4 ms·

I generally don't keep track of responses to my comments because it can end up with bickering, but I made an exception for now because of how proliferate and eg

I generally don't keep track of responses to my comments because it can end up with bickering, but I made an exception for now because of how proliferate and egregiously ridiculous your posts are. That said, I wish to let you know that you desperately need to disconnect from whatever bubbles you're in, take a breath, and get back to reality. I haven't flagged you yet because I prefer honest and informed dialog, but you don't seem to be interested in those topics so I may have to adjust my take. For now, I'll just say: this isn't reddit.

olliej 4y ago
I also appreciate honest dialog, like the fact that every single survey has found that the majority of americans support women's rights. That a sitting member of the Supreme Court has a very plausible rape accusation that has been ignored, the another member of the Supreme Court has a track record of sexist treatment and harassment of court staff, and that one has written at length about how she would at best recuse herself if the law ever disagreed with her faith. Rulings like this clearly attack all women in America, which is over 50% of all Americans. They don't get to just ignore it. It was also realistically a planned ruling - from the GOP deliberating preventing the nomination of an SC under Obama (because it was a "lame duck" session, also "the replacement should also be conservative"), before placing their own appointment on the court, or when they then replaced RBG with a hyper conservative judge in a few weeks despite it being a lame duck session mere weeks prior to the election. The reality is one major american party has stated, very clearly, that its core principles are: removing women's bodily autonomy (check), removing LGBT rights (multiple states have even started passing legislation to explicitly allow bullying LGBT kids at school), suppressing votes of non-white americans (even republican judges, appointed by republican controlled state governments, in republican states have repeatedly declared numerous actions taken by the GOP to be unconstitutional). The fact that you're literally threatening to flag me, because you disagree with me politically, about a matter of whether all humans have rights no less, is quite revealing in of itself.
- jfengel 4y ago
  Rulings like this clearly attack all women in America, which is over 50% of all Americans. And yet a great many women voted for the person who put the definitive votes on this case. Including a majority of white women. I concur with you that this constitutes women attacking other women. I'm merely pointing out that this is the case.
  - olliej 4y ago
    Many anti-choice women have had abortions, because unlike everyone else their need is special. Nah, we should actually do something to reduce the need for abortions like vasectomies for every male in an anti-choice state. The procedure can be reversed once they can prove they are able to be an effective father, etc - and it causes less long term damage than forced pregnancies.

olliej 4y ago

I also appreciate honest dialog, like the fact that every single survey has found that the majority of americans support women's rights. That a sitting member of the Supreme Court has a very plausible rape accusation that has been ignored, the another member of the Supreme Court has a track record of sexist treatment and harassment of court staff, and that one has written at length about how she would at best recuse herself if the law ever disagreed with her faith. Rulings like this clearly attack all women in America, which is over 50% of all Americans. They don't get to just ignore it. It was also realistically a planned ruling - from the GOP deliberating preventing the nomination of an SC under Obama (because it was a "lame duck" session, also "the replacement should also be conservative"), before placing their own appointment on the court, or when they then replaced RBG with a hyper conservative judge in a few weeks despite it being a lame duck session mere weeks prior to the election. The reality is one major american party has stated, very clearly, that its core principles are: removing women's bodily autonomy (check), removing LGBT rights (multiple states have even started passing legislation to explicitly allow bullying LGBT kids at school), suppressing votes of non-white americans (even republican judges, appointed by republican controlled state governments, in republican states have repeatedly declared numerous actions taken by the GOP to be unconstitutional). The fact that you're literally threatening to flag me, because you disagree with me politically, about a matter of whether all humans have rights no less, is quite revealing in of itself.

jfengel 4y ago
Rulings like this clearly attack all women in America, which is over 50% of all Americans. And yet a great many women voted for the person who put the definitive votes on this case. Including a majority of white women. I concur with you that this constitutes women attacking other women. I'm merely pointing out that this is the case.
- olliej 4y ago
  Many anti-choice women have had abortions, because unlike everyone else their need is special. Nah, we should actually do something to reduce the need for abortions like vasectomies for every male in an anti-choice state. The procedure can be reversed once they can prove they are able to be an effective father, etc - and it causes less long term damage than forced pregnancies.