The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

[Rover]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Supreme Court denies stay on same sex marriages in Alaska .

I know its against board rules, but I've discovered Bob's real name and profession!

Anthony Culler (R), who is challenging Rep. James Clyburn's (D-SC) for Congress, referred to same-sex couples as "gremlins" and "bullies" in a Facebook post, according to The Hill.

Culler decried same-sex marriage as "a pestilence that has descended on our society, against our will, by those in the courts and government that do not value the traditional family. Same sex couples that seek to destroy our way of life and the institution of marriage are NOT cute and cuddly but rather (for those of you that are old enough to remember the movie), Gremlins that will only destroy our way of life."

Just kidding Bob before you freak out.

 

[unofan]

I know its against board rules, but I've discovered Bob's real name and profession!

Anthony Culler (R), who is challenging Rep. James Clyburn's (D-SC) for Congress, referred to same-sex couples as "gremlins" and "bullies" in a Facebook post, according to The Hill.

Culler decried same-sex marriage as "a pestilence that has descended on our society, against our will, by those in the courts and government that do not value the traditional family. Same sex couples that seek to destroy our way of life and the institution of marriage are NOT cute and cuddly but rather (for those of you that are old enough to remember the movie), Gremlins that will only destroy our way of life."

Just kidding Bob before you freak out.

Can't be Bob. Bob wouldn't get the movie reference since he doesn't follow pop culture.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

I know its against board rules, but I've discovered Bob's real name and profession!

Anthony Culler (R), who is challenging Rep. James Clyburn's (D-SC) for Congress, referred to same-sex couples as "gremlins" and "bullies" in a Facebook post, according to The Hill.

Culler decried same-sex marriage as "a pestilence that has descended on our society, against our will, by those in the courts and government that do not value the traditional family. Same sex couples that seek to destroy our way of life and the institution of marriage are NOT cute and cuddly but rather (for those of you that are old enough to remember the movie), Gremlins that will only destroy our way of life."

Just kidding Bob before you freak out.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Here is the Texas website regarding what is, or is not, required.

http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/pamphlets/largepamp.shtml

As for ID's, basically if the Texas Department of Public Safety, or the United States government, issued it, it's ok. Bay Ridge Christian College ID, not so much.

Seems logical.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Anthony Culler (R), who is challenging Rep. James Clyburn's (D-SC) for Congress, referred to same-sex couples as "gremlins" and "bullies" in a Facebook post, according to The Hill.

Culler decried same-sex marriage as "a pestilence that has descended on our society, against our will, by those in the courts and government that do not value the traditional family. Same sex couples that seek to destroy our way of life and the institution of marriage are NOT cute and cuddly but rather (for those of you that are old enough to remember the movie), Gremlins that will only destroy our way of life."

What makes that analogy even dumber is that Gremlins is a comedy. Ooooooooooh, scary!

 

[LynahFan]

I know its against board rules, but I've discovered Bob's real name and profession!

Anthony Culler (R), who is challenging Rep. James Clyburn's (D-SC) for Congress, referred to same-sex couples as "gremlins" and "bullies" in a Facebook post, according to The Hill.

Culler decried same-sex marriage as "a pestilence that has descended on our society, against our will, by those in the courts and government that do not value the traditional family. Same sex couples that seek to destroy our way of life and the institution of marriage are NOT cute and cuddly but rather (for those of you that are old enough to remember the movie), Gremlins that will only destroy our way of life."

Just kidding Bob before you freak out.

I always love the argument that gay people are going to destroy the institution of marriage by *participating* in it and extending it to even more people. Um, what?

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

I always love the argument that gay people are going to destroy the institution of marriage by *participating* in it and extending it to even more people. Um, what?

"Women's suffrage will destroy the institution of representative democracy." -- Same argument, 1915

 

[Craig P.]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

What makes that analogy even dumber is that Gremlins is a comedy. Ooooooooooh, scary!

Gremlins 2 is a comedy, but my possibly imperfect recollection is that Gremlins wasn't, or if it was, weighed a lot more towards scary than funny. Even in Gremlins 2, the bad guys are clearly dangerous.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Assuming the good guys have won this round of the culture war...

"Essentially, as Northeastern, Midwestern and Western moderates became marginalised in the party, the Southern cultural conservatives took over the issue framing," he writes. "Whereas the former were true conservatives, fighting to preserve traditional cultural norms, the latter were radicals seeking to impose a puritanical set of policies with very little appeal on the country through the legislative process."

... what's the next battle?

Dick Meyer of Scripps writes that while social issues may no longer be at the forefront of today's policy battles, the cultural polarisation that they reflected is still around and exacerbated by today's politicians.

Slate's Rehan Salam identifies the debate over religious freedom, embodied in the recent Supreme Court decision to allow employers to opt out of providing insurance that covers some forms of contraception, as a possible central focus of a renewed culture conflict.

"The next culture war could pit devout secularists against a shrinking religious minority determined to live in accordance with their beliefs," he writes.

The abortion issue also isn't going away, he notes, as some states continue to push for a ban on abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

The next big debate could be about reproductive technology that doesn't yet exist, he says, such as artificial wombs and eugenics. Or it could have nothing to do with marriage and sex and instead be a result of the rise of Latino culture in the US.

"Given that the Latino population is poorer than the population at large, we can expect that its members will press for a larger share of public resources at a time when the white and black populations will be aging rapidly," he writes. "It is not at all obvious that non-Latinos will embrace this prospect."

The "culture war" as we know it may be coming to a close. Political conflict, drawn from differing agendas, experiences and priorities, is as old as humankind, however. It's not going anywhere.

 

[joecct]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Eugenics? Heck we're killing babies now because they don't fit the right "profile". IIRC Eugenics was the big "thing" 100 years ago. Can't have those non whites breeding too much can we?

Artificial wombs? I can see it. Honor Harrington did it.

And the devout secularists are going to find out that their vision of Utopia isn't .

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Yes of course [voter fraud] occurs. However the frequency and level of damage are without question significantly up for debate.

The far more damaging problem is the widespread perception that voter fraud occurs, and tilts elections consistently to the same side.

If people cannot trust the integrity of elections, that changes the entire dynamic in a very unhealthy way. It's one thing to feel, "okay, well, they won fair and square" and go along with the results, it is different to have sullen resentment if not outright anger that they stole an election and then rammed through legislation that a majority of the country opposed, legislation that costs trillions of dollars that people cannot afford, etc. etc. That kind of perception tears the country apart. It's also in many people's minds a dangerous step from a democratic republic to a totalitarian regime

They had elections in the Soviet Union and in Saddam Hussein's Iraq too you know. Just having elections isn't enough, the essential element is the trust that people have that votes will be counted fairly, You start to erode that trust, and bad situations become even worse.

We know for sure that voter fraud occurs. It makes no sense whatsoever to say that we should just be fine with it and allow it to keep going on.

 

[unofan]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

The far more damaging problem is the widespread perception that voter fraud occurs...

Widespread? Surely you jest.

It's only prevalent among a certain political segment who may or may not watch and read specific news sources.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

"Women's suffrage will destroy the institution of representative democracy." -- Same argument, 1915

That one turned out to be true, at least in my household. When my wife votes, I get no vote at all.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Eugenics? Heck we're killing babies now because they don't fit the right "profile". IIRC Eugenics was the big "thing" 100 years ago. Can't have those non whites breeding too much can we?

Artificial wombs? I can see it. Honor Harrington did it.

And the devout secularists are going to find out that their vision of Utopia isn't .

Things are coming full circle, as they often do. Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger was big into eugenics as a way of dealing with minorities. Not to mention her buddies in 1930s Germany.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Things are coming full circle, as they often do. Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger was big into eugenics as a way of dealing with minorities. Not to mention her buddies in 1930s Germany.

Ha ha ha ha. If your day job doesn't work out, there's always standup comedy - perhaps you and joecct can form a duo act.

It's completely laughable that anyone would equate couples' voluntary termination of pregnancies due to birth defects and other issues with a national program of state-enforced abortions for the purpose of altering the gene pool at large (you know, eugenics).

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger was big into eugenics as a way of dealing with minorities. Not to mention her buddies in 1930s Germany.

Are you at least going to cite that broad, unspecific claim, or are you just going to leave us to assume you've been devouring the latest NRL nonsense?

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Are you at least going to cite that broad, unspecific claim, or are you just going to leave us to assume you've been devouring the latest NRL nonsense?

um, Margaret Sanger's interest in promoting birth control as a way to keep "unwanted" populations from growing in number is pretty widespread knowledge, if I recall correctly.

Wikipedia:

Sanger....has also been criticized for supporting eugenics.

....

As part of her efforts to promote birth control, Sanger found common cause with proponents of eugenics, believing that they both sought to "assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit." Sanger was a proponent of negative eugenics, which aims to improve human hereditary traits through social intervention by reducing the reproduction of those who were considered unfit. Sanger's eugenic policies included an exclusionary immigration policy, free access to birth control methods and full family planning autonomy for the able-minded, and compulsory segregation or sterilization for the profoundly retarded. In her book The Pivot of Civilization, she advocated coercion to prevent the "undeniably feeble-minded" from procreating

At the same time, I do think it is unfair to lump her in with the Nazis. Sanger opposed euthanasia, according to the same Wiki source. She "merely" wanted to reduce the reproductive capacity of the "unfit," she did not go so far as to want to actively kill them off.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Are you at least going to cite that broad, unspecific claim, or are you just going to leave us to assume you've been devouring the latest NRL nonsense?

I've posted lots of info on that a number of times in the past around here. If you google for two seconds you would find plenty on it. The PP supporters around here haven't denied it in the past, they just try to say that she's ancient history and not reflective of the current organization, even though the current organization honors her in many ways.

Here's some quotes from her. Her desire to exterminate "the Negro population" is one of the real eye openers.

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/03/11/10-eye-opening-quotes-from-planned-parenthood-founder-margaret-sanger/

Here's an example of the info out there on Sanger, PP, and their ties to the Nazis.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

um, Margaret Sanger's interest in promoting birth control as a way to keep "unwanted" populations from growing in number is pretty widespread knowledge, if I recall correctly.

Wikipedia:




At the same time, I do think it is unfair to lump her in with the Nazis. Sanger opposed euthanasia, according to the same Wiki source. She "merely" wanted to reduce the reproductive capacity of the "unfit," she did not go so far as to want to actively kill them off.

Good Lord.

Try again, and this time don't use Wikipedia as a source.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

um, Margaret Sanger's interest in promoting birth control as a way to keep "unwanted" populations from growing in number is pretty widespread knowledge, if I recall correctly.

Wikipedia:

At the same time, I do think it is unfair to lump her in with the Nazis. Sanger opposed euthanasia, according to the same Wiki source. She "merely" wanted to reduce the reproductive capacity of the "unfit," she did not go so far as to want to actively kill them off.

Certainly Sanger wasn't on board with many things the Nazis did, at least from what I've read. But, their common interest in creating a purer greater race, eliminating less desirable groups of people, and such are quite apparent.