Journal smittyoneeach's Journal: Instavision on Affirmative Action 55
Centrist Democrat Mickey Kaus talking to Libertarian Glenn Reynolds, the mighty Instapundit:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oV5PUewTMM
Racism is racism, and the Progressive Plantation has no lack of it.
End Affirmative Action.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oV5PUewTMM
Racism is racism, and the Progressive Plantation has no lack of it.
End Affirmative Action.
Re: (Score:1)
That was one of Margaret Sanger's goals when she advocated for both birth control and abortion. Sanger was also a proponent of Eugneics, and an admirer of one Adolf Hitler. Just because you're completely ignorant of history and who these "progressives" really are is your problem, not smitty's (or mine). Go read some of Sanger's letters. The truth is out there, Anonymous
Re: (Score:1)
That was one of Margaret Sanger's goals when she advocated for both birth control and abortion.
Hee Hee, too bad the "wrong [usnews.com]" race is getting most of the abortions and birth control, isn't it? That's the only reason you're against it. Of course when you people do it, it's called a "procedure", done overseas if necessary because local law doesn't permit it, or you don't want your nosy neighbors to know your wife was cheating on you, or that your daughter got knocked up by the sheriff's kid.. Bunch of damn hypo
Re: (Score:1)
Just so you know: I am, as a Catholic, vehemently opposed to all forms of abortion, save one -- when the life of the mother is at risk. At that point, it's a triage case, and doctors should save the lives that they can. Rape / incest -- sorry, but just because a child was conceived under horrible circumstances does not warrant that child being given the death penalty.
On Birth Control: I do not want to be forced to pay for someone else's birth control, and my
Re: (Score:1)
Consistent, you are... consistently goofy. When you stop paying for other peoples' Viagra, then you can complain all you want about birth control. And regardless of any of that, you have absolutely no right to get in between a woman and her doctor. You have no right to force YOUR morals upon them. It's pretty damn simple. In the USA all people are supposed to have equal rights. You don't like those morals, tough. You are free to move to Saudi Arabia, or some such place that has your morals codified into law
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As though moral choices aren't being forced down the throats of Hobby Lobby.
I didn't feel it was moral to pay for the wars that we have started. Nobody wanted to listen to me complain about the morality of that. Why is it that when a non-conservative wants to petition to the government he is a terrorist loving traitor who needs to leave the country but when a conservative wants to do the same they are red-blooded true "Americans" to whom the laws of the land should be built around?
I guess the Progressive Faith has given itself a pass, or something.
As you would be telling us if someone with your preferred consonant had signed the Health Insuranc
Re: (Score:1)
Hobby Lobby is a business. They must abide by the same rules as everybody else. They are trying to deny their employees their rights. Civil rights trump religious choice.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Exactly my point. Hobby Lobby has no natural rights. It is not a natural person.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The employees are natural persons. The institution is not. You are only showing your preference for the institution over the person.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
BTW:
Hobby Lobby is an example of religious bigotry, not religious freedom, and they are trying to impose their bigotry on their employees. And another thing, their products come from China, so they actually support not only abortion, but also infanticide (real, honest to god murder, but who cares about the living, right?), not to mention godless communism. So, every time you buy something from them or anything else from China, you are killing babies, no problem as long as they were already born, and they're
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Hobby Lobby has no right to decide what medical procedures a person may wish to undergo. It's like putting a camera in every doctors office. Screw them. It's none of their business. Hobby Lobby is a corporation with no natural rights. The owners can keep their damn religion in their church and at home. They shall not be allowed to impose it on their employees. They shall not be allowed to discriminate.
Re: (Score:2)
The owners can keep their damn religion in their church and at home. They shall not be allowed to impose it on their employees.
Again, what has been forced on anyone in any positive sense? Please be specific.
Re: (Score:1)
They are trying to be like a damn HMO dictating what medical procedures can be used on a patient. They are not doctors. They are fanatics. And they are hypocrites. They don't tell the defense department how to use their tax money, and those people are a bunch of real killers. Do you hear them complain when a fetus gets droned in Yemen, Pakistan or Afghanistan? Of course not. Why should it be any different for health insurance?
Re: (Score:2)
They are trying to be like a damn HMO dictating what medical procedures can be used on a patient.
How is a Constitutional challenge to a specific, narrow aspect of a law the same thing as behaving in as a general HMO?
I guess if every single aspect of ObamaCare, including this particular assault on religious liberty, were not rooted in diabolical falsehood, then the Administration's case would seem less like Yet Another Wanton Constitutional Raping.
Re: (Score:1)
It's not religious "liberty". It's religious bigotry. And they are trying to flout anti-discrimination laws with it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The same way anti Jim Crow and anti segregation laws are not bigotry. Or what, do you believe the contrary?
The attack is against bigotry, not Hobby Lobby. That's like saying sending the National guard into the racist south to enforce the law is bigotry.Or that the 14th amendment is bigotry. You are saying Eisenhower was a bigot. Maybe he was, but he enforced civil rights law, as required. In fact you saying all civil rights laws are bigotry because they won't let you be a bigot. I know pudge thinks that wa
Re: (Score:2)
Jim Crow and anti segregation laws are not bigotry
No, but Affirmative Action laws sure are. Racism is deciding upon genetic factors. The fact that you've created vast swath of Equal Opportunity jobs, and have the Supreme Court playing along can't crush truth.
Or that the 14th amendment is bigotry.
Hey, if the only absolute is the right of the womb owner to give an imperial thumb up or down to a life, then the 14th Amendment does not apply to that portable plantation.
But Hobby Lobby's right not to be accountable for that womb in any procreational sense seems far from bigotry to me.
The motives f
Re: (Score:1)
A bigot's definition of bigotry is hardly one tot go by. The woman owns her body and everything in it. That carries no relation to the 14th amendment whatsoever, except as a possible path to citizenship, but the fetus only becomes a citizen after it is born. All this is none of Hobby Lobby's business. If anything you all are trying to enslave women to force them to carry your DNA. That seems to be the crux of the matter. You see the fetus as yours. It is not. You have no rights over her body, none. If that
Re: (Score:2)
The woman owns her body and everything in it.
My aunt is an alcoholic. I had a nephew afflicted with fetal alcohol syndrome. The guy was born legless, an died of the effects of the natal abuse in his early twenties. It hurt just to look at him. To behave as though his mother had the level of absolute control you seem to imply, as though these two lives did not overlap, does not seem right to me.
Even the biggest 2nd Amendment proponents don't contend that an absolute right to self defense somehow equates to an absolute right to a nuclear weapons, which
Re: (Score:1)
Then she should have two choices. Terminate the pregnancy, or face charges and sterilization after the baby is born. If the baby dies after it is born, it can be treated as a homicide. What happens during the pregnancy only matters after the baby is born.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
No, my position stands. Her life history is irrelevant. The options I gave are perfectly adequate. Terminate, or face the music.
Re: (Score:2)
Terminate, or face the music.
Face WHAT music? You stated that my aunt had absolute, total, no-strings-attached control of her body at all times. How could you, by your argument, hold her in any way accountable, having established her non-accountability? As with your random officeholder notion, you seem to be trying to play guitar and drums at the same time. Your band: it suck.
Re: (Score:1)
Face the the music after the baby is born. There's plenty to work with there.
You're out [imgace.com]!
Re: (Score:2)
more than half of the murder victims of abortion are female, thanks to gender-selective abortion.
[citation needed]
And of course, we know you can't provide one for that because no meaningful statistics exist for that statement. Whether you made it up on the spot or took it from someone else who made it up doens't really matter.
If you considered the reality of the situation for even a moment you would realize that your claim is at best 100% un-supportable. Most abortions occur to early in the pregnancy for the mother to even know the gender of the fetus. We know that because most of the legal abo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
sex-selective abortion is difficult to track in the United States because of lack of data. However, based on the sex ratios in the United States, it is certainly rare for the population overall. Abrevaya (2009) found that among firstborn children in the U.S., the sex ratio is the normal 102-106 males per 100 females.
So either you didn't read it, or you are hoping that you can force your faith on the rest of the planet. You most certainly, at the very least, did not provide a source to back up your claim.
Re: (Score:1)
No sir, it is continuous. Once the kid is born, everything counts. The mother has the chance to avoid the issue, and probably a doctor would recommend the same. Still the mother's choice, unless you can get papers to state otherwise, unfit, not of sound mind, whatever. Conversely you could use that to make her carry to term. No matter what, politicians, business people, and the preachers should stay out of it. If the mother wants their advice she can ask for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Once the kid is conceived, everything counts.
Fixed that for you. If you believe everything a corrupt lawyer or politician tells you, you're doomed. The attempt to have human life start at some arbitrary, later time is false. Thought experiment: if a woman eats her "not exactly human life" embryo, is it an act of cannibalism?
Re: (Score:1)
"Eating the flesh of one's own kind"
The embryo is of human flesh. Yeah, I suppose it would be. It changes nothing. After the kid is born alive do your worse, until then, leave her alone. Do not meddle uninvited. She has no obligation to carry your DNA. Your whole spiel is extremely chauvinistic and bigoted against women. It is alpha male animalism demanding that they be submissive.
Re: (Score:2)
Your whole spiel is extremely chauvinistic and bigoted against women. It is alpha male animalism demanding that they be submissive.
How, in defending unborn females, am I even slightly bigoted against them? There is nothing "alpha male" about the simple truth that a human being is defined by their genetic information, which was complete at conception. You seem to fling all the Lefty poo you can find in an effort to soil the truth.
Re: (Score:1)
There is nothing lefty in protecting the rights of living and breathing human beings.
In choosing between bigots and their victims, you are choosing the bigots. Yes, it is "alpha male" chauvinism. You are not "above it all" by any means. Peel away the layers of abstraction that you are looking through. Only then can you comprehend that your nature is not exclusively human.
Re: (Score:2)
This. Is. A. Completely. BS. Standard.
The only motive for fannying about in this fashion is to attempt to purge the guilt connected to destroying life. Go go Gosnell!
Re: (Score:2)
Cut the hooey, say I, and go with the clear, defensible standard: you were you at conception, when your information was complete.
Re: (Score:1)
You were you at conception, when your information was complete.
Doesn't matter. Mother is god until I am born. The information is useless until it delivers a baby. And that choice is solely the mother's to make. No man has any right to interfere. No man has any intrinsic authority over a woman in any way. You are using your religion to claim just that. And the true nature of your claim, I have already posted.
Re: (Score:1)
Except half the genetic information came from his sperm...
When the man can get pregnant we can talk. And if he didn't want the kid, he shouldn't "offer" up his sperm. The solution is simple and obvious in that regard. But this isn't about child support. During pregnancy all rights belong exclusively to the mother. Afterwards they can fight about it with their lawyers.
Re: (Score:1)
A car analogy would be like where you claim exclusive ownership of a car (and could throw it into the dumpster if she wants), but then come back 9 months later and demand somebody else pay the maintenance
If she had to build the car from raw materials and carry it around with her everyday for 9 months by herself, hell yeah. They both get part time custody, unless one is proven unfit. But if she stops and then tosses the pieces into the dumpster, even though she had ALL of them (with half coming from another
Re: (Score:2)
The information is useless until it delivers a baby. And that choice is solely the mother's to make.
No, pregnancy is not a hunting license.
No man has any intrinsic authority over a woman in any way. You are using your religion to claim just that.
Murder is murder, whether you're snuffing a Hindu, an atheist, or a Mormon.
Re: (Score:1)
It's not murder. If you want to call it that, then so is dropping a bomb on a pregnant woman. In which case it's two murders. If abortion is murder then so is war and the death penalty. And all those who partake should be up on charges.
The mother is the decider, nobody else.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
No more than you are, sir...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
...anyone who miscarries or delivers a baby who lives for only a fleetingly short amount of time could find themselves charged with murder while grieving.
Already happening [theguardian.com]... That is what these people want.