious construct), when it should have recognized "civil union", since the govts only concern is that 2 unrelated people are effectively becoming a family with merged property, contract obligations, and the ability to make medical decisions for each other.

His solution: The govt would simply recognize civil unions. Anyone getting married would only need enter into a civil union. If they wanted to get the blessings of a religion as well, they could also choose a church to get married in, but the marriage performed by the church would have no legal meaning.

I have no religion, so in order to support the distinction (prior to same-sex marriage being legalized), I had always planned to apply for a civil union if I ever was motivated to get married.  Along the same lines, I support adults' rights to enter into a plural marriage within the structure of their religion -- as long as they don't try to apply for the civil benefits to support more than one partner.  If they can afford it, and all are willing adults, I could not care less how they form their family units.

[TriGirl 318]

On 5/4/2022 at 10:11 PM, ryoder said:

Omigawd; I made the mistake of searching Reddit for that, and now I can't unsee it.

Meanwhile on my Twitter feed:

 

I got the impression he was doing that to his incapacitated buddy.  e.g., sexual assault. Did I get that wrong?

I could not care less what this guy, or any other consenting, cognizant adult, does in the bedroom.  If his buddy was part of the "crass" activity willingly, this video means nothing to me.  If, OTOH, the buddy was unconscious or incapacitated, we have evidence of a crime.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

1 hour ago, TriGirl said:

I got the impression he was doing that to his incapacitated buddy.  e.g., sexual assault. Did I get that wrong?

I could not care less what this guy, or any other consenting, cognizant adult, does in the bedroom.  If his buddy was part of the "crass" activity willingly, this video means nothing to me.  If, OTOH, the buddy was unconscious or incapacitated, we have evidence of a crime.

One problem would be the statute of limitations.

If it was long enough ago, it's not prosecutable.

Doesn't make it less of a crime.
Doesn't make him any less appropriate to hold public office (not that that concept is really possible at this point).
Doesn't make him less of a shitbag.

But likely not prosecutable.

[tkhayes 348]

On 5/2/2022 at 11:24 PM, Phil1111 said:

The white, evangelical, religious right is winning in the US.

There will always be Canada and Mexico for women.

the religious right's numbers are decreasing every year, and they see it.  They are like a wild animal backed into a corner..... it is hard to guess what bullshit they will try to pull as they desperately try to hang onto power..... Contraception is next.  The leak of the draft states that there is no liberty nor privacy in the constitution and is using that as the basis for overturning Roe v Wade.   sadly they still have a lot of power but until the nones, the atheists and agnostics stand up and speak out against the religious running the country, well, the religious will continue to run the country.  We still have dozens and dozens of congress, Senators, and governors that believe the world is 6000 years old.  That alone is a problem.

[tkhayes 348]

On 5/2/2022 at 11:24 PM, Phil1111 said:

The white, evangelical, religious right is winning in the US.

There will always be Canada and Mexico for women.

the religious right's numbers are decreasing every year, and they see it.  They are like a wild animal backed into a corner..... it is hard to guess what bullshit they will try to pull as they desperately try to hang onto power..... Contraception is next.  along with LGBTQ rights, and the more liberal states will be able to use it to track and seize guns, spy on radical right wing groups with impunity, etc

The leak of the draft states that there is no objective or defined liberty nor privacy in the constitution and is using that as the basis for overturning Roe v Wade.   that leaves an awful lot of things to go back to the states, including servitude, discrimination, religion in classrooms, Contraception, along with LGBTQ rights, and the more liberal states will be able to use it to track and seize guns, spy on radical right wing groups with impunity, etc, etc.  Good that they used 13th century law as a basis for a 21st century argument.... not

Sadly they still have a lot of power but until the nones, the atheists and agnostics stand up and speak out against the religious running the country, well, the religious will continue to run the country.  We still have dozens and dozens of congress, Senators, and governors that believe the world is 6000 years old.  That alone is a problem.

Edited May 9, 2022 by tkhayes

[gowlerk 2,190]

1 hour ago, tkhayes said:

sadly they still have a lot of power but until the nones, the atheists and agnostics stand up and speak out against the religious running the country, well, the religious will continue to run the country.

This issue will not really catch fire and unite people until doctors and women start being jailed. Then it will explode.

Edited May 9, 2022 by gowlerk

[wmw999 2,445]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

This issue will not really catch fire and unite people until doctors and women start being jailed. Then it will explode.

Nah, that didn’t work before Roe. Now, with it in the recent past people will realize they’ve lost something, but until cute blonde women start dying from bitched abortions it won’t matter. It’s kind of like a young woman or child who disappears. There’s a real correlation between color and publicity.

Wendy P. 

[gowlerk 2,190]

15 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Nah, that didn’t work before Roe. Now, with it in the recent past people will realize they’ve lost something, but until cute blonde women start dying from bitched abortions it won’t matter. It’s kind of like a young woman or child who disappears. There’s a real correlation between color and publicity.

Wendy P. 

Oooohhhhh.... I love it. You are even more cynical than me. Nice!

[JoeWeber 2,720]

31 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Nah, that didn’t work before Roe. Now, with it in the recent past people will realize they’ve lost something, but until cute blonde women start dying from bitched abortions it won’t matter. It’s kind of like a young woman or child who disappears. There’s a real correlation between color and publicity.

Wendy P. 

Bingo. You should work for NASA. Americans don't effect change so much as they accept change, especially forced change. Of course, the best change is change that others need to deal with, others who can't buy their way out of disagreeable change. I guess I shouldn't give a crap but I do; I do because I fear what this nation will look like in 10 years. 

[GeorgiaDon 362]

When female skydivers are arrested and charged with child endangerment for skydiving while pregnant, will that be enough to get male skydivers concerned about the issue?  Once a fetus is legally recognized as a person, all sorts of activities with even a small element of risk will potentially become felonies.  Women will be held hostage by their biological status as incubators.

[JoeWeber 2,720]

52 minutes ago, GeorgiaDon said:

When female skydivers are arrested and charged with child endangerment for skydiving while pregnant, will that be enough to get male skydivers concerned about the issue?  Once a fetus is legally recognized as a person, all sorts of activities with even a small element of risk will potentially become felonies.  Women will be held hostage by their biological status as incubators.

Dang tootin', we just need to get skydivers motivated and we'll change the world!