Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 28, 2014, 01:14:07 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 298 299 300 301 302 [303] 304 305 306 307 308 ... 616
7551  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Missouri Senate Race, 2012 on: August 23, 2012, 04:22:44 pm
McCaskill
7552  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Elections / Re: GriffGraph: Balance of Power Comparisons (Past 60 Days) on: August 23, 2012, 04:19:59 pm
Have you though about including presidential numbers in these?
7553  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Elections / Re: GriffGraph: Balance of Power Comparisons (Past 60 Days) on: August 23, 2012, 04:06:32 pm
And the Northeast's Lieutenant Governor is Labor now, having received three votes in the election.

*slow-clap* Good for you, citizens.

Actually, Goldwater is supposed to be the Lieutenant Governor. A mistake was made.

And what mistake would that be?

It appears Goldwater won the most votes (3). You won 2.
7554  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Elections / Re: GriffGraph: Balance of Power Comparisons (Past 60 Days) on: August 23, 2012, 03:12:30 pm
And the Northeast's Lieutenant Governor is Labor now, having received three votes in the election.

*slow-clap* Good for you, citizens.

Actually, Goldwater is supposed to be the Lieutenant Governor. A mistake was made.
7555  Election Archive / 2012 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: Rassy poll, CT McMahon leading now on: August 23, 2012, 11:23:23 am
Murphy is a stronger candidate than Blumenthal. Not as strong as Blumenthal was thought to be initially, but stronger than he ended up being. This race won't even be close. Murphy is going to win by double digits.
7556  Forum Community / Forum Community Election Match-ups / Obligatory Joe Republic vs. Joe Democrat Poll on: August 23, 2012, 11:05:25 am
Grin

7557  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Elections / Re: GriffGraph: Excellent/Egregious Executives Evaluation (August 2012) on: August 23, 2012, 10:49:50 am
I wish I was still in the Northeast so I could give Nix a +. I really couldn't have asked for a better successor.
7558  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: I'm calling you out Joe Republic on: August 22, 2012, 07:52:16 pm
He will, nay, he must return, for all of us.

I hope his next account is Joe Democrat Forever. Maybe we could also have Joe Democrat Rises.
7559  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: SENATE BILL: Equal Rights Amendment (Debating) on: August 22, 2012, 07:45:06 pm
OK... I am going to do my best to respond to all of these points in one post. If I miss some one's comments, please let me know...

Vagueness of my Amendment

I find it very amusing that this is the criticism of my amendment... this is my point about the ERA as a whole! If your concern is that a judge could conceivably interpret my amendment in a way that you would not want- please understand that a judge could do the same for the ERA which leads to my next point....

Actually the text as written is typical of constitutional law and validated by the opinions of many legal experts. What you propose is vague, unclear, and unsuitable.

Quote
Abortion

Afleitch- my amendment also does not ban elective abortion... it simply makes it clear it is not a right provided by the ERA
Your amendment implies that abortion isn't already a constitutional right.

Quote
Quote
Because it's a stereotype and it's hurtfully discriminatory. I get the feeling you wouldn't be suggesting that its ok to discriminate against blacks because they might be "better suited as janitors or basketball players".


Napoleon- this is absurd on two levels. Of course it is ridiculous to suggest I'd be fine with that, but it is also absurd to say that it is hurtfully discriminatory if I hired some one because they were more physically able. Is it discriminatory that I preferred to hire a woman whenever I hired a nanny or babysitter for my children? Perhaps you think it might be... but there are certain qualities that men and women have in more abundance. I am not offended that I could've never been a basketball star because I am 5'9...why would you take offense to a woman losing out on a construction job because other applicants were physically stronger or a man losing out on a job as a nanny because the parents felt more comfortable with a woman watching their children?

I don't know why you keep making this argument. It is a poor one. To suggest that no women could ever be as physically capable as a man is flat out wrong.

Quote
Restrooms

Sbane- while I agree that Afleitch's testimony on this issue is comforting, both Napoleon and especially Scott have made comments in this debate supporting the ride of a man who identifies as a female to use the women's restroom. This is very concerning to me. My amendment is an attempt to avoid this issue without specifically putting restrooms in the constitution

Well, if that is so, could you explain to us how inequality of restroom convenience and quality is "biologically necessary"?
7560  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: SENATE BILL: Equal Rights Amendment (Debating) on: August 22, 2012, 09:36:10 am
Senators, why has this debate has descended into the scatalogical? There is a pre-occupation with toilet facilities when this amendment has nothing to do with with them. I re-iterate; the biological difference between men and women with regards to their sanitary needs is not something that the ERA will affect. It does however mean that if an establishment has toilets clearly labeled 'Men' but no facilities for women then it would be in violation of the ERA. I dread to think that any establishment (even gay bars) don't provide facilities for both sexes in 2012 so the point is probably moot. It also means that baby changing facilities should be accessable to men (if an establishment chooses to make baby changing facilities available) as providing such facilities in a womans restroom only would be in violation of the ERA.

The ERA does not mandate anyone to provide toilets, or changing facilities or lockerooms but if it does, it has to provide them for both sexes either as individual facilities or unisex facilities. It is as simple as that.


Could someone not claim in the future that the separate facilities are unequal so we need Uni-sex bathrooms. I personally don't think it's a big deal, but I do think this amendment could lead to that.

It only guarantees that the facilities be provided equally for each sex. No one with a law degree would agree with this conclusion. It's illegitimate.
7561  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Will Akin stay or go? on: August 22, 2012, 09:28:22 am
After all, due to McCaskill's unpopularity in Missouri, Akin just has to be perceived as a more or less acceptable alternative, he doesn't need to be loved by everyone.

Rape isn't something taken lightly over here. When your party is already involved in a War on Women, and you start trying to tell these women that they were not legitimately raped, you wouldn't be able to overcome that, especially against a female opponent. We've seen the GOP lose races because of this as recently as 2010 in Colorado.
7562  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: SENATE BILL: Equal Rights Amendment (Debating) on: August 22, 2012, 09:24:07 am
I am also not in favor of including anything related to abortion in this amendment.  This amendment was not meant to address the abortion issue; that is a discussion for another day.
 Peace!

It's a dirty but textbook tactic, bringing abortion up where it obviously isn't relevant. Here it's used as part of an "everything but the kitchen sink" strategy of opposition. It's problematic first for implying that abortion isn't already guaranteed by the Constitution under our right to privacy and perhaps more importantly, part of a larger sexist history where men oppose women's rights by hiding behind abortion. Do any of our Senators look at this
Quote
Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by Atlasia or by any Region on account of sex or sexual orientation towards adults.
and see anything relevant to elective abortion? If so, please keep it to yourself because it would make you look quite foolish. No judge is going to rule in favor of elective abortion because women are given equal rights as men. Roll Eyes
7563  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: SENATE BILL: Equal Rights Amendment (Debating) on: August 22, 2012, 09:19:14 am
Quote
AN AMENDMENT

To ensure the equal protection of all genders n the Republic of Atlasia.

Be it enacted by 2/3 of the Senate of the Republic of Atlasia.

SECTION ONE. TITLE

This amendment may be cited as the 'Equal Rights Amendment.'

SECTION TWO. AMENDMENT

1.) Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by Atlasia or by any Region on account of sex or sexual orientation towards adults except where such inequality is necessary due to the biological differences between the sexes.

2.) The Senate shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Better?

Given that perceived 'biological differences' between the sexes and the resulting capacity or capability of each sex being able to do or not do specific tasks is the root cause of sex discrimination, why should an exemption be made for it? Surely 'biological difference' can be used to justify hiring a woman over a man in a child nurturing role or a man over a women in a labour role?
Yes!!! What is the problem with this? If a man is more physically able to hold a job in construction, why shouldn't I be able to hire him for that reason?
Because it's a stereotype and it's hurtfully discriminatory. I get the feeling you wouldn't be suggesting that its ok to discriminate against blacks because they might be "better suited as janitors or basketball players".
7564  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: SENATE BILL: Equal Rights Amendment (Debating) on: August 22, 2012, 09:00:52 am
All of these amendments should be defeated and rejected. That is all.
7565  Election Archive / 2012 Elections / Re: The significance of Ryan's poor dress sense on: August 22, 2012, 02:43:59 am
Paul Ryan is the know-it-all contrarian straight-laced goody-two shoes kid that would have ratted you out in high school for smoking a blunt.

Yeah, the one the other kids would've given a haircut.

Are you sure other kids would want to join Mitt Romney in another one of his hair cuts of hate?
7566  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: SENATE BILL: Equal Rights Amendment (Debating) on: August 22, 2012, 02:34:17 am
Had you been born yet?

Your use of ad hominems has elevated the quality of this debate.
 
Quote
The odd part of this all is that it is still not in the US Constitution... that means somewhere at some time, some people must have disagreed with your views on this issue. It was not ratified and consistently lost support when its fallacies were pointed out...virtually every woman I knew at that time when the ERA regularly made news opposed its passage

I don't really believe that every woman you knew opposed it, but your anecdotal evidence is unreliable regardless. Women have always favored the ERA by overwhelming margins, and men do too. You might have been misinformed of the facts in the past, but I don't see why you can't take a look at the evidence. The people who disagreed with the mainstream position then were old Southern white males near exclusively.

Quote
As for the toilet amendment- I don't plan to include the word toilet in my proposed amendment so you can sleep soundly tonight. As for the legal reality- that is open to debate. I believe the broad nature of the ERA can lead to unexpected and unwanted consequences... others have historically shared that view. My proposed amendment will be a good faith effort to reach our mutual intent with the passage of the ERA without those negative consequences

I'm now 70 years old and refuse to let myself get drawn in to a catfight on the web about a fake ERA to a fake constitution... so I will see myself to bed and continue this discussion tomorrow after proposing my amendment

I guess the question I'm asking is how you believe your legal opinion is more qualified than the experts.
7567  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: SENATE BILL: Equal Rights Amendment (Debating) on: August 22, 2012, 02:13:29 am
Well here we go again Napoleon...

The reality is that the Equal Rights Amendment has not been adopted in the fictional USA...


The ERA was voted for by 354 Representatives and 84 Senators. You're opposed to something that was a mainstream position even in 1972.


Quote
I have strong objections, shared by others in this body and many across the country...rather then oppose the bill because of these objections- I am choosing to offer an amendment to compromise and create a situation where I and others can support this bill. I am disappointed that you are reacting the way you are to my intention to propose an amendment which- if passed- will lead me and others to back this bill...

A bill does not have to be 100% to your liking...the 3/4 draft compromise sure as hell wasn't to mine, but I voted for it because it was the result of a good faith effort to find middle ground on the issue.

Listen to this classic...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7knIi3LGf4M

I don't know what your link is but an amendment talking about restrooms is a disgrace to our Constitution. Your objection happens to be detached from the legal reality of the text. How do you compromise with a position that isn't even rooted in reality?

I'm not accusing you of trying to use this to mask your opposition, but it simply isn't a truthful argument. This amendment would in absolutely no way mandate unisex restrooms. The only way this amendment would possibly affect restrooms is ensuring that men and women are each offered the proper facilities. What this amendment provides is equal rights under the law. Our right to privacy laws protect us from having to share toilet facilities simultaneously with members of the opposite sex.

You are saying I am not compromising but you're unwilling to even consider the facts that have been repeated over and over.
7568  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: How partisan is the previous poster? on: August 22, 2012, 01:48:59 am
I would say 7, but who knows with the avatar change. Tongue
7569  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: SENATE BILL: Equal Rights Amendment (Debating) on: August 22, 2012, 01:35:11 am
I will not be the President who (literally) supports adding toilet talk to our most honorable document, our Constitution. If such an amendment is adopted, I will have to withdraw my support, unfortunately.

I've offered evidence from the nation's top law enforcement official as well as the fictional US Senate and House of Representatives, and many state legislatures to support my position. This debate has taken an absurd and embarrassing turn. Not to mention the fact that the proponents of that exact text were (who knew?!) women. So you guys are suggesting that a) the Attorney General is lying b) that the United States Congress wants to open up female restrooms to sexual predators or something like that and c) that women themselves are advocating that those scary predators be allowed in.

Its also a great insult to the effort and intellectual capabilities of the women who have fought for this text for generations.

Can I get an eternal facepalm?
7570  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: SENATE BILL: Equal Rights Amendment (Debating) on: August 22, 2012, 01:30:09 am
I urge Senators not to disgrace our honorable Constitution by inserting language telling us who can use what toilet and when. This is a ridiculous idea that should be met with strong opposition.
7571  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: SENATE BILL: Equal Rights Amendment (Debating) on: August 22, 2012, 01:23:26 am
I don't see any problems with this, and given the detailed testimony of the Attorney General, it has my support.

We're happy to have you on board, Senator. Smiley
7572  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: SENATE BILL: Equal Rights Amendment (Debating) on: August 22, 2012, 01:21:16 am
Well, couldn't a gay guy conceivably get more than that much of a glance when we are taking a piss in a urinal? Surely there are some perverted ones.

7573  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: SENATE BILL: Equal Rights Amendment (Debating) on: August 22, 2012, 01:16:52 am
Sbane, I am surprised that you would say that! TJ is wrong.

Let's take a look at the United States. The Equal Rights amendment that passed Congress in 1972 read as follows:
Quote
Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

Let me assure you that a supermajority of the US Congress did not vote to force men and women into the same bathrooms. Why would that apply here? It's a right wing strawman that we should expose for what it is.

As I already said before, I don't think the proponents here or in the US congress are in favor of uni-sex bathrooms. It just could be used later on to create uni-sex bathrooms. Of course that's not really a big deal.

And even dealing with the separate but equal argument, since gender differences are something that are a reality, as opposed to social constructs like race, a court would have much more of a case to rule that separation of the sexes is sometimes necessary, like in a locker room.

I'm not sure that actually is a possibility. Our lawmakers have sharp legal minds, and anywhere from 33% to 50% of the Congress has a law degree. I am confident that they would not have voted so strongly in favor of an amendment that would cause integration of restrooms. It's not like men are going to start playing in the WNBA or anything like that...
7574  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: SENATE BILL: Equal Rights Amendment (Debating) on: August 22, 2012, 01:13:16 am
And Napoleon- because some one with a Johnson is not a female!

Why must restrooms be separated by gender? Since you're the one raising this issue (it's actually a non-issue with regards to the amendment but...), I'd like to be able to understand your side some more.

I don't believe it's my obligation to defend what is a nearly unanimously supported policy...it is common sense to divide males and females for personal business such as using the restroom. I believe it is clear that we need confirmation thru an amendment that this will not be altered
I would like to see a logical argument. If it is common sense and unanimously supported, surely you could conjure up a reason?
Please see my post right above this in response to Sbane...

But you do find it acceptable for women to peep through stalls at other women? There must be a better reason for you to hold this position. I'd like to know, so I can better understand your point of view.
It is simply the fact that men and women, when involved in private activity with exposed private parts, feel more comfortable being seen in such a state by those of their same gender... I don't have poll numbers to jutify this, it is simply a part of human nature or maybe our culture

Thank you Senator. That is more along the lines of what I was looking for. Smiley

How do you reconcile this with the fact that the gender binary is a flawed concept and doesn't take a range of gender identities into account?
7575  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: SENATE BILL: Equal Rights Amendment (Debating) on: August 22, 2012, 01:09:07 am
And Napoleon- because some one with a Johnson is not a female!

Why must restrooms be separated by gender? Since you're the one raising this issue (it's actually a non-issue with regards to the amendment but...), I'd like to be able to understand your side some more.

I don't believe it's my obligation to defend what is a nearly unanimously supported policy...it is common sense to divide males and females for personal business such as using the restroom. I believe it is clear that we need confirmation thru an amendment that this will not be altered
I would like to see a logical argument. If it is common sense and unanimously supported, surely you could conjure up a reason?
Please see my post right above this in response to Sbane...

But you do find it acceptable for women to peep through stalls at other women? There must be a better reason for you to hold this position. I'd like to know, so I can better understand your point of view.
Pages: 1 ... 298 299 300 301 302 [303] 304 305 306 307 308 ... 616


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines