I don't think I've started a thread over here for, well, ever, but this is one of those stories that's funny until you realise that these people are running the country.
The basic gist of this story is that the Republicans wanted to create a law saying that it would be illegal for a non-guardian to transport a minor across state lines for the purposes of an abortion. The Democrats then wanted to pass some ammendments along the lines of "it doesn't apply to taxi drivers", or "this doesn't apply to grandparents". The Republicans shot down this obviously crazy talk, and then ever so slightly rewrote what was originally proposed.
For example, one of the original proposals was:
quote:A Nadler amendment to exempt a grandparent or adult sibling from the criminal and civil provisions in the bill (no 12-19)
This was ever so slightly changed to:
quote:Mr. Nadler offered an amendment that would have exempted sexual predators from prosecution under the bill if they were grandparents or adult siblings of a minor. By a roll call vote of 12 yeas to 19 nays, the amendment was defeated.
They're all like this. Every ammendment has had the words "sexual predators" stuck in. It's just so blatant and childish and pathetic that it's funny, until you realise that these people are running the most powerful country in the world. And then you cry yourself to sleep at night.
(I miss Rob's insights into stuff like this.)
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
I don't.
("Sexual predator" is the best euphemism for "student" ever.)
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I forgot the sarcastic remarks around "insights". We haven't even got Omega to rely on any more for crazy talk.
Posted by Nim' (Member # 205) on :
I'll run the risk of "spanking" the proverbial "gimp" and ask, where does that saying come from? "The lions, the tigers, the bears, oh my"? I remember hearing it from Gary Busey in a movie, where does it come from? I...I hate it.
As for my post breaking file, Busey did say it in "Predator 2" no less, so I'm technically in the clear.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
The Wizard of Oz (1939)
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
All part of the Republican's agenda to make all abortions logistically impossible.
Ten bucks says that any parent actually helping their child get an abortion would be declared "unfit" by HRS.
Man, even if there are two democrat presidents after Bush, there's no way they'll be able to un-fuck our country.
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
So, if an 19 year old knocks up your 12 year old daughter and transports her across state lines for an abortion without you knowing about either events, that is OK?
What they are aiming at is preventing some FemiNazis Activist School Nurse from taking your daughter from school and getting her little "problem" fixed without you having any say or knowledge of the matter. That would also be the Social Agent who would have handed her condoms a few months earlier telling her that she would be "protected" even though there is a 10% failure rate. Never mind the psychological implications that will ensue later of having killed your unborn kid. Who deals with the guilt? Certainly not the Nurse. Who will get blamed by the psychologists? Oh, yeah....its the parents' fault.
I also certainly wouldn't want any child of mine calling up any of my wacko relatives for "advice" and "help". And then who validates who "Uncle Chester" really is? People talk about choice, but the moment a woman spreads her legs she HAS made her choice.
A parent has the right to know what a minor is doing or is having done to them. Afterall, the state will hold them responsible if the kid is out vandalizing property or skipping school.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
Wow. Someone seriously using "FemiNazis Activist School Nurse". Wonders will never cease.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by WizArtist II: So, if an 19 year old knocks up your 12 year old daughter and transports her across state lines for an abortion without you knowing about either events, that is OK?
No. Likewise, if Ghandi comes back from the dead and impregnates yoro 5 year old son who then gives birth to an army of mutated goldfish , that is also not okay. It's also as relevent as your point.
I wasn't talking about whether the law is right or not. I was talking about the fact that the Republicans, completely off their own back, stuck the word "sexual predators" in the middle of a proposal simply because they didn't like it. That's childish at best, and grossely irresponsible at worst.
(In any event, while your family may be "parents good, other relatives wacko", there are more than enough other families where the reverse is true.)
(Also, no-one has ever claimed in the history of all time that condoms have a 100% success rate. They put it on the packet, for pete's sake.)
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Republicans in my own state have proposed a new law calling for new standards of cleanliness in all abortion clinics- under pain of their being immeadeately closed down.
These new standards sound smart....untill you find out that the standards are higher than in a hospital and that a clinic can be closed for up to 48 hours for a "unannounced inspection" of the premises.
So...are they truly cleanliness freaks or is it possibly harassment on Governor Bush's part to show his contributors in the Moral Majority which side he's on?
These new "cleanliness safety sandards" (strangely enough) dont apply to anything except abortion clinics.
I find it so ironic that most of the "concerned parents" so outraged that a minor could have an abortion, likely dont know any of their kids friends' names or even the names of their teachers.
...and no, a woman does not choose to become pregnant "the moment a woman spreads her legs".
What a numb-fuck thing to say.
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon:
...and no, a woman does not choose to become pregnant "the moment a woman spreads her legs".
NO, what I was saying is that she choosed the POTENTIAL to end up pregnant. It's a possible consequence of an action. If you go driving down the highway doing 90 mph, you MIGHT get pulled over for speeding, another consequence of a risky choice.
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: [QUOTE]
I wasn't talking about whether the law is right or not. I was talking about the fact that the Republicans, completely off their own back, stuck the word "sexual predators" in the middle of a proposal simply because they didn't like it. That's childish at best, and grossely irresponsible at worst.
I agree with that sentiment. What irritates me is that social agendas on both sides have become more important than the society these elected officials are supposed to represent. It seems that this generation's whole "In YO Face" attitude has eroded most of the sensibilities of ALL sides. Makes you wonder how God can STILL not drop the big asteroid on this planet and start over.
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
quote:Originally posted by Siegfried: Wow. Someone seriously using "FemiNazis Activist School Nurse". Wonders will never cease.
You didn't have the freaking "Little Dutch Boy" school nurse I had my freshman and sophomore years. She would've made Stalin AND Hitler cower. (And not just because she hated anyone who was, in HER words "Cursed with a Y chromosome")
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by WizArtist II: If you go driving down the highway doing 90 mph, you MIGHT get pulled over for speeding, another consequence of a risky choice.
And if you walk out of your house you might get stabbed to death by an angry clown. What's your point? That because sex is only about pregnencies in the eyes of normal people that anyone who gets pregnent as a result of having sex deserved it?
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
What I'm saying is if you play with fire, you WILL eventually get burned. So if you are UNPREPARED to get burned. DON'T PLAY WITH FIRE.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Does that mean you're afraid of fire...or girls? Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
Wiz: So you're saying that people should be prepared with condoms, birth control pills, and abortion clinics?
Ok then Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Either that, or we should never drive a car ever again.
Or rather, we should NEVER drive a CAR ever AGAIN.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
You didn't have the freaking "Little Dutch Boy" school nurse I had my freshman and sophomore years.
Aww, no wonder little Wizzy is so screwed up... he's been kept under the thumbs of dominant women all his life. B)
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I shall call him Waylon.
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
So is the concensus then that you should be able to do whatever you want with no regard for the consequences those actions bring upon yourself, your environment, and society?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
It's the consequences to oneself that make the right to choose (or not) an abortion central.
It obviously affects socirty as well, but a free society can not choose to stimy a person's decision as to their physical condition.
To allow that is to open the floodgates for others to tell you (based on their religous/moral beliefs) what treatment you must undertake for illness as well (as no right-to-lifer would allow you to -for example- forego treatment of a critical condition).
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
Yes. And a minor is not at a point to properly assess the ramifications of those decisions. It is the parent's responsibility to protect a minor from making self-destructive choices until they reach that point of competency, not an outsider.
And there is a point to a person's self-destructive behaviour where the state DOES step in and "Stimy" their decisions. It's Adult Protective Services, and if you go 5150 (suicidal behaviour) they will put you where you can NOT harm yourself.
And, really, the basis of Western Society was set forth in RELIGIOUS TENETS based on the Judeo-Christian model. But like most "religious" aspects, too often the letter of the law is perverted to fit the needs regardless of what the spirit of the law was there to protect.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"So is the concensus then that you should be able to do whatever you want with no regard for the consequences those actions bring upon yourself, your environment, and society?"
Since we're playing at silly extremes... Yes. Yes, that's exactly the consensus.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Wiz, sex is not "self destructive behavior", no matter how traumatized yuo were by your school nurse.
Thus, the government should not restrict the choices that stem from sexual activity.
I agree that parents of minors should be involved in the decisions of their child, but the choice (minor or not) to have a child must ultimately rest with the wishes of the woman having it.
It's notable that rich white men are the ones that propose the most restrictive leglislation over a woman's right to choose.
As though it affects them directly somehow.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Well, to be fair, it probably does affect them. Often enough, they're probably the fathers. But, then, you'd think they'd be happy for the "evidence" to go away.
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Wiz, sex is not "self destructive behavior", no matter how traumatized yuo were by your school nurse.
I never said it was, I'm referring to individuals that will do the horizontal lambada with anything that happens to still be breathing and then expect there to be no repercussions for their actions.
And to be truthful about Die Nurse, I gave her as much hell back as she gave me. I did the same to a History Professor in college who decreed that everything that ever happened, occured because of a woman. She thought I was a Male Chauvanist Pig, and I returned her compliment by calling her a Female Communist Sow. Ironicly, she was offended by my remarks, but hers were "OK".
Can't have it both ways.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"I never said it was, I'm referring to individuals that will do the horizontal lambada with anything that happens to still be breathing and then expect there to be no repercussions for their actions."
So, what about the people who have sex selectively, but still get pregnant?
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
Like Wiz said, they have to be PREPARED with access to abortion clinics and money to pay for medical treatment. Keep up Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
But if the powers that be make it all but impossible for an abortion to be an option, then things go back to the pre Ro Vs. Wade america where abortion was a stigma and illegeal abortions (often dangerous) are the only solution for some women.
See my post on Florida's proposed (about to pass!) leglislation.
Posted by Bones McCoy (Member # 1480) on :
Wiz:
"What I'm saying is if you play with fire, you WILL eventually get burned. So if you are UNPREPARED to get burned. DON'T PLAY WITH FIRE."
That's very enlightened. Have you ever considered it might not BE someone's choice to be... raped perhaps? Then you have this guy's kid, cos you weren't allowed to decide the fate of your own body. Oh, and as for your condom comment: I live in a country where the AIDS pandemic is threatening to wipe out an entire generation. Now, what do you think God wants? A bunch of 'moral' people, or a bunch of dead ones?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Uh, aren't your two options, in this case, actually the same thing?
Or, wait. I'm thinking of the Catholic Church's position on birth control, but I guess here we're talking about abstinence?
Posted by Home Decor and Gardening (Member # 239) on :
No right-thinking legistlator, regardless of intent, will ever stymie a successful flurry of blows to an unsuspecting abdomen.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
When did you pop back up out of the woodwork?
Posted by Not Invented Here (Member # 1606) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: It's notable that rich white men are the ones that propose the most restrictive leglislation over a woman's right to choose.
As though it affects them directly somehow.
Well it does effect them, collectively. These same rich white men depend on a large source of cheap labour for their collective wealth. The more unwanted babies that are born, often forcing the mother into some kind poverty, the more people there are willing to work for less than a dollar an hour just to survive. I doubt that most of these men have made that conscious leap, but I think they're group sub-conscious certainly has. The great majority of Republican legislation can be seen as a way to increase the cheap labour pool, from extending the H1-B (Did I get that right? I actually live in the UK) Visa programme to neutering big unions to advocating religious fundamentalism.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)