logo Sign In

Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 114

This topic has been locked by a moderator.

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

By the same token, I find myself bothered when I see women wearing burqas in the U.S., England, etc. Especially on college campuses… it seems contrary to basic western cultural values, which presumably is part of what attracted them here. For that reason, it seems slightly hostile (even if not their intent) - and exactly how we would be viewed there if our women ambassadors were to refuse to wear a hijab during a visit to their country.

Apparently, you have forgotten that our western culture values freedom of religion and diversity and tolerance for those who do things differently. I have no problem with a woman wearing a burqa as long as she freely chose to do it.

Author
Time
Post link

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

Many religions believe that it is disrespectful to show the top of one’s head to god - that is even true for men in many religions.

That’s correct, a lot of Orthodox Christians still practice this. The woman have to cover their heads, when receiving communion. If the woman doesn’t have one, the priest’s assistant will provide them with one. The men should always remove their hats when entering the church.

Author
Time
Post link

TV’s Frink said:

Whoa.

http://theslot.jezebel.com/oklahoma-lawmaker-pregnant-women-are-hosts-whose-bodie-1792303950

Women, you may think that the flesh that covers you and the organs and muscles and neurons that make you breathe and poop and eat are your own, but actually they are not. Oklahoma State Rep. Justin Humphrey can see how might “feel like that is” your body, but if you are pregnant, he regrets to inform you that your body is now a “host” and you are an interloping ghost that once used to inhabit it.

In an interview with the Intercept, this is how Humphrey justified the unconstitutional bill he recently introduced, which requires pregnant women to get the fetus’s father’s permission to obtain an abortion:

Ultimately, he said, his intent was to let men have a say. “I believe one of the breakdowns in our society is that we have excluded the man out of all of these types of decisions,” he said. “I understand that they feel like that is their body,” he said of women. “I feel like it is a separate — what I call them is, is you’re a ‘host.’ And you know when you enter into a relationship you’re going to be that host and so, you know, if you pre-know that then take all precautions and don’t get pregnant,” he explained. “So that’s where I’m at. I’m like, hey, your body is your body and be responsible with it. But after you’re irresponsible then don’t claim, well, I can just go and do this with another body, when you’re the host and you invited that in.”

“Congratulations on becoming a host and inviting that in!” is a truly beautiful thing to say to a pregnant woman. Hallmark should start printing that on cards for baby showers.

Oh yeah, I saw this insanity yesterday. I would have posted it here but for some reason I thought this was where I saw it.

Pure, unadulterated dark ages insanity.

Keep Circulating the Tapes.

END OF LINE

(It hasn’t happened yet)

Author
Time
Post link

TV’s Frink said:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38972180

A US district judge in Virginia has ruled that President Donald Trump’s executive order barring entry from seven countries is unconstitutional.

Judge Leonie Brinkema issued a preliminary injunction, asserting that the campaign vow to institute a “Muslim ban” violated the First Amendment.

The Monday ruling is significant, as the judge ruled that religious bias is at the heart of Mr Trump’s ban.

All of the following is very encouraging.

In her 22-page ruling, the Virginia judge cited several of Mr Trump’s campaign statements including those in which he promised to create a “Muslim ban” if he were elected president.

“The president himself acknowledged the conceptual link between a Muslim ban and the EO (executive order),” Judge Brinkema wrote.

She also criticised the president’s statements that persecuted Christians may be permitted entry despite the ban, which she said amounts to a religious test.

She also referenced a Fox News interview in which former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a Trump adviser, said that the president wants a “Muslim ban” and that he had been instructed by Mr Trump to put together a commission to determine “the right way to do it legally”.

Judge Brinkema sharply criticised lawyers for the justice department, who she said did not present any evidence except for the president’s executive order.

“Maximum power does not mean absolute power,” she wrote. “Every presidential action must still comply with the limits set” by the separation of powers laid out in the US Constitution.

If Trump is incapable of learning from his mistakes, and past history indicates that’s precisely the case, his term will be quite short.

Man. Don’t mess with people have have been practicing law all their lives.

Keep Circulating the Tapes.

END OF LINE

(It hasn’t happened yet)

Author
Time
Post link

Warbler said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

By the same token, I find myself bothered when I see women wearing burqas in the U.S., England, etc. Especially on college campuses… it seems contrary to basic western cultural values, which presumably is part of what attracted them here. For that reason, it seems slightly hostile (even if not their intent) - and exactly how we would be viewed there if our women ambassadors were to refuse to wear a hijab during a visit to their country.

Apparently, you have forgotten that our western culture values freedom of religion and diversity and tolerance for those who do things differently. I have no problem with a woman wearing a burqa as long as she freely chose to do it.

Nonsense - there are many things that “bother” me, and that I view negatively, that I would not want to see banned. Heck, Christianity “bothers” me, but I would never suggest banning it. Both are protected by religious freedom, however kooky I might consider them, and I never would suggest disallowing either (except for adjustments in certain security-related situations, such as boarding a plane or taking a final exam).

Having said that, I still feel that it is somewhat insulting to wear a burqa on a college campus. Colleges are supposed to be about opening oneself, sharing, critical thinking… closing oneself off from all direct interaction, especially since it is just one gender doing it (and one gender with whom they cannot interact), seems anathema to a basic tenant of higher education. I’m not proposing any policy, just sharing my impression. Perhaps my view will change over time, although that usually requires some sort of discourse, and it is difficult for such discourse to occur since I’m a man and their religion doesn’t allow them to interact with me (which also seems anathema to higher education).

A hijab, however, is nowhere near that. I have had many students who wear a hijab, and I have yet to observe any sign of religious oppression, or stifling of discourse therein.

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link

Tyrphanax said:

TV’s Frink said:

Whoa.

http://theslot.jezebel.com/oklahoma-lawmaker-pregnant-women-are-hosts-whose-bodie-1792303950

Women, you may think that the flesh that covers you and the organs and muscles and neurons that make you breathe and poop and eat are your own, but actually they are not. Oklahoma State Rep. Justin Humphrey can see how might “feel like that is” your body, but if you are pregnant, he regrets to inform you that your body is now a “host” and you are an interloping ghost that once used to inhabit it.

In an interview with the Intercept, this is how Humphrey justified the unconstitutional bill he recently introduced, which requires pregnant women to get the fetus’s father’s permission to obtain an abortion:

Ultimately, he said, his intent was to let men have a say. “I believe one of the breakdowns in our society is that we have excluded the man out of all of these types of decisions,” he said. “I understand that they feel like that is their body,” he said of women. “I feel like it is a separate — what I call them is, is you’re a ‘host.’ And you know when you enter into a relationship you’re going to be that host and so, you know, if you pre-know that then take all precautions and don’t get pregnant,” he explained. “So that’s where I’m at. I’m like, hey, your body is your body and be responsible with it. But after you’re irresponsible then don’t claim, well, I can just go and do this with another body, when you’re the host and you invited that in.”

“Congratulations on becoming a host and inviting that in!” is a truly beautiful thing to say to a pregnant woman. Hallmark should start printing that on cards for baby showers.

Oh yeah, I saw this insanity yesterday. I would have posted it here but for some reason I thought this was where I saw it.

Pure, unadulterated dark ages insanity.

It was dumb thing to say. I agree there is another life and body at stake when A woman becomes pregnant, but the way he said it was just dumb and stupid. Is there at least an exception in that law if a woman is raped? I hope a woman wouldn’t be required to get the rapist’s permission.

Author
Time
Post link

Warbler said:

Tyrphanax said:

TV’s Frink said:

Whoa.

http://theslot.jezebel.com/oklahoma-lawmaker-pregnant-women-are-hosts-whose-bodie-1792303950

Women, you may think that the flesh that covers you and the organs and muscles and neurons that make you breathe and poop and eat are your own, but actually they are not. Oklahoma State Rep. Justin Humphrey can see how might “feel like that is” your body, but if you are pregnant, he regrets to inform you that your body is now a “host” and you are an interloping ghost that once used to inhabit it.

In an interview with the Intercept, this is how Humphrey justified the unconstitutional bill he recently introduced, which requires pregnant women to get the fetus’s father’s permission to obtain an abortion:

Ultimately, he said, his intent was to let men have a say. “I believe one of the breakdowns in our society is that we have excluded the man out of all of these types of decisions,” he said. “I understand that they feel like that is their body,” he said of women. “I feel like it is a separate — what I call them is, is you’re a ‘host.’ And you know when you enter into a relationship you’re going to be that host and so, you know, if you pre-know that then take all precautions and don’t get pregnant,” he explained. “So that’s where I’m at. I’m like, hey, your body is your body and be responsible with it. But after you’re irresponsible then don’t claim, well, I can just go and do this with another body, when you’re the host and you invited that in.”

“Congratulations on becoming a host and inviting that in!” is a truly beautiful thing to say to a pregnant woman. Hallmark should start printing that on cards for baby showers.

Oh yeah, I saw this insanity yesterday. I would have posted it here but for some reason I thought this was where I saw it.

Pure, unadulterated dark ages insanity.

It was dumb thing to say. I agree their is another life and body at stake when A woman becomes pregnant, but the way he said it was just dumb and stupid. Is at least and exception in that law if a woman is raped? I hope a woman wouldn’t be required to get the rapist’s permission.

Some Republicans want the rapist to have more rights than the woman who was raped.

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

Warbler said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

By the same token, I find myself bothered when I see women wearing burqas in the U.S., England, etc. Especially on college campuses… it seems contrary to basic western cultural values, which presumably is part of what attracted them here. For that reason, it seems slightly hostile (even if not their intent) - and exactly how we would be viewed there if our women ambassadors were to refuse to wear a hijab during a visit to their country.

Apparently, you have forgotten that our western culture values freedom of religion and diversity and tolerance for those who do things differently. I have no problem with a woman wearing a burqa as long as she freely chose to do it.

Nonsense - there are many things that “bother” me, and that I view negatively, that I would not want to see banned. Heck, Christianity “bothers” me, but I would never suggest banning it. Both are protected by religious freedom, however kooky I might consider them, and I never would suggest disallowing either (except for adjustments in certain security-related situations, such as boarding a plane or taking a final exam).

Just what kind of adjustments are you talking about?

Having said that, I still feel that it is somewhat insulting to wear a burqa on a college campus. Colleges are supposed to be about opening oneself, sharing, critical thinking… closing oneself off from all direct interaction, especially since it is just one gender doing it (and one gender with whom they cannot interact), seems anathema to a basic tenant of higher education.

How does wearing a burqa equate to closing oneself off from all direct interaction? Burqas don’t prevent conversation. If Colleges are supposed to be about opening oneself, then be open to those who dress differently than you.

I’m not proposing any policy, just sharing my impression. Perhaps my view will change over time, although that usually requires some sort of discourse, and it is difficult for such discourse to occur since I’m a man and their religion doesn’t allow them to interact with me (which also seems anathema to higher education).

I wasn’t aware that their religion barred them from talking with non-Muslims. If so, how do they ask the professors any questions?

Author
Time
Post link

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

Tyrphanax said:

TV’s Frink said:

Whoa.

http://theslot.jezebel.com/oklahoma-lawmaker-pregnant-women-are-hosts-whose-bodie-1792303950

Women, you may think that the flesh that covers you and the organs and muscles and neurons that make you breathe and poop and eat are your own, but actually they are not. Oklahoma State Rep. Justin Humphrey can see how might “feel like that is” your body, but if you are pregnant, he regrets to inform you that your body is now a “host” and you are an interloping ghost that once used to inhabit it.

In an interview with the Intercept, this is how Humphrey justified the unconstitutional bill he recently introduced, which requires pregnant women to get the fetus’s father’s permission to obtain an abortion:

Ultimately, he said, his intent was to let men have a say. “I believe one of the breakdowns in our society is that we have excluded the man out of all of these types of decisions,” he said. “I understand that they feel like that is their body,” he said of women. “I feel like it is a separate — what I call them is, is you’re a ‘host.’ And you know when you enter into a relationship you’re going to be that host and so, you know, if you pre-know that then take all precautions and don’t get pregnant,” he explained. “So that’s where I’m at. I’m like, hey, your body is your body and be responsible with it. But after you’re irresponsible then don’t claim, well, I can just go and do this with another body, when you’re the host and you invited that in.”

“Congratulations on becoming a host and inviting that in!” is a truly beautiful thing to say to a pregnant woman. Hallmark should start printing that on cards for baby showers.

Oh yeah, I saw this insanity yesterday. I would have posted it here but for some reason I thought this was where I saw it.

Pure, unadulterated dark ages insanity.

It was dumb thing to say. I agree their is another life and body at stake when A woman becomes pregnant, but the way he said it was just dumb and stupid. Is at least and exception in that law if a woman is raped? I hope a woman wouldn’t be required to get the rapist’s permission.

Some Republicans want the rapist to have more rights than the woman who was raped.

Even though I lean pro-life, don’t count me in with them.

Author
Time
Post link

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

Tyrphanax said:

TV’s Frink said:

Whoa.

http://theslot.jezebel.com/oklahoma-lawmaker-pregnant-women-are-hosts-whose-bodie-1792303950

Women, you may think that the flesh that covers you and the organs and muscles and neurons that make you breathe and poop and eat are your own, but actually they are not. Oklahoma State Rep. Justin Humphrey can see how might “feel like that is” your body, but if you are pregnant, he regrets to inform you that your body is now a “host” and you are an interloping ghost that once used to inhabit it.

In an interview with the Intercept, this is how Humphrey justified the unconstitutional bill he recently introduced, which requires pregnant women to get the fetus’s father’s permission to obtain an abortion:

Ultimately, he said, his intent was to let men have a say. “I believe one of the breakdowns in our society is that we have excluded the man out of all of these types of decisions,” he said. “I understand that they feel like that is their body,” he said of women. “I feel like it is a separate — what I call them is, is you’re a ‘host.’ And you know when you enter into a relationship you’re going to be that host and so, you know, if you pre-know that then take all precautions and don’t get pregnant,” he explained. “So that’s where I’m at. I’m like, hey, your body is your body and be responsible with it. But after you’re irresponsible then don’t claim, well, I can just go and do this with another body, when you’re the host and you invited that in.”

“Congratulations on becoming a host and inviting that in!” is a truly beautiful thing to say to a pregnant woman. Hallmark should start printing that on cards for baby showers.

Oh yeah, I saw this insanity yesterday. I would have posted it here but for some reason I thought this was where I saw it.

Pure, unadulterated dark ages insanity.

It was dumb thing to say. I agree their is another life and body at stake when A woman becomes pregnant, but the way he said it was just dumb and stupid. Is at least and exception in that law if a woman is raped? I hope a woman wouldn’t be required to get the rapist’s permission.

Some Republicans want the rapist to have more rights than the woman who was raped.

Even though I lean pro-life, don’t count me in with them.

I don’t.

Author
Time
Post link

Warbler said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

Warbler said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

By the same token, I find myself bothered when I see women wearing burqas in the U.S., England, etc. Especially on college campuses… it seems contrary to basic western cultural values, which presumably is part of what attracted them here. For that reason, it seems slightly hostile (even if not their intent) - and exactly how we would be viewed there if our women ambassadors were to refuse to wear a hijab during a visit to their country.

Apparently, you have forgotten that our western culture values freedom of religion and diversity and tolerance for those who do things differently. I have no problem with a woman wearing a burqa as long as she freely chose to do it.

Nonsense - there are many things that “bother” me, and that I view negatively, that I would not want to see banned. Heck, Christianity “bothers” me, but I would never suggest banning it. Both are protected by religious freedom, however kooky I might consider them, and I never would suggest disallowing either (except for adjustments in certain security-related situations, such as boarding a plane or taking a final exam).

Just what kind of adjustments are you talking about?

Usually an accomodation is provided, such as having a female security officer confirm the woman’s face in a private room. At some universities, when they take an exam, their identity is checked by taking them into another room with a female member of staff so they can lift their veil.

Having said that, I still feel that it is somewhat insulting to wear a burqa on a college campus. Colleges are supposed to be about opening oneself, sharing, critical thinking… closing oneself off from all direct interaction, especially since it is just one gender doing it (and one gender with whom they cannot interact), seems anathema to a basic tenant of higher education.

How does wearing a burqa equate to closing oneself off from all direct interaction? Burqas don’t prevent conversation. If Colleges are supposed to be about opening oneself, then be open to those who dress differently than you.

In many cases, the point of the burqa is to eliminate direct interaction with any men who aren’t the husband.

I’m not proposing any policy, just sharing my impression. Perhaps my view will change over time, although that usually requires some sort of discourse, and it is difficult for such discourse to occur since I’m a man and their religion doesn’t allow them to interact with me (which also seems anathema to higher education).

I wasn’t aware that their religion barred them from talking with non-Muslims. If so, how do they ask the professors any questions?

It doesn’t bar interaction with non-muslims. It bars interaction with men. As for your last question, that is exactly my point… and you can extend that to interacting with male students in the same classroom. Many classroom experiences are supposed to be interactive and include group work with diverse students. I think this should apply to everyone. Religious beliefs that bar interacting with certain groups (or genders) are in my opinion inconsistent with the college experience.

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time
Post link

TV’s Frink said:

moviefreakedmind said:

http://www.dailywire.com/news/13421/swedish-first-feminist-government-wears-hijab-iran-ben-shapiro#exit-modal

So much for female empowerment.

Yeah, I’m not a fan of that, however any chance I had of reading the full article ended when I got to

fighting for the ability to kill babies in the womb at any stage of pregnancy.

That’s a Ben Shapiro staple. That aside, it’s a good example of how the Swedish government is full of crap on women’s rights.

The Person in Question

Author
Time
Post link

moviefreakedmind said:

TV’s Frink said:

moviefreakedmind said:

http://www.dailywire.com/news/13421/swedish-first-feminist-government-wears-hijab-iran-ben-shapiro#exit-modal

So much for female empowerment.

Yeah, I’m not a fan of that, however any chance I had of reading the full article ended when I got to

fighting for the ability to kill babies in the womb at any stage of pregnancy.

That’s a Ben Shapiro staple. That aside, it’s a good example of how the Swedish government is full of crap on women’s rights.

Puggo has made some posts that argue otherwise and I’m inclined to side with him. His position is certainly better argued than “full of crap.”

Author
Time
Post link

TV’s Frink said:

moviefreakedmind said:

TV’s Frink said:

moviefreakedmind said:

http://www.dailywire.com/news/13421/swedish-first-feminist-government-wears-hijab-iran-ben-shapiro#exit-modal

So much for female empowerment.

Yeah, I’m not a fan of that, however any chance I had of reading the full article ended when I got to

fighting for the ability to kill babies in the womb at any stage of pregnancy.

That’s a Ben Shapiro staple. That aside, it’s a good example of how the Swedish government is full of crap on women’s rights.

Puggo has made some posts that argue otherwise and I’m inclined to side with him. His position is certainly better argued than “full of crap.”

The scientific method (of which I am a fan) assures that at any given time I may indeed be “full of crap”. 😃

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link

Situation 1: The US President uses a military weapon like say, “a Nuclear weapon” on the Russians but the National Security Adviser secretly telephones Moscow to tell them how to neutralise the weapon… then lies about it. That’s treason right?

Situation 2: The US President uses a political weapon like say, “Sanctions” on the Russians but the National Security Adviser secretly telephones Moscow to tell them he will neutralise the sanctions… then lies about it. Is that treason too?

(Partly joking)

VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.

Author
Time
Post link

If, in your second story, the President conceals the fact that the National Security Adviser did this, that might also be treason . . .

Author
Time
Post link

She seemed to indicate that someone else was tweeting using her account??? How was that allowed to happen?

Author
Time
Post link

She’s lying. As usual.

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/us/politics/russia-intelligence-communications-trump.html

Phone records and intercepted calls show that members of Donald J. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election, according to four current and former American officials.

American law enforcement and intelligence agencies intercepted the communications around the same time that they were discovering evidence that Russia was trying to disrupt the presidential election by hacking into the Democratic National Committee, three of the officials said. The intelligence agencies then sought to learn whether the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians on the hacking or other efforts to influence the election.

The officials interviewed in recent weeks said that, so far, they had seen no evidence of such cooperation.

But the intercepts alarmed American intelligence and law enforcement agencies, in part because of the amount of contact that was occurring while Mr. Trump was speaking glowingly about the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin. At one point last summer, Mr. Trump said at a campaign event that he hoped Russian intelligence services had stolen Hillary Clinton’s emails and would make them public.

…Oh.

Keep Circulating the Tapes.

END OF LINE

(It hasn’t happened yet)