|
Hollismason posted:Someone has to follow up on this tidbit
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 00:58 |
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Seems like the implication is that she sleeps with women/is a lesbian. quote:Hmm, I'm beginning to sense a pattern here. Come to think of it, Ann Coulter is reputed to have an unusually, er, wide-ranging sex life, too, though as far as I know it's just confined to men. Still, it doesn't exactly match the profile of an ultra-conservative.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Seems like the implication is that she sleeps with women/is a lesbian. http://ifuckedanncoulterintheasshard.blogspot.com/2005/04/farmers-market-on-fairfax-and-3rd-is.html?m=1
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
Blue Star posted:But hasn't the Religious Right already experienced complete and undeniable defeats like this before? Civil rights, Roe vs Wade, etc.? Yeah the right was completely defeated with Roe v. Wade. They definitely haven't made any sort of comeback against abortion. Nope. Not at all. Civil Rights are completely intact as well. Please pay no attention to all this smoke I'm sure nothing's burning. Jarmak posted:She's not, this is a dying cause that will result in a temper tantrum in June followed by all but a few stopping giving a poo poo shortly thereafter (just like every state has been). The generation shift on this is immense and I honestly think "gay rights" won't even be a thing (as in there will be no need) in another generation as kids these days more and more just don't give a gently caress. Remember polling shows that gay marriage has 61% support amoung republicans under 30. (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/03/10/61-of-young-republicans-favor-same-sex-marriage/) You're so naive it's almost cute. Evil Fluffy fucked around with this message at 18:32 on Apr 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
Is there anything about this & the coming period of time regarding the civil rights act? Like, in my head, there had to be a bunch of businesses post-CRA that still refused to serve black people, did they just get shut down, or carted off to jail, or what happened? How long did it take to move from direct rejection to the current status quo of just making sure it's incredibly uncomfortable to be a black person at their place of business and semi-legal discrimination via "private club" bullshit?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Yeah the right was completely defeated with Roe v. Wade. They definitely haven't made any sort of comeback against abortion. Nope. Not at all. Civil Rights are completely intact as well. Please pay no attention to all this smoke I'm sure nothing's burning. What do you think is going to happen?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:What do you think is going to happen? If you're talking about the abortion comparison, probably the same poo poo that's still happening with abortion - keep reaching for new reasons to legislatively target The Bad Thing, keep trying to manipulate the dialogue until you're no longer "banning Thing" but "protecting the people who use Thing" so you can make the people who oppose you out to be the real bad guys who don't care about the lives of the people they use for political points. I mean, I've seen it happen on abortion rights, gay rights, trans rights, even modern arguments for allowing for "Free Market" segregation ("Why should a black person not be allowed to know that the owner of that restaurant is racist? DO YOU WANT THEM TO GET POISONED, YOU REAL RACIST?")
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
Kugyou no Tenshi posted:It's things like this that make me glad I'm not a judge. I would have to bite back the urge to decline the brief on the grounds that the people delivering it to me are arguing on behalf of a third party they cannot prove they have the right to speak for. The drafter of an amicus curiae brief doesn't need standing to submit it to the Court.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 19:59
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:What do you think is going to happen? Incrementally weaken the ruling over a period of years until they will have in-effect rebanned same-sex if not do so overtly. So yeah, exactly what's happening to abortion right now. What do you think will happen? They'll just shrug their shoulders and never ever speak about it again?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
Squizzle posted:omerta kosher thunderdome P.S. I just realized that I'm a genius and the mods need to rename D&D.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
I think comparing same sex marriage to abortion is an apple to orange comparison.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Incrementally weaken the ruling over a period of years until they will have in-effect rebanned same-sex if not do so overtly. What weakenings do you think might happen?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:What weakenings do you think might happen? Let me give you a hint: Prosecuting women for miscarriages. Prosecuting women for drug use during prengancy. Prosecuting Women for attempting abortions. You tell me
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Let me give you a hint: Prosecuting women for miscarriages. Prosecuting women for drug use during prengancy. Prosecuting Women for attempting abortions. None of those things translate to gay marriage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:None of those things translate to gay marriage. No, what it translates is an overwhelming attempt by the Evangelical crowd to try to implement their religious ideals into legislation and law. But why are we explaining this to you, 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:No, what it translates is an overwhelming attempt by the Evangelical crowd to try to implement their religious ideals into legislation and law. That doesn't mean they'll succeed in it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:That doesn't mean they'll succeed in it. That doesn't matter, they have made progress getting their ideals into enforceable law that is affecting peoples REAL lives.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Yeah the right was completely defeated with Roe v. Wade. They definitely haven't made any sort of comeback against abortion. Nope. Not at all. Civil Rights are completely intact as well. Please pay no attention to all this smoke I'm sure nothing's burning. Dude abortion has polled the same for four decades while views of homosexuality have undergone a massive shift just from a few years ago. Trying to compare those two issues as if they are similar is simply ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:What weakenings do you think might happen? Not even a whole month ago: Morter posted:Oklahoma House Approves Measure Changing Marriage Licenses
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
Another brief, this time from 57 GOP members of congress http://www.washingtonblade.com/content/files/2015/04/14-556-bsac-Brief-of-57-Members-of-U.-S.-Congress.pdf quote:The petitioners’ view that every State must recognize the validity of a same-sex marriage celebrated in another State would violate fundamental principles of federalism. It would allow partners to evade the restrictions of the forum State simply by eloping to a neighboring State that lacks the same restrictions. This rule would permit each State, in effect, to project its marriage policy into all neighboring States, forcing uniformity instead of permitting federal diversity. In sum, the States’ traditional sovereignty over marriage and domestic relations plainly encompasses the authority of a State to refuse to recognize the validity of marriages that were validly enacted in other jurisdictions. This rule is “as old as the Republic.” Ted Cruz is listed first on the brief
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
Don't elope, people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:Another brief, this time from 57 GOP members of congress Wow, I mean, they went to a lot of effort for that. They could have just said "We, the undersigned, do hereby affirm: gently caress the 14th Amendment right in its ear." (Countdown until someone points out the procedural inaccuracy in my joke...) Nostalgia4Infinity posted:I think comparing same sex marriage to abortion is an apple to orange comparison. And yet a lot of the anti-SSM groups are also anti-choice groups. It may be apples and oranges if you split this hair or that one, but we're talking about political ConAgra at this point. It's largely the same people fighting on both fronts, using the same rhetoric, and there is no sane reason to not think they'll attempt TRAP-style tactics against SSM in the future. Kugyou no Tenshi fucked around with this message at 21:08 on Apr 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:Another brief, this time from 57 GOP members of congress  These people are evil.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
Yeah, just look at all the backsliding that's happened on the interracial marriage front!
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
GrumpyDoctor posted:Yeah, just look at all the backsliding that's happened on the interracial marriage front! Yup, once Loving came down the pipe, no one resisted at all, anywhere, ever. Not even symbolic gestures. Nope. Wikipedia posted:In 1967, 17 Southern states (all the former slave states plus Oklahoma) still enforced laws prohibiting marriage between whites and non-whites. Maryland repealed its law in response to the start of the proceedings at the Supreme Court. After the ruling of the Supreme Court, the remaining laws were no longer in effect. Nonetheless, it took South Carolina until 1998 and Alabama until 2000 to officially amend their states' constitutions to remove language prohibiting miscegenation. In the respective referendums, 62% of voters in South Carolina and 59% of voters in Alabama voted to remove these laws.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
It has been interesting watching how slowly SCOTUS has been unwinding same-sex marriage jurisprudence. All of the recent holdings on the issue have been in favor of expanded marriage rights for same-sex marriage, but very incrementally, with narrow, cautious holdings. Opinions have studiously avoided citing Loving, and I don't think the Court will use that opinion until it definitively overturns state laws against same-sex marriage. It probably won't be long now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
What Are some other great sites that cover LGTB rights news?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 22:03
|
|
|
Kugyou no Tenshi posted:Yup, once Loving came down the pipe, no one resisted at all, anywhere, ever. Not even symbolic gestures. Nope. There was no judicial backsliding after Loving, none at all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
TheImmigrant posted:There was no judicial backsliding after Loving, none at all. Yeah but then poo poo like this happens: http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/louisiana-police-chief-apologizes-arrests-2-gay-men-under-unenforceable-anti-sodomy-law21021 http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/south-carolina-county-sheriffs-warned-over-illegal-entrapment-gay-men190812 Note the year. There's no going back but I expect poo poo like this more often in the wake of the ruling. Political Whores fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Apr 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 22:15
|
|
|
Well then you slap the fuckers down with the judicial system. All this henny-pennying over something that might happen is pretty pathetic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
Whoa, all these things rule, I can't wait.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
It took almost four decades for loving to poll as well as gay marriage already is. Between that and the fact opposition to gay marriage from people under 30 polls about on par with the government being involved in 9/11 I'm not sure what thought process leads anyone to think this is anything like Roe v Wade.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:It took almost four decades for loving to poll as well as gay marriage already is. Between that and the fact opposition to gay marriage from people under 30 polls about on par with the government being involved in 9/11 I'm not sure what thought process leads anyone to think this is anything like Roe v Wade. Roe was a rare SCOTUS decision where the Court was way ahead of public consensus on a highly contentious social issue, and the decision probably exacerbated the divisions about it. They won't be doing anything like that in the near future.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:What do you think is going to happen? Civil War II I've been reading the freep thread recently, and it has convinced me this is the last straw. The Silent Majority has been keeping their powder dry and they're going to take back their country 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 23:48
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Civil War II Fortunately for all concerned, the effective operational range of mobility scooters is rather limited. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
Sabotage. The Big Businesses who build Rascals have gone over to the homofascists.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 23:59
|
|
|
TheImmigrant posted:Roe was a rare SCOTUS decision where the Court was way ahead of public consensus on a highly contentious social issue, and the decision probably exacerbated the divisions about it. They won't be doing anything like that in the near future. Does Brown v Board fit this definition as well? The chances of this happening seem very slight but if the court handed down a "actually, integrate schools in fact, you assholes" decision I would say they'd still be ahead of the public consensus.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
BigRed0427 posted:What Are some other great sites that cover LGTB rights news? Just click any news stories Chris Geidner tweets about.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 00:17
|
|
|
So the first time I saw "strange flesh", all I could think of was horsefucking. That's loads stranger than just sexing dudes. And then I look at the thread...
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 01:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 00:58 |
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:I think comparing same sex marriage to abortion is an apple to orange comparison. Alright, let's compare it to things like the Civil Rights Act, which Roberts will lead in killing off entirely the moment he gets a case that lets him do so and in the meanwhile he'll continue dismantling parts of it as he's already done recently to allow states to usher in a new wave of voter ID laws and other things that just happen to heavily target minorities (and poors). Or how schools have heavily re-segregated over time and in a much more effective and harder to legally challenge way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 01:06
|
|