American Politics

[Long_Before_Sunrise]

12 hours ago, Astreya said:

‘Condemning everyone alive’: outrage at US supreme court climate ruling. Limiting the Environmental Protection Agency at a time when fossil fuel emissions need to be curbed is devastating 

The EPA was only starting to recover from Trump's rule to get rid of two regulations for every new regulation added. 

[purpledragonclaw]

12 hours ago, StormBirdRising said:

The last thing I want is a pro-active Supreme Court.  A pro-active Supreme Court could have declared the fetus to be a person and conferred Constitutional protections to the fetus.  

 

That's coming very soon, mark my words. Arizona is already fighting to give constitutional protections to a fetus. And if that case, along with similar cases from other states, comes before the Supreme Court as it currently stands, I have no doubt what the ruling will be.

[Astreya]

25 minutes ago, purpledragonclaw said:

That's coming very soon, mark my words. Arizona is already fighting to give constitutional protections to a fetus. And if that case, along with similar cases from other states, comes before the Supreme Court as it currently stands, I have no doubt what the ruling will be.

This is actually mainly a problem as your judges and lawmakers appear not to use any common sense.

 

Did you know that in Germany, the Federal Constitutional Court set the following legal principle: "If a pregnancy is not the result of a criminal interaction or a threat to the mother's life or health an abortion violates the right to life of an embryo. As a result, in the last case, abortion has to be prohibited."

 

But this decision led to the the lawmakers changing the criminal law. They prohibited abortion within twelve weeks after fertilisation (that is, the 14th week after the first day of the last period) but after using a pregnancy consultation all participants go unpunished.

 

So in Germany every woman can get an abortion within 12 weeks if there is an indication - but the latter range from medical and criminal (where it is not illegal to get an abortion in the first place) to social (lack of money money or any other reason a woman might have).

The medical indication is not time-limited by the way - if the life of the woman is in danger, a medical doctor can take action at any time even after the 12 weeks. And if a girl under 14 years of age gets pregnant, there is always a criminal indication.

[Source]

 

 

 

[Long_Before_Sunrise]

Bad news,  @Lagie  you got a Ted Cruz infestation there.

[Lagie]

5 hours ago, Long_Before_Sunrise said:

Bad news,  @Lagie  you got a Ted Cruz infestation there.

Hunh?

[Astreya]

I just read this in the Guardian [source]:

Quote

Like Texas’s abortion bounty law, the don’t say gay bill gives parents the power to levy lawsuits against teachers or schools they believe contravene the deliberately broad law. The threat of being hit with a costly lawsuit means that it’s likely underfunded school districts will err on the side of caution and ask teachers to avoid saying or doing anything that could be possibly be construed as queer.

 

Indeed, lawyers have already told teachers in Orange county public schools that they should be careful not to wear rainbows; avoid mentioning same-sex spouses or displaying any pictures of them; and ensure they remove safe-space stickers from their classroom doors. So there you go: the party that professes to love free speech and small government has pushed through a law that means a rainbow sticker could end a teacher’s career.

 

While you can’t say gay in Florida schools any more, teachers can pray as much they like. On Monday, the supreme court ruled that the right to exercise free speech means public school teachers are allowed to lead organized prayer with students while on school grounds.

Out of curiosity - couldn't one set up a church that worships same sex relationships and then design prayers that circumvent the don't say gay law and then pull this through on grounds of religious freedom?

[purplehaze]

4 hours ago, Lagie said:

Hunh?

Supposedly Ted Crude was vacationing again -- this time in the Bahamas.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/ted-cruz-has-reportedly-gone-to-the-bahamas-amid-another-weather-warning-for-texas/ar-AAZ4lcV

Edited July 3, 2022 by purplehaze

[Lagie]

8 hours ago, purplehaze said:

this time in the Bahamas.

Ah. Urgh. Well, hopefully he spends lots of money here. Thanks.

[Fuzzbucket]

11 hours ago, Astreya said:

I just read this in the Guardian [source]:

Out of curiosity - couldn't one set up a church that worships same sex relationships and then design prayers that circumvent the don't say gay law and then pull this through on grounds of religious freedom?

 

In which context, I offer you this:

[Astreya]

@Fuzzbucket

Yeah, that, too, for sure! I think rulings and laws like these call for creative ways to circumvent them!

[Fuzzbucket]

Meanwhile I see that lawyers in Orange county are advising teachers not to wear rainbows...

 

 

This is all so awful for you all. And I fear it spreading to other countries.

[GhostMouse]

17 hours ago, Astreya said:

I just read this in the Guardian [source]:

Out of curiosity - couldn't one set up a church that worships same sex relationships and then design prayers that circumvent the don't say gay law and then pull this through on grounds of religious freedom?

 

This is close to what The Satanic Temple does. For example, they started a program called "After School Satan" as an alternative to religious after school programs that were being allowed to operate in public schools, to demonstrate that no religion belongs in public schools. They're also trying to protect abortion rights by treating it as a religious ritual.

[Astreya]

@GhostMouse

Thanks for the info! I also thought that actually the CoS should be able to turn abortion into a religious ritual - after all, what's more powerful than an unborn fetus to be sacrificed on the altar of the Great Beast...

[Long_Before_Sunrise]

 

[Marcus Pheonix]

Things just don't seem to be getting better for the people of america. It makes me wonder if there some sort of international law by the UN that this violates that could be brought up to counter whats happening there.

 

Also hoping some people are shooting off rainbow fireworks for murica day.

[trystan]

11 hours ago, Marcus Pheonix said:

Things just don't seem to be getting better for the people of america. It makes me wonder if there some sort of international law by the UN that this violates that could be brought up to counter whats happening there.

i also had this question.... so much stuff happening violates human rights, it's insane.

 

 

Edited July 4, 2022 by trystan

[Astreya]

I just googled around a bit to find out why no one ever sues the gun makers for the gun violence that is so rampant in the US and I found:

 

"Since 2005, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) has provided near blanket immunity for gun makers and dealers from liability for crimes committed with their products. The law was passed after lawsuits by several cities tried to hold companies liable for gun violence." [Source]

 

Can anybody enlighten me if it might be able to challenge this law? E.g. would it be possible to stack the Supreme Court with additional non ultra-right judges and then strike down this law so that it would be possible to sue the daylight out of the gun manufactures  to grab the evil at the source? Or to sue the NRA for propagating violence and abetting criminal murdering people with guns and rifles?

Edited July 5, 2022 by Astreya

[Long_Before_Sunrise]

Remington was successfully sued by Sandy Hook parents. They won last year. The child survivors of that mass shooting are old enough to drive and work.

[Long_Before_Sunrise]

Arizona Republican Representative Debbie Lasko on CSPAN speaking against a gun control bill: "I would do anything to protect my five grandchildren, including, as a last resort, shooting them if I had to to protect the lives of my grandchildren. The Democratic bills we've heard this week want to take away my right, my right, to protect my grandchildren."

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c5018963/user-clip-rep-lesko

She also says, "When Republicans were in the majority, we actually passed legislation that was passed into law that would have prevented mass shootings." 

That's a lie.. No such legislation was passed. It's not law. Mass shootings continue to happen.

 

It gets better: This was a rehearsed speech she had made the month before (again against gun control and mental health service) but this today she messed it up. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwL3ona-WUI

Edited July 7, 2022 by Long_Before_Sunrise

[StormBirdRising]

On 7/1/2022 at 5:29 AM, TCA said:

They say that now, but just you wait: they'll still use it as precedent when it benefits them.  And when they do, I want you to think about how you defended them now, and how I told you this would happen, and I want you to wonder if maybe you've been wrong about anything.

The Supreme Court set no legal precedent beyond that of the abortion issue,  determining that abortion was an issue for the Legislature,  not for the Supreme Court. The issue is now to be settled by Congress, or probably by the State Legislatures,  since Congress still continues to do nothing to resolve the issue.  Seems pretty clear cut to me. 

 

Shortly after the "leaked" Supreme Court decision,  California announced that its abortion laws would remain the same.  Subsequent to that, California declared itself an  "abortion sanctuary" state,  meaning that women from any state were guaranteed an abortion in California,  including that California taxpayers would pay the bill for said abortion and travel expenses.  So in California, an abortion sanctuary state,  mobs of abortionists, unhappy with a federal decision that they did not like, a decision that the state and residents of California had nothing to do with,  vandalized buildings,  beat an LAPD officer with a nightstick,  blocked traffic,  and terrorized anyone who got in the way of their hate filled temper tantrum.  So this is what the face of Pro-Abortionists look like:  blind rage and hate.  

Edited July 9, 2022 by StormBirdRising

[Astreya]

@StormBirdRising

In the US you currently find a lot of rage - and the rage is made really dangerous as everybody and their dog have not only access to guns and rifles, but even automated weapons with which one can kill and injure masses of people. Shouldn't this general (!) inclination to violence in the US lead to much stricter gun control in general?

 

(I think the violent abortionists are just as criminal as the violent anti-abortionists and also those mobs that attacked the Capitol on Jan 6 and the perpetrators of the regular mass shootings in the US. IMO the US needs a general weapons ban unless people have a good reason to keep one in a controlled manner.)

 

Edited July 9, 2022 by Astreya

[AngelsSin]

So apparently this is a thing

Since overturning Roe vs. Wade claiming an unborn fetus is a person one pregnant woman decided to use this as a reason/excuse to use the hov lane and is trying to get out of a ticket saying they can't have it both ways either her fetus is a person or it's not and she technically had two people in the car. 😅

[Fuzzbucket]

That's INSPIRED ! I do hope she wins in court.

[purpledragonclaw]

On 7/8/2022 at 3:38 AM, StormBirdRising said:

The Supreme Court set no legal precedent beyond that of the abortion issue,  determining that abortion was an issue for the Legislature,  not for the Supreme Court. The issue is now to be settled by Congress, or probably by the State Legislatures,  since Congress still continues to do nothing to resolve the issue.  Seems pretty clear cut to me. 

 

Shortly after the "leaked" Supreme Court decision,  California announced that its abortion laws would remain the same.  Subsequent to that, California declared itself an  "abortion sanctuary" state,  meaning that women from any state were guaranteed an abortion in California,  including that California taxpayers would pay the bill for said abortion and travel expenses.  So in California, an abortion sanctuary state,  mobs of abortionists, unhappy with a federal decision that they did not like, a decision that the state and residents of California had nothing to do with,  vandalized buildings,  beat an LAPD officer with a nightstick,  blocked traffic,  and terrorized anyone who got in the way of their hate filled temper tantrum.  So this is what the face of Pro-Abortionists look like:  blind rage and hate.  

 

So Californians protesting in solidarity with their brothers and sisters in other states where abortions will be outlawed even in the case of rape and incest shouldn't happen? Should Californians just sit back and let it happen since "hey, it doesn't affect us, we're good"? That's how bad things happen: a lot of good people doing nothing. 

 

Source for your second paragraph, please? That is so very biased in its writing I have the feeling there's another side to this that your source isn't reporting on.

 

Also, be mindful of not generalizing pro-choicers as "blind rage and hate". I wouldn't call all pro-lifers "forced-birth violent terrorists that camp outside of abortion clinics to scream and physically threaten women just trying to get healthcare" because those people get the most news coverage for their violence. Or conservatives as "Trump-worshiping insurrectionists who tried to overthrow a peaceful election process while smearing literal feces on the walls of the Capitol because their guy didn't win" when not all conservatives are like that. 

 

ETA: changed "pro-abortionists" to "pro-choice", thank you Fuzz, you are correct.

Edited July 10, 2022 by purpledragonclaw
changed wording

[Fuzzbucket]

On a more cheerful note - https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/floating-abortion-clinic-meg-autry/2940013/

 

She isn't fomenting hate and rage.

 

There is, by the way, no such thing as a "pro-abortionist". There are people who are pro-CHOICE, who would never force anyone to have an abortion, and there are anti-abortionists, who would take away that choice. THEY are the ones with rage and hate - they cannot bear to see anyone do what they wouldn't choose to do themselves (or ion the case of men, when they don't want you to do something because they simply want power over women. Make men have to take on the unwanted babies they spawn, and that would change quite fast.

 

I've been looking for that California stuff. It's nowhere reliable that I can see. Best I can see is this:

 

https://freebeacon.com/latest-news/pro-abortion-rioters-attack-injure-la-cops/

 

From an extreme right wing site

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Free_Beacon

 

and from BEFORE the ruling, and before Ca had announced its intention to be a sanctuary state..

 

Here's a rather more accurate piece on Ca:

https://www.capradio.org/articles/2022/06/30/as-states-ban-abortion-californians-open-their-arms-and-wallets/