They are normal couples.Dreiko said:Basically, the forcing is in having to live in a society which treats gay married folks the same as normal couples
They are normal couples.Dreiko said:Basically, the forcing is in having to live in a society which treats gay married folks the same as normal couples
Oh the poor whittle babies.Dreiko said:Basically, the forcing is in having to live in a society which treats gay married folks the same as normal couples
Did not know that information before, it makes their actions all the more insidious an indefensible here.Lil devils x said:Most pregnancy complications are not known to be severe in advance, they usually do not know the severity until it is already to that point with the exceptions of diseases such as cancer. In most maternal mortality cases though, they would have no way of knowing how severe it was going to be in advance to be able to qualify for a "serious high risk" exemption under the criteria required here. This will definitely increase maternal mortality further when it has already been increasing in the US as it is.
Oki doki, living under some kind of rock since at least the formative years is one thing, but when people regularly try to lift the rock to let a bit of sunlight in only for it to get pulled straight back down again to continue baseless rambling about the evil "sjws," "communism/socialism," "feminazis" and the "abnormal gay married folk" at every opportunity kinda makes the whole attempt at claiming everyone else needs to be "understanding of the other side for dialogue to begin" come off as astoundingly blind hypocrisy at very best when clearly you haven't taken in a single thing others have tried to patiently explain over bugger-knows how long now.Dreiko said:That's not really the argument though is it. The thing they have against gay marriage isn't that people will be forced to get gay married, it's that it fundamentally alters/destroys/whatever the institution of marriage and forces people to live with such a reality. It's kind of apples an oranges but it is a concern about values so just because it's a different sort of concern doesn't make it not about values.
Basically, the forcing is in having to live in a society which treats gay married folks the same as normal couples, which to those people indeed feels like oppression in the same way, as silly as it may seem to us.
First you gotta understand the other side, then dialogue can begin. We gain nothing from constructing straw-men and refusing to see how people actually think about these things. How we feel and whether or not we disagree with them is something that enters the discourse AFTER this step.
And again, a lot of women voted for those people too, so they can't really exercise power in removing their own power, cause even if that action is implemented it was partially they who implemented it. It's kinda like willingly becoming a slave out of your own volition and being free to sign away your freedoms...kinda like marriage, in fact!
Institutions have no rights. They are there to serve us. They are made to represent what the majority think is a good law/ way to live/ moral structure etc. We change these all the time, depending on what society demands. King George III didn't want America to break away from England. The tradition was America was a colony of England. How you think means that America shouldn't never even tried to break away. And the only reason is... tradition. The America society decided that it was more beneficial to not remain part of the realm. Because the society decided that this tradition was no longer necessary.Dreiko said:That's not really the argument though is it. The thing they have against gay marriage isn't that people will be forced to get gay married, it's that it fundamentally alters/destroys/whatever the institution of marriage and forces people to live with such a reality. It's kind of apples an oranges but it is a concern about values so just because it's a different sort of concern doesn't make it not about values.
Firstly, I'm highly aware that people find 'the gays' morally repugnant. Mostly, it comes from some passage in the Bible/Torah/Qur'an. I understand that it comes from some divine being that people think is important. Problem is, when people say 'understand their viewpoint', they actually mean believe it or submit to it. Understanding doesn't mean agreement.Basically, the forcing is in having to live in a society which treats gay married folks the same as normal couples, which to those people indeed feels like oppression in the same way, as silly as it may seem to us.
First you gotta understand the other side, then dialogue can begin. We gain nothing from constructing straw-men and refusing to see how people actually think about these things. How we feel and whether or not we disagree with them is something that enters the discourse AFTER this step.
I'm afraid it might go dangerously far. And/or they won't recognise the significance of what they are doing. Lot of pissed off deplorables with guns who won't fight for the future of the US, but will murder innocent people and pretend that's what they are doing.Silentpony said:Play chicken with them, see how far their conviction goes
Why would you assume that I, or anyone else for that matter, does not understand how these religious fanatics think? As I have stated on here before, as a child I was taken by these religious fanatics and tied to a chair and made to read the bible aloud while they turned the pages. I have read the Bible more times than most Christians and have even translated it from Hebrew. In that same school that the US government required us to attend on the reservation, a man raped hundreds of children "to get the devil out of them". In that same school hundreds of kids were beaten and abused and told that it was the beliefs of our ancestors that were evil and that we needed to be saved. Although the late Senator John McCain helped put a stop to the man raping the children, the school's other abuses continued and is still open to this day. The only way for my family to escape that abuse was to leave the reservation, the homeland of my ancestors, as this is actually part of the US governments forced assimilation of our people. The US government is part of the reason why this sort of fanaticism is so rampant in the US, as the US government has not only condoned such behavior, but encouraged and facilitated it to continue for generations.Dreiko said:That's not really the argument though is it. The thing they have against gay marriage isn't that people will be forced to get gay married, it's that it fundamentally alters/destroys/whatever the institution of marriage and forces people to live with such a reality. It's kind of apples an oranges but it is a concern about values so just because it's a different sort of concern doesn't make it not about values.Lil devils x said:BS. Legalizing gay marriage does not force people who are not gay to be gay and marry people of the same sex. This is forcing women to have no say over their own bodies. Women can be raped and they will be forced to give birth. Women will die due to this. Who is dying from gay marriage? If this is not a sex issue, name the men who will die as a result of this? To make it worse, Alabama is one of the states with a higher maternal mortality rate already so this will only make a bad situation worse. Women's bodies, health and lives are forever changed by giving birth.Dreiko said:It's not a sex issue, it's a forcing your values down people's throats issue. I guess this is how the conservatives felt when gay marriage was legalized or something.
This is both an issue of removing women's control over their own bodies and one of forcing one's religious beliefs onto others. Gay marriage does neither, as they are not forcing people to be gay and go get married themselves, accepting that others do so has no bearing on the lives and freedom of the people who disagree with it. Here, they are forcing women who had no say in being raped to not only have no say in what happened to them then, but also to have no say to what happens to them afterwards and being forced to risk their health and lives forever changing their bodies to accommodate the whims of religious fanatics. No where near comparable to any other laws that exist.
Basically, the forcing is in having to live in a society which treats gay married folks the same as normal couples, which to those people indeed feels like oppression in the same way, as silly as it may seem to us.
First you gotta understand the other side, then dialogue can begin. We gain nothing from constructing straw-men and refusing to see how people actually think about these things. How we feel and whether or not we disagree with them is something that enters the discourse AFTER this step.
And again, a lot of women voted for those people too, so they can't really exercise power in removing their own power, cause even if that action is implemented it was partially they who implemented it. It's kinda like willingly becoming a slave out of your own volition and being free to sign away your freedoms...kinda like marriage, in fact!
As I have said before on these forums, I don't think abortion should be used as a form of birth control or taken lightly, however, I think it is a decision that should be made by a patient and her physician, not by legislatures. It should not be illegal and it should not be promoted as a form of birth control. It should instead be treated a serious medical issue that no one other than the patient and their doctor should have a say in.trunkage said:But someone getting married affects my marriage! How could I love my partner after someone else getting married.Lil devils x said:BS. Legalizing gay marriage does not force people who are not gay to be gay and marry people of the same sex. This is forcing women to have no say over their own bodies. Women can be raped and they will be forced to give birth. Women will die due to this. who is dying from gay marriage? If this is not a sex issue, name the men who will die as a result of this? To make it worse, Alabama is one of the states with a higher material mortality rate already so this will only make a bad situation worse. Women's bodies, health and lives are forever changed by giving birth.Dreiko said:It's not a sex issue, it's a forcing your values down people's throats issue. I guess this is how the conservatives felt when gay marriage was legalized or something.
This is both an issue of removing women's control over their own bodies and one of forcing one's religious beliefs onto others. Gay marriage does neither, as they are not forcing people to be gay and go get married themselves, accepting that others do so has no bearing on the lives and freedom of the people who disagree with it. Here, they are forcing women who had no say in being raped to not only have no say in what happened to them then, but also to have no say to what happens to them afterwards and being forced to risk their health and lives forever changing their bodies to accommodate the whims of religious fanatics. No where near comparable to any other laws that exist.
We could just follow the Stefan Molenyuex doctrine. Bad men in society are the fault of women having babies with bad men. Becuase, it could never be the fault of bad men. It's a woman problem. (I have a friend who, after a nice relationship of 6 years, was suddenly lock in a house, striped naked, tied up and raped multiple times by her boyfriend. He's a bad man, but, until that week, everyone thought he was good. Molylenuex's rationality breaks down when you realise that bad men usually pretend to be good to get away with this stuff. In Molyenuex's world, it was her fault. But I couldn't tell he was bad, neither did she.) But, then a common trait of bad men is not taking responsibility for their own issues
Anyway, I'm sympathetic to foetus' rights. I don't know how or why they should supersede the mother rights, especially all the time. I'd be willing to say there is a point where more stringent requirements for abortions. 6 weeks is not that time. We have a requirement in my state where you need permission from two doctors to do an abortion in the third trimester. So it becomes more of a medical necessity rather than choice like in the first two trimesters. I'm happy with this as most of the time the mother has the stronger right, but transfers to the foetus later to recognise that it should supercede as some stage. It's not perfect, but all rights conflict have similar problems. Either one person is dominate, effecting the other negatively or we could try to share.
Even less discussed but far more common is the lifelong impact of childbirth to women's health. While some women can have a complication free pregnancy, childbirth is one of the leading causes of life long disability in women. Even when we manage to reduce maternal mortality rates, we still struggle with addressing the severe and permanent damage to a woman's health that can leave her permanently disabled from childbirth. All of the body changes and what one's body has to endure during pregnancy can permanently damage organs and/or cause organ failure, cause chronic inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, chronic pain, and can damage the spinal cord and increase the likelihood of breaking bones. Many do no realize the severe impact this can actually have a woman's body, and they may never be able to return to work afterwards. This is a decision that will affect the rest of a woman's life. Even worse, many women think these things will be short term and due to not being able to return to work, they often lose their ability to apply for disability benefits due to loss of credits and then are left disabled, not able to work and not able to receive benefits. In states like Alabama this is made even worse due to their severe lack of assistance for women, often leaving them with no options. This is one of the "traps" women find themselves in where they are forced to be dependant on a spouse in order to survive at all, and is common in abusive relationships as a reason why the woman cannot leave their abuser. This bill targeting rape and incest victims makes it that much worse for the victims to never be able to escape their abuser.Neurotic Void Melody said:Did not know that information before, it makes their actions all the more insidious an indefensible here.Lil devils x said:Most pregnancy complications are not known to be severe in advance, they usually do not know the severity until it is already to that point with the exceptions of diseases such as cancer. In most maternal mortality cases though, they would have no way of knowing how severe it was going to be in advance to be able to qualify for a "serious high risk" exemption under the criteria required here. This will definitely increase maternal mortality further when it has already been increasing in the US as it is.
The people pushing this also want to strip the right to vote from people who have committed a felony.Silentpony said:Oh I know. And they'll give it their best shot. But the blowback if it does succeed will be monstrous for Republicans. Like losing the 2020 election, and Congress and having all of Trump's supreme court nominees impeached(which yes you can impeach them) and having a Dem president throw on new judges and a new law passed, challenged and affirmed by the courts with 6 months.Worgen said:The reason they are doing this is because currently the courts are conservative with possibly no swing vote. Kennedy was the swing vote on abortion before but now that we have two trump appointees, there is a good chance that they will vote to overturn the federal abortion law. This is why they are pulling this, because they are sure the court will side with them and abortion will be outlawed nationwide.Silentpony said:So this'll be struck down like immediately. Federal Law trumps State law every time.
Nah! Just nuke Alabama. /jkRaikuFA said:fucking hell. Just launch the nukes already. We?ve failed as a species.
Baffle2 said:They are normal couples.Dreiko said:Basically, the forcing is in having to live in a society which treats gay married folks the same as normal couples
That's not generally considered a safe way of performing abortions. But 100% effective, I guess.CaitSeith said:Nah! Just nuke Alabama.RaikuFA said:fucking hell. Just launch the nukes already. We?ve failed as a species.
If people want to help, they should listen to what abortion rights organizations in Alabama want, not write off the state as irredeemable.Thaluikhain said:EDIT: Seriously though, lots of talk of companies boycotting the state. On one hand, yeah, see why you'd do that. On the other, if you need an abortion, being unemployed as well isn't to help.
Feels like a rather trivial matter to be "oppressed" for. Sure it goes the other way around as well, but laws usually have better than trivial rationale behind them. I hope.Dreiko said:Basically, the forcing is in having to live in a society which treats gay married folks the same as normal couples, which to those people indeed feels like oppression in the same way, as silly as it may seem to us.
Aside from DC police being the wrong law enforcement body (that falls to the Sergeant at Arms of the United States House of Representatives for cases of contempt of Congress), you're dead on. That and that if held in contempt of congress they have to hold them in the House's jail, which might possibly cause logistical issues depending on how many ignored subpoenas there end up being.Silentpony said:that is one thing dems do that's starting to piss me off. We live in a post-rules world right now. People are openly ignoring subpoenas, and Nancy Pelosi is out there thinking she might hold them in contempt of congress. No girl, that shit is straight up illegal! You can't ignore a subpoena! Get the DC police to go arrest them and jail them until they agree to adhere to the summons.
This is a different tune than what you were singing about Kavanaugh and Ford.Schadrach said:Aside from DC police being the wrong law enforcement body (that falls to the Sergeant at Arms of the United States House of Representatives for cases of contempt of Congress), you're dead on. That and that if held in contempt of congress they have to hold them in the House's jail, which might possibly cause logistical issues depending on how many ignored subpoenas there end up being.Silentpony said:that is one thing dems do that's starting to piss me off. We live in a post-rules world right now. People are openly ignoring subpoenas, and Nancy Pelosi is out there thinking she might hold them in contempt of congress. No girl, that shit is straight up illegal! You can't ignore a subpoena! Get the DC police to go arrest them and jail them until they agree to adhere to the summons.
I do understand the other side. And that other side refuses to understand my side, and refuses to dialogue with us. So fine, no more dialogue. If they wanted to talk, we gave them 8 years to talk, and everytime we tried to talk they actively spit in our face and slapped our hands.Dreiko said:First you gotta understand the other side, then dialogue can begin. We gain nothing from constructing straw-men and refusing to see how people actually think about these things. How we feel and whether or not we disagree with them is something that enters the discourse AFTER this step.