Another protester with hairy armpits proudly held a sign while chanting its slogan, “keep your laws out of my p*ssy.”
To that end, Democrats in Congress are calling on their colleagues to “codify Roe” in federal law. The Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA) introduced by Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.) in June 2021 would do just that. Here’s what you need to know.
By framing the right to abortion as a matter of access to abortion services, the WHPA is taking a page from another major civil rights bill, the Civil Rights Act of 1964. When Congress sought to enforce anti-discrimination requirements in public accommodations such as hotels, public transit and restaurants, it grounded its authority to do so in the Commerce Clause.
I’ve been barking at the moon on Twitter about the leaked decision on Roe v. Wade, trying to point out that it is the job of Congress to pass policy law on the issue of abortion. If delivered as leaked, this decision doesn’t require an Amendment to restore the status quo, nor does the issue have to be relegated to 50 different State legislatures, which all have wildly-varying interpretations on what the policies should be.
Elizabeth Warren made some news by being candid, passionate, and coherent — an unfortunately all-too-rare combination for a sitting Senator — and basically said what I’ve been trying to say: “Congress can keep Roe v. Wade the law of the land; they just need to do it.” And then everyone ignored that, and we got Kamala Harris jumping up in front of a microphone, and delivering a charted symphony of dog whistles.
The article I’ve linked makes the point I’ve been thinking: Congress has gotten a lot of milage from the “interstate commerce” clause of the Constitution. Especially given the varied nature of State statutes governing abortion, it would seem to me that Congress is perfectly positioned to invoked the clause again in order to regulate abortion across the country. In fact, I would argue that the leak should be seen as a blessing, giving time to Congress to lead and be prepared to pass just such a law if and when the time comes.
There’s an open floor for actual leadership in this country. But, no. No one is stepping up. No one is being an adult here. So, instead, we’re letting all the crybabies have the mic. It’s disgraceful. This whole thing is just disgraceful. And I really just can’t wrap my head around how it seems our entire government of elected lawyers can’t figure this one out. I realize everyone wants to capitalize on the political persuasion that’s up for grabs here, given the coming midterms, but the party that takes control of the narrative, makes the case for Congress doing their job, and drafts a bill reflecting a compromise would score huge points in the next election.
I just felt this was a great post, serving to highlight the capriciousness, hypocrisy, and exploitation of kids just trying to get through public eduction. The people who are architecting these policies and curriculums know they have a captive audience. Further, they also know that their only resistance are parents who are too caught up in the adult versions of these same pressures to effectively combat the school boards who are applying them to their kids. Nobody likes being coerced. No one likes being compelled to do things they don’t want to do. Why is so much of society now bent on telling everyone what to do and say and think!?
Old-fashioned parents and teachers needed a wake-up call, and Netflix’s Sex Education has provided just that.
The hit series, which recently blessed our screens once more for its third – and not final! – series, should act as a bible for all teachers and parents who are still stuck in outdated views about sex and relationships.
Parents and teachers no longer have any excuse to slut-shame, be judgemental or show anger or discrimination towards young people’s sexual endeavours – it’s 2021, and as Sex Education says, we should be ‘f*cking [that] pain away’.
I can’t imagine stringing together more wrong words in a row. You only have to look at social statistics for young people for the past 20 or 30 years to understand just how terrible modern society has become as an environment for growing up. Anxiety and depression are becoming staggering problems. I just read a study that reported that the average teenager’s anxiety is what people sought professional psychiatric help for 50 years ago. I’d try to find a source, but only the most-ardent contrarians would dispute that general idea. Doubling down on the behavior that’s making people crazy is probably not the right answer.
In the lawsuit, she argues that denying requests to allow her to ignore students’ preferred names and pronouns “deprived her of due process and equal protection of law” and violated her First Amendment rights to free speech and exercise of religion.
This is essentially the issue that propelled Jordan Petersen to prominence in Canada, and it seems bound for the Supreme Court. Will the Supremes find an interpretation of the First Amendment that can compel people to say things they don’t want to say, under the threat of the police power of the US Federal Government? No matter how desperately much you might want to use the government’s authority to force people to say things you want them to say — about anything; not just transgendered pronouns — the concept seems hard to square with the clear language and intent of the First Amendment. But, hey, Citizens United, so anything could happen these days.
Ricard acknowledges in the suit that despite being told that another student who was listed in school records as female preferred to be addressed by a different name, Ricard called the student “Miss [student’s last name].” Ricard was reminded multiple times to use the student’s preferred name and pronouns, but continued to call the student by their last name only.
That all being said, according to the article, the teacher in question seems to have been deliberately belligerent in addressing the student, and trying to provoke a confrontation. If that’s true, she is… how you say? A jerk. Kids get called by different names all the time. We call our youngest by his middle name, and no teacher has a problem with that.
Like the case of the no-gay-wedding-cakes baker, this case seems to have been specifically engineered to go to court. I guess the people who cheered Amazon and Cloudflare for throwing Parler off their services can thank Masterpiece Cakeshop for establishing the legal affirmation to do so, but I wonder if the people behind Parler would reconsider their (presumed) support of the baker now. I guess we’ll soon find out whether the Supremes will defend the right of individuals in the same way. I don’t see how they couldn’t, but then does the government (school) have the ability to fire her for these shenanigans, even if she has the legal right to do them? We’re probably going to find this out as well…
Chapek said Disney was rethinking how it approaches political donations on Wednesday; on Friday, he said the company would pause them altogether pending an internal review. However, Disney will increase its “support for advocacy groups to combat similar legislation in other states,” Chapek said.
To be clear, Disney considers stopping political donations in Florida to be a “sanction” against the State for trying to pass this law. Regardless of any personal stance on the proposed bill, I just want people to stop and think about what this says about how our government works, the power that political donations gives to corporations, and how the press reports this threat.
Remember when people said that if you changed the definition of marriage, you’d have people marrying, like, robots, or whatever? And then, like, the next year, a bunch of Japanese men did just that, in a mass ceremony? This has the same energy.
This goes hand-in-hand with my prediction that school board elections are about to get super serious.
This also goes hand-in-hand with the death of comedy, because there’s nothing you can’t make fun of any more that a non-insignificant number of people actually believe, and another, larger group of people say you can’t make fun of them for.
“It’s funny, the more trouble Trump gets into, the wilder the charges and conspiracy theories about me seem to get,” Clinton said, drawing laughs as she delivered the keynote speech at the New York State Democratic Convention.
Well that makes a lot of sense, because he learned this tactic, along with all the rest of the politicians in the US, by watching you for the last 30 years.
I honestly can’t believe we’re hearing this from the very person who claimed that the accusations that her husband was a serial philanderer and the Clintons’ financial investments were fraudulent were all part of a “vast right wing conspiracy.”
And I don’t want to hear anyone point out how Trump pardoned Steve Bannon when he learned that trick by watching Bill Clinton get away with pardoning Susan McDougal.
Honestly, every dirty trick, sleight of hand, and skullduggery that Democrats accuse Republicans of doing was made possible by the Clintons, and CNN giving them political cover and running interference for them, every single time.
Truly, her political depravity knows no bounds. It’s so shameful, I almost admire it. It takes a true psychopath to be this nakedly hypocritical. And I could get over it if she would just go away, but like a sticky booger you can’t quite flick off your finger, she keeps clinging on.
But what Rogan and those that defend him have done since video clips of him using the n-word surfaced on social media is arguably just as dangerous as what a mob did when they stormed the US Capitol on January 6 last year.
It’s bad enough to call what happened on January 6th an actual insurrection. Do I think what happened was illegal? No question. Do I think it was serious? Yes. Do I support it? No. Do I think it was an actual attempt to overthrow the government? No. I think it was a poorly thought-out protest gone wrong, despite whatever involvement Trump or his administration might have had to do with it.
After 30 years of the network media warning us that the wingnut contingent was absurdly-armed and poorly-socialized, I would think that if a right-wing group had wanted to occupy the Capitol and prevent the Electoral College vote count, they could have easily overwhelmed the local LEO presence there and done just that. Whatever it was, the people who need to go to jail surely will, even if I think those sentences are overloaded, and trying to send a message. Which, to be fair, they probably should. Anyway, I note that even Jon Blake doesn’t have the guts to put a name to whatever it was. He assumes his readers will fill in the blank for him.
But, then, on top of this house of cards, he calls the utterance of a word to be the same thing as whatever the reader thinks January 6th was. So if you think CNN’s editorial idea of what happened on that day is specious, then you’re not going to make the logical turn here. Again, you can say that it’s rude to say the N-word. You can consider it an act which should remove you from polite society. But at the end of the day, it’s just a word, and it’s a word that’s still in widespread use by a lot of people. And while I won’t say the word, I detest this double standard. The media is not going to make me stop detesting this situation because they tell me that I should be ok with it. Sorry, Jon Blake, but you just don’t have that kind of influence on my life.
So, in effect, this “article” is a dog whistle of a dog whistle to the true-believing Left, written only to further inflame racial and political tensions, and pressure Spotify to censor Rogan in the name of Wokeness. CNN wants me to consider them to be a serious news organization, which doesn’t stoop to “Faux News” levels of jingoism. Uh huh. Dry that one out and you can use it to fertilize the lawn.
This is a perfect, illustrated example of venture capital squeezing out individuals, cornering a market, and trying to extract ALL the profits from it. This sort of behavior is why housing prices have shot up nationwide. Home ownership was already under siege from underemployment, inflation, and educational loan burdens. Now we have the malfeasance of big companies trying to capture the low-hanging fruit in the housing market, which will only serve to further erode the American dream of the middle class, to the benefit of the already-wealthy. Zillow may have over-leveraged their algorithm here, but, rest assured, there are people out there doing this on a wide scale.