Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Invisusira's playground

Moderators: Aergis, Invisusira

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Nooska » Thu Jul 04, 2013 3:08 am

Doesn't SCUS have the power to take up cases on it's own initiative? Or does it really have to wait for a case to make its way to SCUS?
Main Characters:
Nooska, Blood Elf BM/SV Hunter on Argent Dawn (EU)
Morosin, Bloody freezing orc death knight on Argent Dawn (EU)
Niisca, Shady forsaken "priest" on Argent Dawn (EU)

Keeper Emeritus of the BM hunters guide on Elitist Jerks and the wowhead version untill patch 5.3.
User avatar
Nooska
 
Posts: 1525
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:55 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fridmarr » Thu Jul 04, 2013 9:24 am

Nooska wrote:Doesn't SCUS have the power to take up cases on it's own initiative? Or does it really have to wait for a case to make its way to SCUS?
They do have the power, but typically don't use it. That said, a law doesn't have to reach the Supreme court to be thrown out. If a lower circuit court throws it out, then for that jurisdiction it's thrown out, and other circuits will inevitably follow, so what typically happens in that case is that the bill's supporters try to escalate the case up the chain, not the people trying to throw it out.

fuzzygeek wrote:
Sabindeus wrote:
fuzzygeek wrote:Should women be left out of men's issues legislation?

Such as?

Does it matter?

Indeed, it's a silly idea for almost any legislation. It's even more silly in this case because it's not allowing representation for the babies who are being killed. Besides, as I've pointed out repeatedly, Klaud is a total hypocrite on this issue since he is also in favor of telling a woman what to do with her uterus post 24 weeks gestation.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 9667
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby aureon » Thu Jul 04, 2013 9:38 am

Actually, Klaud's was an opinion, and he did not want to force it as law /sigh
User avatar
aureon
 
Posts: 497
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 4:41 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Thu Jul 04, 2013 10:11 am

I can see where Fridmarr is coming from as I've mentioned that I find abortion iffy on the pregnancy stages where the product is viable. So yeah, I guess I am a hypocrite on that part.

On the other hand, not sure if I am a hypocrite on the opinion that actual abortion legislation should be in the hand of women and not old white rich dudes (which is a term he has bristled at in the past -- and which I find amusing).

I think my opinion on abortion itself is irrelevant in the end, but not on who should be in charge of the legislation.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11141
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fridmarr » Thu Jul 04, 2013 10:23 am

Yeah I asked you specifically if they should be illegal at any point and you said at viability. Yes, I "bristle" at racist and sexist remarks...go figure.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 9667
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Thu Jul 04, 2013 10:45 am

My stance on when it should be illegal is irrelevant because I should not be in charge of determining the laws on abortion. Women with medical and scientific degrees should.

And, unless I'm mistaken, the majority if the people trumpeting for limiting abortion, and in charge of legislation, are people that are old, white, rich and male.

Example:
Dewhurst? White, Rich, Male, Old.
Perry? White, Rich, Male, Old.

Not sure if calling a duck a duck is racist.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11141
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fridmarr » Thu Jul 04, 2013 11:18 am

Klaudandus wrote:My stance on when it should be illegal is irrelevant because I should not be in charge of determining the laws on abortion. Women with medical and scientific degrees should.

And, unless I'm mistaken, the majority if the people trumpeting for limiting abortion, and in charge of legislation, are people that are old, white, rich and male.

Example:
Dewhurst? White, Rich, Male, Old.
Perry? White, Rich, Male, Old.

Not sure if calling a duck a duck is racist.


Actually something like 70% of the population wants abortion limited into the second trimester (this particular legislation kicks in at 20 weeks) and it goes up from there.

However, to your specific point. You aren't merely saying that Perry is an old, rich, white man, you are saying his opinion shouldn't count because he's a rich, old, white man, big difference.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 9667
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Thu Jul 04, 2013 11:28 am

I'm not the one that is discounting his opinion. They're the ones discounting the opinion of women. They're the ones with the uterus after all.

I'd say when it comes to these kind of issues, they should listen to the people affected by it to begin with.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11141
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fridmarr » Thu Jul 04, 2013 11:37 am

By saying he shouldn't have a vote based on his gender, you are.

The impetus behind this legislation is some controversial research indicating that the baby can feel pain around 20 weeks. I don't think there's any reason to believe having a uterus makes someone more qualified in determining biologic attributes of a fetus. The logic around the whole uterus thing is a red herring and always has been.

You keep saying the "people affected" but keep ignoring the babies.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 9667
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Thu Jul 04, 2013 11:50 am

There needs to be more conclusive data on that before going all knee-jerky about it.

The problem is not just abortion itself, some are going beyond that and trying to make miscarriages and stillbirths a criminal offense.

http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/ ... ty-georgia
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/0 ... to-police/
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... nslaughter

Obligatory motherjones/thinkprogress grain-of-salt aside, I still see men being the ones pushing for this kind of stuff on women.

And threading back into abortion. Again, it should be something in the hands of women to push for anything relating to abortion and its legislation.

As it is, it would be like women pushing for legislation for what we can or cannot do with our testes.

Not sure how I ignore the baby though as you called me hypocrite for saying I personally feel that abortion should be restricted once the product is viable.


All things aside, I want to make things clear -- I got no animosity towards you. I love debating and I can treat people equally nice regardless even if we strongly disagree on certain philosophical points.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11141
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Snake-Aes » Thu Jul 04, 2013 11:52 am

That does go back to defining what is a person
Klaudandus wrote:As it is, it would be like women pushing for legislation for what we can or cannot do with our testes.
This particular logic isn't very useful, because men aren't in control of their testicles no more than a woman is in control of her uterus.
It's all a set of biological functions over which no one really has control. So even before questioning the validity of discriminating votes you have to question the validity of the logic itself.
Image
I am not allowed to seduce the abyssal's lunar mate.
User avatar
Snake-Aes
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 15540
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 3:15 am
Location: Thorns

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Thu Jul 04, 2013 11:55 am

Snake-Aes wrote:That does go back to defining what is a person
Klaudandus wrote:As it is, it would be like women pushing for legislation for what we can or cannot do with our testes.
This particular logic isn't very useful, because men aren't in control of their testicles no more than a woman is in control of their uterus.
It's all a set of biological functions over which no one really has control. So even before questioning the validity of discriminating votes you have to question the validity of the logic itself.


Touche.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11141
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fridmarr » Thu Jul 04, 2013 1:16 pm

Klaud, you are all over the place, playing multiple sides of the same argument...
When asked at what point you'd make abortion illegal you said:
Klaudandus wrote:Once past the point of no return -- AKA -- viability

Now you say:
Klaudandus wrote:My stance on when it should be illegal is irrelevant because I should not be in charge of determining the laws on abortion. Women with medical and scientific degrees should.

But then try to deflect criticism of that position, which ignores the fetus, by falling back to your previous position:
Klaudandus wrote:Not sure how I ignore the baby though as you called me hypocrite for saying I personally feel that abortion should be restricted once the product is viable.
You've got to pick one.

Your summary of the links you posted is intellectually dishonest, and that's even beyond the spin that the articles themselves are using. There is zero chance that a miscarriage will be crime, but purposely or negligently causing a "miscarriage" of a near term baby is an entirely different matter. To equate those for a political point is some really sick spin.

On the opposite end of the spectrum there was a woman (who had a previous criminal record) arrested and convicted for manslaughter after stabbing her boyfriend. She was attempting to defend her baby, as she was pregnant and he was purposely punching her in the stomach in an attempt to abort it. Sadly, she was not allowed to mention that she was defending her baby in court, the judge had ruled that the fetus being a non a person is not allowed such a defense, so the jury ruled that her use of force was not warranted. I believe she got a higher court to overturn her conviction later. I only bring this up to point out that it would be equally unfair for me to suggest that judges are trying criminalize women who protect their unborn without full context, as it is to suggest that legislators are seriously trying to make miscarriages illegal without the full context.

All of this though is pretty irrelevant to whether or not only women should be allowed to have a say in abortion legislation. It's merely a distracting digression.

Klaudandus wrote:There needs to be more conclusive data on that before going all knee-jerky about it.
That's a great argument, too bad you chose instead to attack him based on his age, wealth, race, and gender instead of on the basis of his argument. Look, I get that you may not have been aware of the premise of the legislation, the main stream media rarely mentioned it (for obvious reasons), but discounting his opinion because he's an old, rich, white, dude is pretty sad, and trying to reflect that back on him to suggest he's ignoring women is even worse. If you want to disagree with the research or the implementation of that into law great! Let's just do that instead of the whole sexist, racist thing.

Kluadandus wrote:All things aside, I want to make things clear -- I got no animosity towards you. I love debating and I can treat people equally nice regardless even if we strongly disagree on certain philosophical points.
We've covered this a few times in this thread, but you're right to bring it up again. Political disagreements are just that, particularly on an internet forum. There are no ill feelings or loss of respect involved, people are obviously going to disagree on sensitive issues, or they wouldn't be sensitive. If we can't have these discussions without getting angry or personal, then we are lost.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 9667
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Thu Jul 04, 2013 4:16 pm

Not sure what's so strange about me saying when I think abortion should be illegal... when I clearly state that I should not be in charge of deciding when it should be legal or illegal -- Cuz I clearly say that such legislation should be in the hands of women in the first place -- therefore making my own personal opinion moot.

If a bunch of medical women say that abortion should be limited to the first 20 weeks, then I'll shut up, cuz at least its something brought up by women.

However, seeing the Wendy Davis filibuster, I guess its pretty safe to assume its something women do not want.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11141
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fridmarr » Thu Jul 04, 2013 4:27 pm

Klaudandus wrote:Not sure what's so strange about me saying when I think abortion should be illegal... when I clearly state that I should not be in charge of deciding when it should be legal or illegal -- Cuz I clearly say that such legislation should be in the hands of women in the first place -- therefore making my own personal opinion moot.

If a bunch of medical women say that abortion should be limited to the first 20 weeks, then I'll shut up, cuz at least its something brought up by women.

However, seeing the Wendy Davis filibuster, I guess its pretty safe to assume its something women do not want.

Actually plenty do. I'm sure most women don't know who Wendy Davis is.

The strange part is then trying use the third item I posted, that you didn't mention in this post. You believe women should have sole say (now it's only medical women, which is making less and less sense), based on the premise that the legislation only affects them, ignoring that it also certainly affects the life being terminated.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 9667
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

PreviousNext

Return to Arkham Asylum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 380 on Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:28 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest