Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Use a drinking fountain, go to jail.
Examples of GOP Leadership
- Thread starter injinji
- Start date
Hugo Phurst
Well-Known Member
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
I was half my current height (inches, not milligrams) when that was wrestled to a close.
Bagginski
Well-Known Member
The Christian right is coming for divorce next — Vox
Before the 1960s, it was really hard to get divorced in America.
BudmanTX
Well-Known Member
topcat
Well-Known Member
The government should have no role in marriage (or divorce) beyond keeping a register of unions for legal purposes. Government has no authority to issue a license to marry (or get involved with divorce). Change the term to registration, or contract.
The Christian right is coming for divorce next — Vox
Before the 1960s, it was really hard to get divorced in America.apple.news
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Part of the problem is that the covenant marriage movement calls it a contract. Some contracts are hard to terminate.
topcat
Well-Known Member
Like any contract, read the fine print before you sign.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Yup, and the fine print in covenant marriage is kinda strict.
topcat
Well-Known Member
I'm not familiar with that, but presumably they know what they're getting into. If not, that's what courts of law are for.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
It’s a bit like a studio contract. “This, or bye.” They do not allow the contractee to append or elide codicils.
topcat
Well-Known Member
It ain't my business. Lots of history of musicians getting screwed. It's a shame, but still not my business.
Edit Reason: "...to say i wasn't a Yankee, i was a Westerner."
down there. I had to say i wasn't a Yankee, i was a Westerner. I was in Miami Beach one
time and met a black dude in a bar, we had a beer,cops came in hustled him out. I protested,
and they said "We don't like blacks and whites mixing together!" I was totally unfamiliar with
that in human nature other than from TV news coverage of civil rights movement. Want more?
I got some stories from Georgia, too. Even worse.
I'm from the western USA. I went to the south at age 19, in 1968. They called me "yankee"
down there. I had to say i wasn't a Yankee, i was a Westerner. I was in Miami Beach one
time and met a black dude in a bar, we had a beer,cops came in hustled him out. I protested,
and they said "We don't like blacks and whites mixing together!" I was totally unfamiliar with
that in human nature other than from TV news coverage of civil rights movement. Want more?
I got some stories from Georgia, too. Even worse.
Last edited:
CANON_Grow
Well-Known Member
It appears they're the same - but different. It really is amazing how much overlap there actually is.The Christian right is coming for divorce next — Vox
Before the 1960s, it was really hard to get divorced in America.
‘Life is hell for Afghan women once again’
Women had struggled long and hard for the right to divorce, but since the Taliban’s takeover, the situation worsened.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
This issue will come before them again, quite possibly at a time when a Republican administration can decide not to fight for our rights. They could and should have ruled that the antiabortionist's case had no merit but did not do that.
Takeaways from Supreme Court ruling: Abortion pill still available but opponents say fight not over
apnews.com
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court unanimously upheld access to a drug used in the majority of U.S. abortions on Thursday, though abortion opponents say the ruling won’t be the last word in the fight over mifepristone.
The narrow decision came two years after the high court overturned the nationwide right to abortion. Rather than fully dive into the issue, the high court found that anti-abortion doctors lacked the legal right to sue.
That could leave an opening for anti-abortion states or other opponents to keep up the fight.
What does this mean politically?
Thursday’s ruling sidesteps immediate seismic political effects, but the issue will still be center stage this election year.
Democrats said the Supreme Court made the right call on abortion medication, but warned that the ruling wouldn’t end GOP threats to abortion rights. Vice President Kamala Harris said former President Donald Trump’s allies would still try to halt access to medication abortion and enact further restrictions, including a nationwide ban.
Takeaways from Supreme Court ruling: Abortion pill still available but opponents say fight not over
Takeaways from Supreme Court ruling: Abortion pill still available but opponents say fight not over
The Supreme Court unanimously upheld access to a drug used in the majority of U.S. abortions, though abortion opponents say the ruling won’t be the last word in the fight over mifepristone.
apnews.com
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court unanimously upheld access to a drug used in the majority of U.S. abortions on Thursday, though abortion opponents say the ruling won’t be the last word in the fight over mifepristone.
The narrow decision came two years after the high court overturned the nationwide right to abortion. Rather than fully dive into the issue, the high court found that anti-abortion doctors lacked the legal right to sue.
That could leave an opening for anti-abortion states or other opponents to keep up the fight.
What does this mean politically?
Thursday’s ruling sidesteps immediate seismic political effects, but the issue will still be center stage this election year.
Democrats said the Supreme Court made the right call on abortion medication, but warned that the ruling wouldn’t end GOP threats to abortion rights. Vice President Kamala Harris said former President Donald Trump’s allies would still try to halt access to medication abortion and enact further restrictions, including a nationwide ban.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
The logic goes like this: Because some people are harmed by the choice they make, we will remove that choice from everybody. This is the argument the religious right make regarding abortion, marijuana, IVF, literature, porn and so forth.
So, no. The idea of banning covenant marriage because it's a stupid idea that will cause harm to some people (which it is). I'd say, no to that. I would strongly lobby against it if one of my sons decided to marry in that manner but would not say no if that was their choice. The situations in life vary so much from person to person that the state cannot enact proactive behaviorally restrictive laws that are fair to everybody. Empowering people to make their own choices is the better path and causes less harm.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
As long as covenant marriage is one of >1 options, yes. I worry that the objective is described by the Afghani situation.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
I don't see where in my reply to you that I was advocating what you say? In any case, if "contract/covenant marriage" as defined by the Christian Nationalists became the only choice allowable under a state's law, then it wouldn't be called covenant marriage, it would just be called marriage.
Christian nationalism is vile on many fronts, not just this bizarre attack on no fault divorce. If they win big in the upcoming election, the retrograde package of legislation, court appointments, court rulings that come with them, and the gulags needed to break resistance to all of that, will end this country as we know it. US 2.0 will look more like Iran or perhaps Imperial Russia than Afghanistan but I think by then 1950's era divorce laws will be a concern but not our only concern.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
I might have misunderstood. In any case, concur wholly with the rest.
It appears to me that the coup has half-succeeded. The election denialists are burning rubber but not gaining traction.
However the fact that the real damage was done to the judicial system is becoming cast into more stark relief every day lately.
Last election was existential. The coming one will be as well. My heart breaks a little every time a friendly stranger or a neighbor speaks against President Biden.