Respect for Marriage Act makes Congresswoman cry real tears.

[Father Heathen]

No women didn't lose their rights.

There are states that still allow it.

Stop touting half truths.

Then why do you whine about bag bans, cops detaining mentally ill people who pose a threat to themselves or others, etc. since other states don't so that? Sac up and explain.

 

[stvdv]

It's not crazy. Like the thoughts amd ideas of Klansmen. Criticizing their thoughts and ideas is the proper way to handle it because their ideas do not deserve to be freely aired unopposed and unchallenged.

SO
You can belittle(criticize) my beliefs
BUT
I can't reply(criticize) "belittling is crazy"?

That is hypocritical

Note: I only talk about beliefs, not actions

 

[Shadow Wolf]

SO
You can belittle(criticize) my beliefs
BUT
I can't reply(criticize) "belittling is crazy"?

That is hypocritical

Note: I only talk about beliefs, not actions

Yes, I too am talking about beliefs. Sometimes even beliefs deserve harsh criticism. That's why I used the Klan as an example because ideas of racial superiority and inferiority should be challenged, called out and made to feel unwelcomed and not tolerated. They, as well as Nazis, Skinheads and the like, offer an easy example of when it is appropriate to ridicule and challenge beliefs.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I am in a position where people complain if I don't acknowledge/accept all marriages. If I could choose, I would choose to ignore some of them totally, but people don't allow me to "give a rat's tiny hiney who they marry or not". This is why I think it is ridiculously stupid to blame me for caring about it, when at the same time I am demanded to care about it.

Wait - I get it. This is about your sense of entitlement.

You think you're entitled to be regarded positively by others, even if you express viewpoints that those other people find objectionable.

This isn't how the world works.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Then why do you whine about bag bans, cops detaining mentally ill people who pose a threat to themselves or others, etc. since other states don't so that? Sac up and explain.

All that shows is that Democrats are actually hypocritical in just about everything they do.

You whine and moan about abortion, I do the same with issues that are also a threat for freedoms of choice and free movement for Americans.

Essentially we are both whining about the exact same things that are plummeting this country farther and farther down the freedom index.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Because I hear them.

Yeah, so? I hear plenty, but debating them is strictly for entertainment value.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Why tell it at all, if you don't want some people to care about it?

Because some people matter, and we want them to care.

 

[stvdv]

Yes, I too am talking about beliefs. Sometimes even beliefs deserve harsh criticism. That's why I used the Klan as an example because ideas of racial superiority and inferiority should be challenged, called out and made to feel unwelcomed and not tolerated. They, as well as Nazis, Skinheads and the like, offer an easy example of when it is appropriate to ridicule and challenge beliefs.

As long as they just have beliefs (thoughts) there is no problem. A judge can do nothing.

When they open their mouth or act (conspire etc) then I agree with you, you can criticize if their words, actions are "bad". Not before

 

[TLK Valentine]

No women didn't lose their rights.

There are states that still allow it.

So women only lost their rights in some states.

Better?

 

[Guitar's Cry]

So women only lost their rights in some states.

Better?

Or, there are American women that lack rights.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

As long as they just have beliefs (thoughts) there is no problem. A judge can do nothing.

There is a problem when someone believes in racial supremacy. A judge can't do anything because a judge deals with the law amd it's not illegal in America to be a racial supremacist. But others, people like you and me, can and should do something about it by challenging hateful ideas. Even if you just know someone is a Klansman, call it out. If we do nothing because it's a belief then the poison can more readily and easily spread.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So women only lost their rights in some states.

Better?

They lost a right at the federal level. Don't accept the idea it's anything less than that. They might end up feeling justified because it doesn't effect all 50 states, just the ones filled with lots of Christians and Republicans (and they do have a religious text that upfront does not support, condone, promote or allow individual liberty)who want to dictate healthcare and decide for themselves what a woman needs.

 

[TLK Valentine]

There is a problem when someone believes in racial supremacy. A judge can't do anything because a judge deals with the law amd it's not illegal in America to be a racial supremacist. But others, people like you and me, can and should do something about it by challenging hateful ideas. Even if you just know someone is a Klansman, call it out. If we do nothing because it's a belief then the poison can more readily and easily spread.

We can challenge hateful ideas by hitting them where it hurts -- in the wallet.

Since money = speech (according to Citizens United), then where and how we choose to spend our money is how we choose to speak.

The Far Right decries it as "cancel culture," but what other options are left to us?

 

[TLK Valentine]

They lost a right at the federal level. Don't accept the idea it's anything less than that.

Not less at all, but so much more, when the red states stepped up and took it away at the state level... as expected.

They might end up feeling justified because it doesn't effect all 50 states, just the ones filled with lots of Christians and Republicans (and they do have a religious text that upfront does not support, condone, promote or allow individual liberty)who want to dictate healthcare and decide for themselves what a woman needs.

Only a fool would assume it would end there.

In fact, they already tipped their hand... The federal abortion ban bill is here — and it has some Republicans stunned

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Only a fool would assume it would end there.

Yup. It's like people who foolishly proclaimed the struggle for gay rights was over with Obergefel v Hodges.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

We can challenge hateful ideas by hitting them where it hurts -- in the wallet.

Ok, so how do you do this with the Klan? How do you do this with Focus on the Family? How do you do it with Scientology?
The idea that money will take of everything is a failed neo-Liberal concept. Terrible companies and people have no shortage of money while those working towards good causes have to make calls for donations.
No, you don't do it by spending or not spending (despite Milton's claim spending money is not Democracy) but by actually challenging things. Such as, I am willing to wager Daryl Davis has pulled more people out of the Klan by talking to them than all his critics combined. Myself, I'm prone to Socratic questioning or an upfront verbal assault. There's lots of ways to do, but it does require interacting with people.

 

[Shaul]

Redundant, not symbolic.

And it would not be redundant if Obergefell v. Hodges were overturned.

IMO, this bill is the act of a government that got caught with its pants down on the overturning of Roe v. Wade and is looking to put up some bulwarks about something similar happening on the issue of marriage.

"If". That's a big if. It also makes little sense since the Supreme Court could overturn this law as well as Obergefell v. Hodges too.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Yup. It's like people who foolishly proclaimed the struggle for gay rights was over with Obergefel v Hodges.

...or that it's over now, with Biden signing the Respect for Marriage Act into law.

We win the battles for freedom and equality, but the war goes on... the enemies simply grow more desperate.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Ok, so how do you do this with the Klan? How do you do this with Focus on the Family? How do you do it with Scientology?
The idea that money will take of everything is a failed neo-Liberal concept. Terrible companies and people have no shortage of money while those working towards good causes have to make calls for donations.
No, you don't do it by spending or not spending (despite Milton's claim spending money is not Democracy) but by actually challenging things. Such as, I am willing to wager Daryl Davis has pulled more people out of the Klan by talking to them than all his critics combined. Myself, I'm prone to Socratic questioning or an upfront verbal assault. There's lots of ways to do, but it does require interacting with people.

I didn't claim it was a universal solution... but it's a useful tool. And it must be an effective one, or else why would people hate it so?

The kind of direct challenging you're talking about is also useful. The trick, as always, is to recognize the right tool for the job.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

"If". That's a big if. It also makes little sense since the Supreme Court could overturn this law as well as Obergefell v. Hodges too.

On what grounds?