and they call the Taliban medieval?

Food, recipes, fashion, sport, education, exercise, sexuality, travel.
User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 18858
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

That too
"I don't have dreams. Either in dreams or life."
- Bert Kibbler

liberty
Posts: 4041
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:31 pm
Location: Colonial Possession

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by liberty »

MajGenl.Meade wrote:
Wed Sep 08, 2021 10:35 am
Bicycle Bill wrote:
Wed Sep 08, 2021 7:54 am
liberty wrote:
Wed Sep 08, 2021 7:42 am
War is a bitch. The US army struck the final blow, and even some of the soldiers felt sorry for them. The army crushed them. The Comanches went from the lords of the plains to a joke in three days when the army rounded up and shot all of their horses. The Comanches had to walk to Oklahoma; in Comanche culture, only women walked.
You're evading the question, asshole.
Not only evading but making up stuff. "A joke in three days" = a war that went on for over a year. "The army rounded up and shot all of their horses" = the battle of Palo Duro, where a small segment of the Plains Indians were in camp and (indeed) lost over a thousand of their horses which (indeed) were shot to prevent recapture. Of more significance was the realization that destroying the buffalo = destroying the Plains Indians.

And of course the Comanche (and Kiowa) signed agreements to move to reservation in Oklahoma in both 1865 and 1867 but the government just couldn't get it together to make it happen - damn settlers! What is one to do? Smallpox and cholera had reduced tribes to 7,000 survivors or so before the final clearances began.

And what does any of this have to do with the matter at hand? Are you suggesting lib that pregnant women in Texas are the new Plains Indians and somehow "deserve" to be subjugated by tough white men?
No, that is not what I am saying. I am speaking for the "right to life people", to them; the pro-abortion people might as well be the savage Comanche torturing and murdering babies. I have asked my wife; she sees no different between abortionist and Nazis the only difference is the abortionist have smaller death camps.

What is the difference between partial-birth abortion and after-birth abortion?
I expected to be placed in an air force combat position such as security police, forward air control, pararescue or E.O.D. I would have liked dog handler. I had heard about the dog Nemo and was highly impressed. “SFB” is sad I didn’t end up in E.O.D.

Big RR
Posts: 12883
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by Big RR »

But "partial birth' abortion is not what we're talking about, is it? This law applies to the aborting of an embryo after around 6 weeks gestation, tissue less than a quarter inch in length with no heel to be seized or head for the Comanche to smash on the stones. If your wife equates aborting an early embryo with the holocaust, she's entitled to her opinion, but she has no right to force it upon others (anymore than anyone would have a right to force her to get an abortion). If she (or you or anyone else) are outraged by the fact that abortions are ongoing, too damn bad--the world does not exist to fit your views.


But even more, what will you do when another state creates a similar power for people to file suits and harass gun owners (or people who exercise free speech or any other individual right) and/or their aiders/abettors. This law is indefensible and a danger to all individual rights as the door has been opened. Hopefully, the courts will close it, but I am concerned that that may not.

User avatar
Bicycle Bill
Posts: 7268
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:10 pm
Location: Onalaska, Wi (suburb of La Crosse)

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by Bicycle Bill »

Big RR wrote:
Wed Sep 08, 2021 4:09 pm
This law is indefensible and a danger to all individual rights as the door has been opened. Hopefully, the courts will close it, but I am concerned that that may not.
Not only do I hope they close it, but that they then lock it, brick it up, plaster over it, and repaper the wall so that no one even knows it was ever there.
Image
-"BB"-
Yes, I suppose I could agree with you ... but then we'd both be wrong, wouldn't we?

liberty
Posts: 4041
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:31 pm
Location: Colonial Possession

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by liberty »

Big RR wrote:
Wed Sep 08, 2021 4:09 pm
But "partial birth' abortion is not what we're talking about, is it? This law applies to the aborting of an embryo after around 6 weeks gestation, tissue less than a quarter inch in length with no heel to be seized or head for the Comanche to smash on the stones. If your wife equates aborting an early embryo with the holocaust, she's entitled to her opinion, but she has no right to force it upon others (anymore than anyone would have a right to force her to get an abortion). If she (or you or anyone else) are outraged by the fact that abortions are ongoing, too damn bad--the world does not exist to fit your views.


But even more, what will you do when another state creates a similar power for people to file suits and harass gun owners (or people who exercise free speech or any other individual right) and/or their aiders/abettors. This law is indefensible and a danger to all individual rights as the door has been opened. Hopefully, the courts will close it, but I am concerned that that may not.

But even more, what will you do when another state creates a similar power for people to file suits and harass gun owners (or people who exercise free speech or any other individual right) and/or their aiders/abettors. This law is indefensible and a danger to all individual rights as the door has been opened. Hopefully, the courts will close it, but I am concerned that that may not.
[/quote]

My wife and I have not always agreed. We disagreed on abortion, and it almost destroyed our marriage. Years later, she admitted I was right; I genuinely wish I had been wrong, but we don’t always get what we want. However, she is still just as anti-abortion as she has always been.


Should Nazis be attacked and or killed?
I expected to be placed in an air force combat position such as security police, forward air control, pararescue or E.O.D. I would have liked dog handler. I had heard about the dog Nemo and was highly impressed. “SFB” is sad I didn’t end up in E.O.D.

ex-khobar Andy
Posts: 4478
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 4:16 am
Location: Louisville KY as of July 2018

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by ex-khobar Andy »

Uber and Lyft have announced that they will defend any driver who is sued for transporting a woman to an abortion provider. It's a start.

liberty
Posts: 4041
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:31 pm
Location: Colonial Possession

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by liberty »

Big RR wrote:
Wed Sep 08, 2021 4:09 pm
But "partial birth' abortion is not what we're talking about, is it? This law applies to the aborting of an embryo after around 6 weeks gestation, tissue less than a quarter inch in length with no heel to be seized or head for the Comanche to smash on the stones. If your wife equates aborting an early embryo with the holocaust, she's entitled to her opinion, but she has no right to force it upon others (anymore than anyone would have a right to force her to get an abortion). If she (or you or anyone else) are outraged by the fact that abortions are ongoing, too damn bad--the world does not exist to fit your views.


But even more, what will you do when another state creates a similar power for people to file suits and harass gun owners (or people who exercise free speech or any other individual right) and/or their aiders/abettors. This law is indefensible and a danger to all individual rights as the door has been opened. Hopefully, the courts will close it, but I am concerned that that may not.

I thought you guys liked the action of vigilantes, or is that only when three grown men attack a young volunteer security guard. The boy was attacked and forced to defend himself, and now you have charged him with murder. And then there is the giant football coach the chases down and kills a drunk white guy because the coach was insulted. The drunken man is dead, and the black football coach never served a day in jail. In both cases, they could have called the police but wanted to issue the punishment themselves. Now, all of you, tell me again how are opposed to vigilantes.
I expected to be placed in an air force combat position such as security police, forward air control, pararescue or E.O.D. I would have liked dog handler. I had heard about the dog Nemo and was highly impressed. “SFB” is sad I didn’t end up in E.O.D.

Big RR
Posts: 12883
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by Big RR »

I have no idea who "you guys" are or what you are talking about. Don't bother to explain. there's no sense in it.

Just to recap, this thread is neither about nazis nor vigilante "justice"; it is about a law that gives private citizens the right to use the courts to harass other individuals, or, more broadly, about abortion rights.

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 15530
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by BoSoxGal »

liberty wrote:
Thu Sep 09, 2021 5:52 pm
And then there is the giant football coach the chases down and kills a drunk white guy because the coach was insulted. The drunken man is dead, and the black football coach never served a day in jail. In both cases, they could have called the police but wanted to issue the punishment themselves. Now, all of you, tell me again how are opposed to vigilantes.
No, he was a basketball coach who punched - once - a highly intoxicated man who was acting like an entitled asshole and who had just busted his car window - a little bit more than an insult.

And that basketball coach lost his job, lost his fiancé, was convicted of a crime and given fines and 3 years probation (a reasonable sentence considering his history) and now faces a wrongful death suit from Szabo’s family. So his life was pretty well upended by his poor judgment that night - but he’d never have had reason to be provoked into poor judgment if Szabo hadn’t gotten drunk and behaved like a fool. Not saying he deserved to die but witnesses reported that he went out on the street and started banging on cars looking for his Uber and probably because he was so drunk he was oblivious to how hard he was banging and how obnoxious he was being, as most highly drunk people are.

I can tell you that if the roles were reversed and Szabo had punched someone once and they fell and died, and he was charged more seriously than this basketball coach, his parents would have been screeching just as much that he was an innocent, provoked by a drunk, had no intent to kill. Most bereaved/victimized people are irrational to some extent, and that is exactly why we don’t usually let them dictate the course of prosecution or punishment.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9028
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by Econoline »

No, liberals don't like the action of vigilantes. Full stop.

More-right-wing projection.
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9028
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by Econoline »

Texas star.jpg
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

Burning Petard
Posts: 3236
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Near Bear, Delaware

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by Burning Petard »

Lets try a little thought experiment. The Planned Parenthood organization strategizes to fight this Texas law by wholesale 'denial of service' (metaphorically) of the Texas court system. 1. they get a web site with all the paperwork needed to file a private lawsuit under the new Texas law.
They get a willing victim to get an 'abortion' when about seven weeks pregnant. They carefully document every step of the way to fully prove all involved (do the actual deed, aid, and abate) are without personal resources, thus judgment proof. They publish the pertinent information on that same website and invite a million or so people around the world to file the paper work in the Texas court system; Planned Parenthood even pays the fees. Note there is no requirement that the vigilante be anywhere in Texas or even in the United States. What would be the result of such a mammoth bolus in the court system? Would checks included to pay filing fees lapse and become invalid because of the delay cashing them? How many new state employees would be needed to handle the mail bags? What would that cost the Texas taxpayers?

snailgate

User avatar
Joe Guy
Posts: 12199
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:40 pm
Location: Redweird City, California

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by Joe Guy »

I assume everyone here has heard about this by now. Should be interesting....
Justice Dept. sues Texas over state's new abortion law


AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — The Justice Department on Thursday sued Texas over a new state law that bans most abortions, arguing that it was enacted “in open defiance of the Constitution."

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Texas, asks a federal judge to declare that the law is invalid, “to enjoin its enforcement, and to protect the rights that Texas has violated.”

“The act is clearly unconstitutional under long-standing Supreme Court precedent,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said at a news conference announcing the suit.

The Justice Department argues the law unlawfully infringes on the constitutional rights of women and violates the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, which says federal law supersedes state law. Federal officials are also concerned other states could enact similar laws that would “deprive their citizens of their constitutional rights," he said.

“It is settled constitutional law that ‘a State may not prohibit any woman from making the ultimate decision to terminate her pregnancy before viability,’” the lawsuit reads. “But Texas has done just that.”

The Texas law, known as SB8, prohibits abortions once medical professionals can detect cardiac activity — usually around six weeks, before some women know they’re pregnant. Courts have blocked other states from imposing similar restrictions, but Texas’ law differs significantly because it leaves enforcement to private citizens through civil lawsuits instead of criminal prosecutors.

Pressure had been mounting on the Justice Department not only from the White House – President Joe Biden has said the law is “almost un-American” – but also from Democrats in Congress, who wanted Garland to take action. Earlier this week, Garland vowed the Justice Department would step in to enforce a federal law known as the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act.

That law, commonly known as the FACE Act, normally prohibits physically obstructing access to abortion clinics by blocking entrances or threatening to use force to intimidate or interfere with someone. It also prohibits damaging property at abortion clinics and other reproductive health centers.

The lawsuit filed on Thursday seeks an immediate injunction to prohibit enforcing the law in Texas. Under the statute, someone could bring a lawsuit — even if they have no connection to the woman getting an abortion — and could be entitled to at least $10,000 in damages if they prevail in court.

“The statute deputizes all private citizens, without any showing of personal connection or injury, to serve as bounty hunters authorized to recover at least $10,000 per claim from individuals who facilitate a woman’s exercise of her constitutional rights,” Garland said. “The obvious and expressly acknowledged intention of this statutory scheme is to prevent women from exercising their constitutional rights by thwarting judicial review.”

The attorney general also argued the Texas law could expose some federal employees at different agencies across the government to civil liability for doing their jobs.

The Texas law is the nation’s biggest curb to abortion since the Supreme Court affirmed in the landmark 1973 decision Roe v. Wade that women have a constitutional right to an abortion.

Abortion providers have said they will comply, but already some of Texas’ roughly two dozen abortion clinics have temporarily stopped offering abortion services altogether. Clinics in neighboring states, meanwhile, have seen a surge in patients from Texas.

Texas Right to Life, the state’s largest anti-abortion group and a driver of the new law, said Thursday in anticipation of the lawsuit that it was already working with other states to pass similar measures.

“The Biden administration’s ploy represents a desperate attempt to stop the life-saving law by any means necessary,” the group said in a statement.

Renae Eze, a spokesperson for Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, said his office was confident the courts would uphold the law.

“The most precious freedom is life itself. Texas passed a law that ensures that the life of every child with a heartbeat will be spared from the ravages of abortion,” Eze said. [IMO, the only thing the law ensures is potential "illegal" abortions along with the likelihood that Texans who want abortions will go to another state or maybe even to Mexico

The law provides no exceptions in cases of rape or incest, which Abbott on Tuesday defended by falsely asserting that women still have “at least six weeks” to get an abortion. A woman who has regular periods and is carefully tracking her cycle could know of a positive result no earlier than about four weeks into a pregnancy.

Abbott also said Texas would strive to “eliminate all rapists from the streets.” Recent surveys by the U.S. Department of Justice found that most rapes go unreported to police, including a 2019 survey that found that only about 1 in 3 victims reported they were raped or sexually assaulted.

The Center for Reproductive Rights, which is representing Texas abortion clinics suing over the law, welcomed the Biden administration stepping in.

“It’s a game changer that the Department of Justice has joined the legal battle to restore constitutionally protected abortion access in Texas and disarm vigilantes looking to collect their bounties,” said Nancy Northup, the group’s president.
source

User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33171
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by Gob »

Econoline wrote:
Thu Sep 09, 2021 8:54 pm
Texas star.jpg
Having that!!
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 15530
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by BoSoxGal »

0482EEA0-5D65-4707-A3A6-D228AC5A83BC.jpeg
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 18858
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

Fascinated by these three "thoughts":
We disagreed on abortion, and it almost destroyed our marriage. Years later, she admitted I was right; I genuinely wish I had been wrong, but we don’t always get what we want. However, she is still just as anti-abortion as she has always been.
So what did she admit you were "right" about? Was it:

(a) you were right about abortion but she is still anti-abortion - which seems to argue that she didn't ever agree you were right about abortion
(b) you were right that it almost destroyed your marriage
(c) you were right that it almost destroyed your marriage, but you wish you'd been wrong and it HAD destroyed your marriage?
(d) you were right in wishing your marriage had been destroyed but you can't always get a good result and she endorsed that opinion

Sometimes you are confusing.
"I don't have dreams. Either in dreams or life."
- Bert Kibbler

Big RR
Posts: 12883
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by Big RR »

Or Lib, was it that, at some time, you recommended or counseled someone that having an abortion was the best choice in a situation, and then later regretted it and hoped you were wrong because it conflicted with your (and your wife's) personal views on abortion? That's what I read into what you wrote.

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 15530
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by BoSoxGal »

I’m pretty sure liberty has shared the details of the situation here before (or maybe it was CSB?) so I just want to weigh in with a vote for he doesn’t have to discuss it again if he doesn’t want to. Painful stuff, as I recall.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 18858
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

Ah, OK. I didn't realize it was as Big RR and BSG suggest. Never mind my question, lib.
"I don't have dreams. Either in dreams or life."
- Bert Kibbler

Big RR
Posts: 12883
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: and they call the Taliban medieval?

Post by Big RR »

BSG--I don't recall that, but agree there's no reason to discuss it if Liberty doesn't choose to.

Post Reply