Spot on, that was precisely what the Judges argument stated.
1 Like
That’s exactly what “lack of standing” means in a legal context.
Nah…life didn’t do anything to you…However, anyone as old as you are who is not at least a bit cynical, has not been paying attention…
So, I came across this piece, which outines how the right wing christian nutjob crowd is starting to push back on no-fault divorces, and to make it more difficult to get divorces. And anything that makes it more difficult to divorce would be quite the disaster for e.g. marriages with domestic violence. Discuss.
1 Like
That the SCOTUS agreed to hear this in the first place is an indication of their intent to find ways to restrict women’s reproductive health. The case had no merit to begin with, yet they accepted it anyway.
I have exactly zero confidence in the current SCOTUS. They regularly demonstrate that they are a very broken arm of government.
2 Likes
I should take offence at that, but facts are facts…
1 Like
The 9-0 ruling is at least somewhat encouraging. Thomas even wrote a concurring opinion. I haven’t read it yet, so I don’t know what he said, but at least he didn’t dissent.
He’s afraid they’ll be coming for his Viagra 
3 Likes
Did you notice what he said in his concurring opinion to the Dobbs decision? He said the Court should reconsider prior decisions such as same sex marriage, contraception, etc?
One decision conspicuously missing was Loving v. Virginia. Gee, I wonder why?
3 Likes
What’s even better is the Christian movement to revoke a woman’s right to vote . . . to repeal women’s suffrage.
See below:
There is a belief that a house (or family) should be represented, not individuals . . . as the basic social unit is the family.
So the man (as head of the house) decides what’s best for the family, so he’s the one who votes.
1 Like
The Man Show did a skit on this. Funny, but also sad because most of the people coming up to their booth had no idea what suffrage meant and were more than willing to sign their fake petition to end women’s suffrage.
2 Likes
I know I’m in danger of stating the obvious here, but I suspect that since “suffrage” kind of looks and sounds like it can have something to do with suffering, some people mistakenly take it for another form of “suffering”. So in their minds, “end women’s suffrage” becomes “end women’s suffering.” Which is why they don’t hesitate signing the (fake) petition.
2 Likes
That’s probably an accurate description of why so many women signed the petition. It also illustrates the poor quality of education in this country when people don’t know the difference between suffrage and suffering. They had a sign where it was clearly spelled “suffrage” and the hosts very clearly pronounced the word.
3 Likes
Here’s a little snippet from that link:
“Women are more easily misled than men. Why? Not because women are dumb. Far from it. But women are designed by God to be relational, nurturing, to show care, concern. Within their place, these are beautiful, wonderful, things. But they can mislead us when we as a people let concern for feelings triumph over logic.”
Now once we all stop laughing or seething at that, does anyone notice it contains a no true Scotsman fallacy? Doubly hilarious then to see this clown tack the word logic onto the end of his fallacy.
Next paragraph:
“This is one reason that the 19th amendment was such a bad idea; it gave an avenue for feelings to triumph over needs, facts, truth.”
A poisoning of the well fallacy, he’s on a roll.
“Men are designed by God to be the leaders and, as such, God gave them a more logical mind.”
Leaving aside the hilarity for a minute, I am wondering what he means by logical mind? I keep hearing this rhetoric, but if humans already had a logical mind, then surely taking the time and trouble to create a method of reasoning that adheres to strict principles of validation (logic) would be rather pointless? No one possesses a logical mind, they merely learn to spot logical fallacies, and this clown clearly is using them throughout his misogynistic religious hooey.
I do have to smile when religious apologists invoke the word logic, and get it utterly wrong.
“Men must base their leadership on God’s Word”
So much for adherence to logic then…
“and we must make absolutely certain that our feelings are also under the sway of the Word of God. It’s so very obvious when they aren’t.”"
ON that last part at least he and I can agree on something, very obvious.
“I realize that women’s suffrage is a hot button topic, one that elicits an excitable emotional response in many of us. Rather than taking an honest look at it through labored, intensive, and biblical study, many tend to react to it in a knee-jerk fashion.”
Again palpable irony here, but he seems to genuinely believe that emotions and reason are mutually exclusive, now either I am unique among humans or like me others can be both moved by a topic and still strive for the truth with sound reasoning. If he wants to see knee jerk reactions and poorly reasoned and emotive arguments though, he ought to enter a debate on abortion with religious extremists, if they don’t use the words baby and murder in the first paragraph it is very unusual in my experience.
“what we need to do is to ask has women having the “right to vote” brought glory to our Lord?”
Was that it’s purpose I wonder, and which deity, I mean are they all misogynistic concepts, what about women who are atheists, one imagines that even by his twisted rationale, they have no reason to surrender the vote?
“An emotional response is never a biblical one.”
LMAO…too too fucking hilarious that one…I know one thing this guy’s obsession with the 19th amendment doesn’t extend to the 1st amendment, I doubt he’s read it judging from some of the nonsense he’s posted there.
3 Likes
That was fucking hilarious, many of them didn’t know what suffrage meant, or what the 19th amendment says, and they failed to recognise Jimmy Kimmel.
Seriously laughed my arse off at that, but can only hope they didn’t include the reactions of most people, who understood what it meant, and recognised Jimmy Kimmel.
1 Like
This is just beyond sad. I’ve also been in discussions with both men and women who think women in the U.S. have had the right to vote since the 1800’s, some of whom I was never able to convince otherwise. My grandmothers could actually remember when women couldn’t vote. It’s also frustrating that many young women seem to think that their merits alone got them into certain colleges and jobs. They fail to realize that they wouldn’t even have been allowed in those roles without the women’s rights movement. We’re really doing a piss poor job of teaching these things.
4 Likes
I agree 100%.
The dismal world of “The Handmaiden’s Tale” seems closer and closer every day.
4 Likes
The words used in discussion about abortion that really pisses me of are mother and pro-life. Unfortunately, many who support the right to choose use those words as well.
1 Like
So….i wonder what they think about their book’s story of Jesus in the temple getting pissed and throwing tables around. Is it un-biblical?
1 Like
If you read that link he sounds pretty pissed off that the US moved away from bronze age middle eastern patriarchal morality by enacting the 19th amendment as well, ironic really.
Does he think we won’t notice that a man, bitching that women have more rights in the 21st century in the US, than they had in the middle east under bronze age patriarchal societies, means he has less?
Cry me a fucking river, odd how in their apologetics, the deity they imagine invariable wants what they want, when you get right down to it.
3 Likes