Louisiana is now trying to define life as starting at fertilization, not conception. Wants to ban most forms of birth control. Oh, they also want to criminalize miscarriages as a felony murder, which means those women won't get to vote after a conviction.
This isn't about protecting a life, this is about controlling women.
Please stop the trans exclusionary rhetoric!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
Fuck off you stupid cunt
Hey at least they don't let adults marry kids under 16 since 2019, that's progress :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
You're genuinely the dumbest motherfucker I know. How you manage to keep the lights on and put food on the table is just beyond me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Add Missouri to the dumbduck list with an abortion trigger law. And theirs would also target fertility clinics :rolleyes:
You know this isn't my argument right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...entity/620031/
"Only niche groups tend to care about how Americans discuss gender and pregnancy—including whether it’s better to use the term pregnant people instead of pregnant women. But those groups care a lot. Representative Cori Bush of Missouri used the term birthing people in a hearing, causing a mini-uproar on social media. “When we talk about ‘birthing people,’ we’re being inclusive. It’s that simple,” the pro-abortion-rights group NARAL tweeted in her defense."
The mental gymnastics required to think that this backs up your trolling is impressive in it's own right. :haha:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
So…GOP was looking to steamroll into the Senate and House…now mange to galvanize the Democratic base. This could cost them gains they were looking to make.
Fidiots.
Don't worry, they can always compensate for it by making it more difficult to translate Democratic voters' votes into legislative representation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Veldan Rath
They're still set to get rid of every single Republican who stood in the way of their last round of coup attempts, so the next time they should have no problem overthrowing democracy.
Pence not fleeing with his SS detail (likely thinking they were going to disappear him) is the only event that stopped the insurrection coup from succeeding. So yeah, democracy is screwed.
There were a number of points where they came close to a successful coup, that day's attempts were just the most violent. Don't forget the attempts to declare martial law, seize the voting machines, get the DoJ to declare the votes invalid and open an investigation, get state officials to declare their votes invalid through solicitation and intimidation, the attempts to get various federal judges to throw out the results, the attempt to get the supreme court to overrule the election... there were so many tries that I'm sure I'm forgetting some. Some came closer than others, but in many cases it came down to a handful of people, mostly Republicans or Republican appointees, who refused to abandon their sworn duties for the orange menace. Those people are mostly gone now or will be gone soon, and their replacements were selected for their loyalty to the Big Lie.
Lmao that's just retarded. Pence leaving wouldn't change the date of the transfer of power to Biden. People working themselves in a frenzy over nonsense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
The plan was that if the count wasn't completed on Jan 6, Trump could declare martial law and cancel the transfer of power because the electoral votes hadn't been counted when they were supposed to be. Internal memos advised that he could hold on to power that way until March, at which point they'd "prove" Trump actually won the election so he'd never have to leave office. When Pence wouldn't play ball, their last ditch effort was to prevent the counting of the electoral vote at all. They just needed to get Pence out of the capitol for the rest of the day, and thankfully, he saw what was happening.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/25/polit...319/index.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Step 1: The 7 states submitted their false electors, which itself was an astonishing accomplishment. Done.
Step 2: Gather enough GOP votes in the house and senate to reject the state electors, and send the ballots back to the state legislators. Done.
Step 3: Make sure the state’s legislatures had the votes to flip their elections and certify the fake ballots. Done.
Step 4: Get Pence on board. The sticking point was Pence, he seemed to be hesitant. Plan A was to talk him into it. Failed.
Plan B, was to have an mob assault the Capitol, and put emotional pressure on Pence. The leaders never explicitly said they were threatening to take out Pence, but the chants of the mob made it clear that making Pence fear for his life was the next step. Failed.
Plan C was to escalate the violence of the mob in the Capitol to the point where the Secret Service would feel compelled to evacuate him. This was only recently revealed. If the GOP cabal could get Pence away from the Capitol, the Senate could declare him absent and continue on with the vote.
----------
And the most GOP thing I'm all this? None of the communications are "this is wrong, I'm not taking part". They are all "this isn't working, I'm backing out"
Literally none of this would work. If you actually think the courts would be like 'oh damn you wily trickster you got one over us, good one' you are delusional.
Yeah, because Trump definitely wouldn't do anything illegal. He broke so many laws we still can't go a week without finding out more of them. He has an entire political party dedicated to protecting him from any consequences from any of it. Avoiding legal consequences and undermining the justice system is why it was so important to him to appoint so many judges and to stack the supreme court. He's basically a dumber version of Putin, and he thought he could get away with it all. And he is, because Republicans have decided that hanging on to power is more important than the country.
Why the fuck do we even have to defend this? He literally bragged about trying to use Pence to overturn the election in multiple written statements and claiming that the VP gets to decide who the winner is. You're right though, he's clearly delusional, but there's a whole party feeding his delusions.
The same courts that include a sitting SCOTUS judge that tried to hide his own wife's involvement in the insurrection? The one that currently has multiple sitting SCOTUS judges that are on record lying under oath according to the Roe leak? That same courts that have a literal handmaid sitting as a SCOTUS judge?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Now you claim none of this would work. How many people in power have suffered any legal consequences for their parts that did succeed?
EDIT:
And lets not forgot what was largely considered the courts most corrupt ruling, handing the 2000 election to Bush.
"It's okay to try for the president to try to overthrow US democracy because he might fail" is the dumbest excuse ever.
No URLQuote:
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
I assume it was meant to be: https://www.salon.com/2022/05/09/are...birth-control/
For good measure:
SourceQuote:
Criminalization of miscarriages. Bans on condoms, IUDs, and other forms of birth control. Stripping pre-existing abortion protections from state constitutions.
Wraith got the link right, fixed my attempt.
Ah yes, normal-ass country
I'd call them the American Taliban, but the Taliban allows abortion up to 12 weeks.
Remember when Lewk would spam Ann coulter and complain about the coming doom of sharia law? Add it to his projection pile.
https://anncoulter.com/2022/05/04/al...ves-not-biden/Quote:
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
"I have only two absolutely definite predictions flowing from the leak of the abortion opinion:
1) Liberals are about to start claiming that black people not only are incapable of getting IDs to vote, but are also incapable of knowing that they’ve been pregnant for four months. (And then: NIGHTMARE! THEY’LL HAVE TO GET A BUS TO NEW YORK OR CALIFORNIA!)
2) As for the leaker, if the perp turns out to be a conservative who was trying to pressure Chief Justice John Roberts or Justice Neil Gorsuch, he will be ruined for life. If he turns out to be a clerk for one of the liberals, he will get a book contract and a regular spot on MSNBC."
Why would you post something so fucking dumb after being told how fucking dumb you are
Twitter Link
Utter clown emojis
Yeah, this is all so fucked up it's hard to know where to begin, but maybe that's been part of the GOP "plan" for decades -- incremental changes in law, exploiting peoples' short attention spans, propaganda and disinformation flying around at the speed of the internet -- and maybe no one will notice just how Radical and Extreme the Republican party has become? :donkey:
Also, when the RNC did that "autopsy" after losing to Obama, and they decided to "expand the tent" to get more voters...what they *really* meant was they'd include White Nationalists, racists, misogynists, theocrats, autocrats, and conspiracy theorists in that tent. Because, ya know, it's tough to run a political party by just promising to dismantle the administrative state and give tax breaks to the wealthy.
The Abortion History the Right Doesn’t Mention
By Randall Balmer - Tuesday
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/th...ion/ar-AAX7ufqQuote:
On the face of it, Samuel Alito’s draft decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, published by POLITICO last week, represents a vindication for the Religious Right, the culmination of nearly five decades of working to outlaw abortion. “I don’t know if this report is true,” said evangelist Franklin Graham of the draft opinion overturning abortion rights, “but if it is, it is an answer to many years of prayer.”
The history of that movement, however, is more complicated. White evangelicals in the 1970s did not mobilize against Roe v. Wade, which they considered a Catholic issue. They organized instead to defend racial segregation in evangelical institutions, including Bob Jones University.
To suggest otherwise is to perpetrate what I call the abortion myth, the fiction that the genesis of the Religious Right — the powerful evangelical political movement that has reshaped American politics over the past four decades — lay in opposition to abortion.
The historical record is clear. In 1968, Christianity Today, the flagship magazine of evangelicalism, organized a conference with the Christian Medical Society to discuss the morality of abortion. The gathering attracted 26 heavyweight theologians from throughout the evangelical world, who debated the matter over several days and then issued a statement acknowledging the ambiguities surrounding the issue, which, they said, allowed for many different approaches.
“Whether the performance of an induced abortion is sinful we are not agreed,” the statement read, “but about the necessity of it and permissibility for it under certain circumstances we are in accord.”
Two successive editors of Christianity Today took equivocal stands on abortion. Carl F. H. Henry, the magazine’s founder, affirmed that “a woman’s body is not the domain and property of others,” and his successor, Harold Lindsell, allowed that, “if there are compelling psychiatric reasons from a Christian point of view, mercy and prudence may favor a therapeutic abortion.”
Meeting in St. Louis in 1971, the messengers (delegates) to the Southern Baptist Convention, hardly a redoubt of liberalism, passed a resolution calling for the legalization of abortion, a position they reaffirmed in 1974 — a year after Roe — and again in 1976.
When the Roe decision was handed down, W. A. Criswell, pastor of First Baptist Church in Dallas and sometime president of the Southern Baptist Convention, issued a statement praising the ruling. “I have always felt that it was only after a child was born and had a life separate from its mother that it became an individual person,” Criswell declared, “and it has always, therefore, seemed to me that what is best for the mother and for the future should be allowed.”
I recall reading through Weyrich’s papers at the University of Wyoming in Laramie, and when I came across his correspondence following the 1978 midterm elections, the papers almost began to sizzle with excitement. He characterized the outcome as “true cause for celebration.” Weyrich had finally landed on an issue — abortion — that could mobilize grassroots evangelicals. Now, Falwell and other leaders of the Religious Right had a “respectable” issue, opposition to abortion, one that would energize white evangelicals — and, not incidentally, divert attention from the real origins of their movement.
Even so, as late as August 22, 1980, when Ronald Reagan addressed more than ten thousand cheering evangelicals at Reunion Arena in Dallas, he talked about creationism, he said that if he were stranded on a desert island he would want the Bible, and he lambasted “Jimmy Carter’s Internal Revenue Service” for challenging the tax exemption of racially segregated evangelical institutions. On that occasion, however, Reagan said nothing whatsoever about abortion.
Abortion did not take hold among evangelicals until the eve of the 1980 presidential election, the result of assiduous promotion by Weyrich, Falwell and other leaders of the Religious Right following the 1978 midterms. In addition, although it was poorly received when it toured the country early in 1979, Frank Schaeffer’s anti-abortion film series Whatever Happened to the Human Race?, which featured his father, Francis A. Schaeffer, and C. Everett Koop, began finally to take root among evangelicals.
Opposition to abortion, therefore, was a godsend for leaders of the Religious Right because it allowed them to distract attention from the real genesis of their movement: defense of racial segregation in evangelical institutions. With a cunning diversion, they were able to conjure righteous fury against legalized abortion and thereby lend a veneer of respectability to their political activism.
Alito’s draft makes no mention of this tawdry history.
"The Real Origins of the Religious Right" was published in 2014 and goes into greater depth. https://www.politico.com/magazine/st...rigins-107133/
These weird-ass Taliban creeps are still at it:
https://twitter.com/RightWingWatch/s...57198577606657
Twitter Link
I don't know what's worse—the genocidal rhetoric or the cretinous pseudointellectual phrasing.
How often do you take your children to drag shows Aimless?
What?
How often do you legislate who can attend a performance? A 10 y/o kid can watch Scarface, but can't be expected to see a woman pretending to be a man or vice versa? For that matter, they can go legally watch s screening of Rocky Horror Picture Show but they can't see a man in a dress on-stage?Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
I take my kids to a traditional performance every year, with at least one drag role. Y'all Qaeda wish to criminalise my culture.Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
I don't know how national they are but Hamburger Mary's is a drag joint and my kids (4-17 years old) love their performances. We used to go pretty regularly before moving out to the sticks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
Hell, there's drag queen storytime at public libraries, even in Georgia.