The States Rights Argument

[Huntn]

I reject it. It was used to start the Civil war, and repress civil rights in the South afterwards. In other words it is a mechanism to get what you want, usually bad things, that you’ll never get with a majority consensus. And besides do you want a country with a National framework of laws, or 50 little countries where you can walk free in one or be locked up in another?

The States Rights argument is in full swing today, the perfect example is the over turning of Roe v Wade. That happened after a Republican, Mitch McConnell prevented Obama from appointing a judge, so SCOTUS, under Trump could be flooded with Right Wing zealots. We could discuss the pros and cons of lifetime appointments. I recognize it’s a double edged sword when ass hats are in the position of nominating lifetime positions.

If there is a silver lining it’s that the GOP went too far, declaring a fertilized egg to have personhood rights, basically threatening in vitro fertilization, and implementing a Civil War era law to outlaw abortion. Now Republikans are scrambling to fool the voters again. “No, we really did not mean that!!”

I keep wondering why the hell the GOP still remains viable today, and I can only think we have an an above average quotion of STUPID. It also does not help that the party who is supposed to be the populists are a bit too cozy with Corporate America. This appears to be a pretty good reason that many who have roots from the disenfranchised middle class are ready to burn it all down by drinking Trump poison.

 

[Herdfan]

The States Rights argument is in full swing today, the perfect example is the over turning of Roe v Wade. That happened after a Republican, Mitch McConnell prevented Obama from appointing a judge, so SCOTUS, under Trump could be flooded with Right Wing zealots. We could discuss the pros and cons of lifetime appointments. I recognize it’s a double edged sword when ass hats are in the position of nominating lifetime positions.

Vote was 6-3. Even assuming Garland was on the court instead of Gorsuch, the vote is 5-4. Still overturned. RBG screwed the Dems. And it looks like Sotomayor may be following suit.

I keep wondering why the hell the GOP still remains viable today, and I can only think we have an an above average quotion of STUPID. It also does not help that the party who is supposed to be the populists are a bit too cozy with Corporate America. This appears to be a pretty good reason that many who have roots from the disenfranchised middle class are ready to burn it all down by drinking Trump poison.

Calling people you don't agree with STUPID is not a winning argument. Maybe someday the Dems will learn that. But hopefully not.

And the Dems are just as cozy with corporate America. The difference now is the Dems used to be the party of the working class, but have lost that to the GOP.

 

[GermanSuplex]

It's a dumb argument, a cop-out argument, because the religious crusaders will still try to ban abortion, regardless of what the state or federal governments say. And frankly, its none of your business what medical procedure someone else has. Period, end of story, next question.

People are free to feel however they want about abortion. Shame your kids, shame your wives, shame your women. I can't stop you. But you have no right to dictate someone else's physical body. Your freedom should end at shaming, not being able to prevent a woman from obtaining a medical procedure.

It's not as if republicans haven't been warned this is a losing issue. I don't know what else to say at this point.

Of course, with them not respecting the results of elections, they've carved out an easy way to protest everything; when we win, hooray, America agrees with us! And when they lose, it's "Damn, America agrees with us, but they stole the election!"

A recipe for disaster. And losses.

 

[Herdfan]

It's a dumb argument, a cop-out argument, because the religious crusaders will still try to ban abortion, regardless of what the state or federal governments say. And frankly, its none of your business what medical procedure someone else has. Period, end of story, next question.

People are free to feel however they want about abortion. Shame your kids, shame your wives, shame your women. I can't stop you. But you have no right to dictate someone else's physical body. Your freedom should end at shaming, not being able to prevent a woman from obtaining a medical procedure.

Except when it comes to having to take a vaccine I guess. The Dems absolutely would have forced this on every single person if they could have.

 

[rdrr]

Except when it comes to having to take a vaccine I guess. The Dems absolutely would have forced this on every single person if they could have.

Blame the Pope as well. We gave two people outs, Religious and Medical. Since the Pope declared the vaccine was good, about 90% of the Catholics here couldn't really argue Religious Exemption. A few found a doctor that would say they had some trumped up medical condition to get out of it. So it's not exactly true that us Dems would have forced everyone.

However... Since you opened the door to the whataboutism, the Republicans would have ALL pregnant women carry to term a birth. Even if it could cost their lives, or was a product of a rape.

 

[GermanSuplex]

Except when it comes to having to take a vaccine I guess. The Dems absolutely would have forced this on every single person if they could have.

No they haven't. Many people who refuse to get vaccinated... have successfully refused to be vaccinated.

Outlawing a medical procedure in which people as recently as this year have nearly died from not having access to is not the same as your job telling you "Get vaccinated or go work somewhere else."

Sorry, its not the same. For fack's sake, Tinder has a vaccinated/unvaccinated option - many proudly tout their unvaccinated status.

Not to mention, its amazing how the anti-vaccine crowd was a fringe minority until we had a pandemic and Trump pushed quack medicine.

 

[rdrr]

Sorry, its not the same. For fack's sake, Tinder has a vaccinated/unvaccinated option - many proudly tout their unvaccinated status.

Not sure if you meant to put these four words together for a pun or not?

 

[GermanSuplex]

Not sure if you meant to put these four words together for a pun or not?

Darn it, it was unintentional. I'd love to take credit!

 

[Yoused]

This is what states' rights gets you

Happy Give-up Day​

 

[leman]

And the Dems are just as cozy with corporate America. The difference now is the Dems used to be the party of the working class, but have lost that to the GOP.

I do not understand this. Pretty much any initiative I see from GOP protects financial magnates and screws over the working class. Maybe I am missing something, being an outsider?

Except when it comes to having to take a vaccine I guess. The Dems absolutely would have forced this on every single person if they could have.

Baseless statement (I don't remember any popular legal initiatives that would make vaccines mandatory), but let's go with. This is a difference between public safety and individual freedom. Surely Republicans would agree that acts that directly endanger the public should be regulated, no? Or is the Republican Party turning into the Anarchist Party? Like, do republicans oppose things like driving licenses? Abortions on the other hand are entirely private matter and do not affect the public safety in any way. If you say you are pro liberty, what type of initiative would make more sense for you to support? One that suppresses individual freedom to protect the public or one that suppresses individual freedom because some people find it distasteful?

From my outsider perspective, it seems like many initiatives of the Republican Party are aimed at the reduction of the individual freedoms in the name of some unclear unspecified abstract values. I do not understand how these legislators can describe themselves as pro-freedom. The modern Republican Party is building an autocratic society where everything follows as single source of moral values, which is the Republican Party. That's not democracy and that's not republicanism.


P.S. Sorry that I butt into USA domestic political discussions like that, but since it looks increasingly likely that I will be moving to the States later this year I though it's time to get political ^^

 

[GermanSuplex]

That's not democracy and that's not republicanism.

It's borderline theocracy, and the right is increasingly conflating Trump with God. Not being hyperbolic.

 

[Nycturne]

I do not understand this. Pretty much any initiative I see from GOP protects financial magnates and screws over the working class. Maybe I am missing something, being an outsider?

The party is certainly trying to claim the mantle of the blue collar worker over here and has been for decades, but I haven’t seen much being done to actually help them. At least in my lifetime I saw a lot of “look at that person on welfare picking your pockets” talk while at the same time cutting taxes on those who are already wealthy. Then complaining that the lowered tax revenue can’t cover programs meant to help blue collar workers (social security being a big one). At least since the 80s, the big plan was “make the lives of the rich easier, and that tide will lift all boats”, but it never materialized. But now the rhetoric is that we need more of the big plan, and it’s the fault of Democrats that it didn’t lift the boats of the blue collar worker.

It smacks of a sort of economic religion. It couldn’t have been that the policy failed as the policy is an axiom, it must have been sabotage by the other side.

Baseless statement (I don't remember any popular legal initiatives that would make vaccines mandatory), but let's go with. This is a difference between public safety and individual freedom. Surely Republicans would agree that acts that directly endanger the public should be regulated, no? Or is the Republican Party turning into the Anarchist Party? Like, do republicans oppose things like driving licenses? Abortions on the other hand are entirely private matter and do not affect the public safety in any way. If you say you are pro liberty, what type of initiative would make more sense for you to support? One that suppresses individual freedom to protect the public or one that suppresses individual freedom because some people find it distasteful?

At least when I was growing up, there were vaccine requirements to get into public school that I had to meet. Nobody really batted an eye on that. But with the recent disinformation on vaccines of the last decade or so, has created a political rift where there wasn’t one.

 

[GermanSuplex]

At least when I was growing up, there were vaccine requirements to get into public school that I had to meet. Nobody really batted an eye on that. But with the recent disinformation on vaccines of the last decade or so, has created a political rift where there wasn’t one.

Basic math tells you the vast majority of people on a warpath against Dr. Fauci and the COVID vaccine have already been vaccinated, for many things, many times over. Anyone who went to public schools, worked in hospitals or who's in the military or a veteran who is protesting the vaccine are - despite my gratitude for their service - idiots.

*Back to abortion, I think this will have an impact on Trump more than he thinks. There are quite a few anti-abortion zealots, almost all of them on the right. Trump marketed himself as an outsider, but on this issue, he's proving to be nothing more than a political hack, following whichever way the wind blows. He still brags about overturning Roe, and is now trying to frame it in the context of "my goal was always to turn control over to the states", but he also says that its what the majority of Americans want, which is just his usual BS bluster. They clearly don't.

 

[Herdfan]

No they haven't. Many people who refuse to get vaccinated... have successfully refused to be vaccinated.

Outlawing a medical procedure in which people as recently as this year have nearly died from not having access to is not the same as your job telling you "Get vaccinated or go work somewhere else."

Sorry, its not the same. For fack's sake, Tinder has a vaccinated/unvaccinated option - many proudly tout their unvaccinated status.

Not to mention, its amazing how the anti-vaccine crowd was a fringe minority until we had a pandemic and Trump pushed quack medicine.

There is most certainly a subset of Dems that would have required the vaccine if they could have gotten away with it. There are posts from members on this board who posted the unvaccinated should not be allowed integrate into society.

You all may have forgotten this, but the rest of us haven't.

 

[rdrr]

There is most certainly a subset of Dems that would have required the vaccine if they could have gotten away with it. There are posts from members on this board who posted the unvaccinated should not be allowed integrate into society.

You all may have forgotten this, but the rest of us haven't.

I didn't say exactly that, but if people didn't have a legitimate medical or religious exemption (and there is some context around the latter), then I felt those people were very selfish. In the regards that it was the tool to open society back up.

 

[leman]

There is most certainly a subset of Dems that would have required the vaccine if they could have gotten away with it. There are posts from members on this board who posted the unvaccinated should not be allowed integrate into society.

You all may have forgotten this, but the rest of us haven't.

Sure, there are people with all kinds of ideas. But when exactly did Democrats actually pass a legislation that would restrict your individual freedom? While right now we have entire Republican-controlled states that restrict reproductive freedom of women and destroy lives of rape victims. Let’s argue about facts, not hypotheticals.

 

[Herdfan]

Sure, there are people with all kinds of ideas. But when exactly did Democrats actually pass a legislation that would restrict your individual freedom? While right now we have entire Republican-controlled states that restrict reproductive freedom of women and destroy lives of rape victims. Let’s argue about facts, not hypotheticals.

Some cities did mandate it for city employees and for the public to have access to certain spaces.

But as a previous post said, get vaxxed or go work somewhere else, why not just go somewhere else for an abortion.

Either my body, my choice is absolute or it isn't.

Remember, I am not opposed to abortion. I am not for it being legal 10 minutes before the baby is born, but comfortable with 20-24 weeks.

 

[leman]

Some cities did mandate it for city employees and for the public to have access to certain spaces.

It does make sense to mandate it in professions with high epidemiological risk. It’s not very different from enforcing basic hygiene standards in gastronomical professions.

But as a previous post said, get vaxxed or go work somewhere else, why not just go somewhere else for an abortion.

Republicans are literally criminalizing going somewhere else for abortion.

Remember, I am not opposed to abortion. I am not for it being legal 10 minutes before the baby is born, but comfortable with 20-24 weeks.

And that’s a very sensible position in this matter as far as I am concerned. It’s just your position is extremely at odds with the active bulk of the Republican party. Remember, I’m not criticizing your personal opinions, I am criticizing what the Republican Party says and does openly.

 

[Yoused]

that restrict reproductive freedom of women and destroy lives of rape victims

Livestock.

 

[GermanSuplex]

There is most certainly a subset of Dems that would have required the vaccine if they could have gotten away with it. There are posts from members on this board who posted the unvaccinated should not be allowed integrate into society.

You all may have forgotten this, but the rest of us haven't.

I get it, but I don't know how someone making a private healthcare decision that literally doesn't directly effect anyone else vs. someone walking around with a contagious disease are even close to the same.

My only complaint is that COVID wasn't deadlier. We are in DEEP SH*T with this mentality if we ever have a true pandemic with a virus that rots your organs as you liquid-sh*t your life away. Perhaps then we can draw a clear distinction.

As for your side not forgetting - I would have it no other way. May the most rational side win. There are also republicans who would re-institute slavery (excuse me, forced vocational training). I'm comparing what actually is and what's done, not what a fringe minority would get away with if they could. You don't have to get the vaccine if you don't want. Just like you don't have to have a driver's license, or even an ID. You may miss out on some societal events, because we as a society have decided that when a deadly virus hits and there's a cure, we want to be protected, and to be around those who are protected. You can not get vaccinated, and invite all your unvaccinated friends over, and indeed, the "state's rights" kicked in and many republican governors actively participated in promoting dangerous and deadly behavior.

Regardless, the great god above (or evolution, take your pick) decided unfairly that the female sex would carry a life. That gives me no right whatsoever to dictate to this woman what she can do with her body. Nobody went to jail for not getting jabbed - your side wants to literally lock people up for exerting medical control over their own physical bodies. Not the same.