All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!(Part II)

[Gray Lensman]

I am a Republican, so all things being equal, I do prefer Republicans being in control to Democrats being in control.

However, I'm not as convinced of the necessity of fighting Trump. A lot of what he's done is generic Republican policies. The exceptions are areas where congressional oversight is limited (Steve Bannon shouldn't have been anywhere near the White House, but that didn't have anything to do with the advise and consent of Congress; The administration should be more vocal about the murder of Jamal Khashoggi but this isn't something Congress can force.) There are potential overreaches (IE- If Trump were to shut down the Meuller probe) but that hasn't happened yet.

Trump's continual assault on the FBI for having the gall to investigate him should have been called out, not rallied behind.

Trump's assaults on facts need to be stood up to, not accepted.

Trump's destruction of America's international standing via dropping nearly every international agreement he can needs to be stopped - he has pretty much destroyed the value of the nation's word, and that isn't something that can easily be repaired.

All of these are things outside any partisan agenda - but not on Trump's, and as a result the Republican party has remained silent. Deafeningly silent.

[kidfresh512]

Trump administration trying to define transgender out of existence – report

I think this headline sums it up pretty well. In a way it reminds me of Climate Change. Both are real, both are important and the issues around them are important, yet Trump and those around him are trying to use words to make both of them Non-existent.

Words aren't going to stop the Climate from continuing to become more chaotic, that it is changing.

Words aren't going to magically disappear the fact that Sex is defined on many levels, mostly personal ones, a truth that will never change.

Its just the beginning. As minorities the LGBT community is particularly vulnerable to hypocritical "morality" by this administration and the GOP at large. This administration has continually come for the LGBT community trying to ban transgenders in the military, to packing all the courts with as many conservatives as they can find qualified or not to start slapping down progressive, humane rulings.

First its transgender and the excuses here are biological labels. But, oh rest assured they will come for us degenerate gays at large as well. We are minorities and particularly vulnerable to this and hopefully decent society has learned from the incremental steps towards a semblance of equality we got under Obama and vote in midterms.

I took off to go vote first thing in early voting tomorrow. I just hope that enough people who don't think I am a lesser human being because I am gay also choose to vote. Not for me in particular but for people who aren't just hypocritical, hateful people always telling us we should be afraid and separated.

[Mister Mets]

You want to answer this one or just ignore it?

I've addressed a bit, but I'll gladly explain further.

You did set up a relatively weak argument, asking me to demonstrate "that this has a positive purpose and isn't just a way to make the lives of ~1.4 million people even harder" since I don't even have to address whether this is a good or worthwhile policy, but one that offers any benefit. It offers clarity, gets a federal regulation closer to the original purpose/ definition, and removes federal regulations which tend to have some costs in terms of training, and measuring compliance. It doesn't affect any state regulations.

It is STUPID easy to argue for 'biological features such as chromosomes and genitalia' as the defining trait of 'sex' when your 'sex' matches your gender identity AND your sexuality (there's that cis/het privilege we keep hearing about...) and there is no clash. The reality is, though, that for many people, 'having a penis' at birth does not make them 'male', and whatever their 'chromosomes' or 'genitals' say shouldn't take precedence over what the person saddled with the wrong parts wants out of their life.

Did you know that things like 'sex' and 'gender' are actually incredibly fluid in nature, and that what we understand to be 'firm science' as it applies to humans (a species of animal with an inflated sense of self worth) is absolutely NOT firm in the rest of nature?

https://beckman.illinois.edu/news/20...hodesfishstory

Republican policy is that what you are assigned at birth takes precedence over all other considerations, though, so when it comes to that, you'll pay lip service to 'science' that supports your theories, but not when it comes to actual existential threats like climate change that might hurt your wealthy donors bank accounts.

I'm aware that other species can have different sex distinctions. It doesn't really apply to Title IX though.

In the context of this discussion, I am careful to avoid phrases like male or female since those can refer to gender as well as sex. Someone can have a gender identity that is distinct from their biological sex. I'm not denying the difficulties these individuals face; just considering the applicability of a particular statute.

We don't have to twist the definitions of a 1972 law in order to change protections and obligations regarding a protected class. Congress could push for a new law. If Republicans are unwilling to move on it, Democrats can advocate for it in the coming weeks.

Trump's continual assault on the FBI for having the gall to investigate him should have been called out, not rallied behind.

Trump's assaults on facts need to be stood up to, not accepted.

Trump's destruction of America's international standing via dropping nearly every international agreement he can needs to be stopped - he has pretty much destroyed the value of the nation's word, and that isn't something that can easily be repaired.

All of these are things outside any partisan agenda - but not on Trump's, and as a result the Republican party has remained silent. Deafeningly silent.

I don't doubt that congressional Democrats are eager to investigate Trump for lying in speeches and interviews, for making statements against the FBI, and for dropping international agreements. I just don't think that should be Congress's role. These are things that are stupid and wrong, but seem to be legal.

[Gray Lensman]

I don't doubt that congressional Democrats are eager to investigate Trump for lying in speeches and interviews, for making statements against the FBI, and for dropping international agreements. I just don't think that should be Congress's role. These are things that are stupid and wrong, but seem to be legal.

The Republicans were running interference for Trump. That shouldn't be Congress's role either.

I hope the Dems at least win the house, and can manage to find out the depths of what Nunes was pulling.

[Mister Mets]

Republican policies are based on the abjectly monstrous idea that trans people are mentally ill predators who want to rape girls in the bathroom. That gay people are all child molesters who want to have drag queens perform analingus in front of kindergardeners in public libraries. That Muslim refugees are all secretly Isis. That Latinx immigrants are all drug mules and gang members. That women are all hysterical baby murderers in waiting. That only straight, white, Christian landowning males are deserving of recognition and acclaim and prestige and power. The 'bad attitudes' you try to ignore as inconsequential are critical to understanding why and how Republicans vote the way they do and enact the policies they do.


So the Republican solution is to treat immigrants like less-than-human criminals in every case except for when they are wealthy, white, and/or related to the president's former mistress and current third trophy wife. Meanwhile, all anyone on the left wants, when not speaking hyperbolically or imagining a perfect world without petty bullshit like borders, nations, 'race' or money, is to let people immigrate wherever they goddamn please more easily, like we used to do when countless (white) people came over in boats and got to be Americans after maybe filling out a form and taking a pledge. Unless your fears of immigration are less about cultural issues and more about skin color, the current Republican stance makes no sense, and is deeply unethical.


Wealthy people SHOULD pay higher taxes. That is how a healthy, functional society works. You know...'With great power, comes great responsibility' and 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you' and 'from each according to his ability to each according to his need'.The wealthy benefit from societies rules and economic structures to a vastly greater degree than most, and thus SHOULD shoulder more of the burden that GAVE them those advantages. That's how the US used to work, when things were less broken and Ayn Rand hadn't yet been fetishised to the point that her ideals leeched the soul out of your party.


There are. They're called 'doctors' and they don't just hand out surgical procedures like Oprah hands out cars. The government has no place telling doctors what is and is not medically/psychologically sound for or otherwise beneficial to a patient's well being. Which is also why Republicans need to shut the **** up about abortion, but that's another topic entirely.


That's nice. Your party doesn't.


That is utterly laughable, if one pays even sparing attention to reality. Republicans place wealthy, white, Christian cis/het males at the top of the caste system they want for America, above everyone else. Then there are the women who subsume their own liberties and rights to appease their husbands. Then come the PoC and LGBT+ quislings like Ron Christie, Ben Carson or the Log Cabin folks, who are willing to look the other way as Republican/right wing policies kill their mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, sons, daughters and neighbors, as long as they get a tax break. Then there are the white working class, who will never be anything but workers slaving away for the wealthy under Republican policies. Then there are the white working class women. Then there are 'legal' workers of color beneath that, and THEIR wives, mothers and daughters beneath them, and then, WAAAAAAAAAAY at the bottom, are the 'queers' and 'he/shes' who go against God, the 'foreigners' and terrorists...I mean immigrants...who want to destroy America, and the atheists who want to destroy the Baby Jesus.

This is demonstrable fact. These are your party's policies. This is what your party wants. You can PRETEND that this isn't true by focusing on the one or two Republicans who aren't monstrous bastards in human meat suits (and who the base of your party call RINO's, for not being hateful, greedy and ignorant enough), but everyone will know that you're either lying or hopelessly deluded.

I'm not claiming that flawed attitudes have positive tradeoffs. It remains a comment limited to policies.

On immigration, the left hasn't really defined what they want, in terms of what limits are acceptable. Their main stated goal seems to be changing the status of people who came into the country without the permission of the federal government.

Republicans do support non-white people being able to come to this country legally.

I'd agree that the wealthy should pay a higher share than the poor and middle class. And they do. We do have to be careful not to conflate arguments. Whether something is a tradeoff is distinct from whether it's worthwhile, just as whether something is a good policy is a distinct argument from whether a reasonable person could argue it. Don't ask me for something with a lower burden of proof, and then react to something different.

I'm not sure that getting the consent of one doctor is enough of a barrier on whether children should be allowed to undergo hormone treatments that can impair fertility. There is also the question of who pays for the costs, and whether political correctness prevents us from having honest discussions about this, and prevents doctors from addressing the facts. It was widely accepted relatively recently that the majority of gender non-conforming youth grow out of it.

There's a different attitude now, and it's probably not exclusively due to the medical community being wrong in the past.

On the topic of castes, you're not mentioning specific policies, while suggesting relatively extreme things (all cops are bastards, the overwhelming majority of Republicans are monstrous bastards.)

[Panfoot]

I've addressed a bit, but I'll gladly explain further.

You did set up a relatively weak argument, asking me to demonstrate "that this has a positive purpose and isn't just a way to make the lives of ~1.4 million people even harder" since I don't even have to address whether this is a good or worthwhile policy, but one that offers any benefit. It offers clarity, gets a federal regulation closer to the original purpose/ definition, and removes federal regulations which tend to have some costs in terms of training, and measuring compliance. It doesn't affect any state regulations.

Seriously, your only answer is that it offers clarity? It doesn't matter that this would open up a whole bunch of people who already face discrimination to even more discrimination, just for "this word definitively refers to ___". What a load of horseshit and you know it.

[Tami]

I'm not claiming that flawed attitudes have positive tradeoffs. It remains a comment limited to policies.

On immigration, the left hasn't really defined what they want, in terms of what limits are acceptable. Their main stated goal seems to be changing the status of people who came into the country without the permission of the federal government.

Republicans do support non-white people being able to come to this country legally.

The Left is constantly defining what they want, an Immigration policy that Doesn't separate families, incarcerate children, jail immigrants for the crime of daring to step on American Soil. One that gives all immigrants a pathway to citizenship, and allows foreign workers to continue to work in jobs that no American is willing to do. An Immigration Policy that removes the word "Illegal" from the word Immigrant, and treats everyone with respect, dignity, and gives them a right to request asylum and have it processed judiciously and quickly.

There is no need for a Border Wall, what there is need of is a functioning diplomatic corp, State Department, and Intelligence all working to find solutions to the problems we caused in other countries so that the people who live there have no need to leave. Immigration is a problem caused by decades of pushing our problems out onto other countries, or worse.

Make South and Central America Safer, more democratic, and more economically sound, and the people who live there won't want to leave.

[SuperiorIronman]

That's just it. If you want clarity, your paperwork reading female but looking and acting male complicates that.

Because at the end of the day, it's an I.D problem. And it doesn't solve the problem. In fact it makes somebody carding someone that much harder. If you are listed male and yet everything else reads female, I don't know if you realize this, but people do read licenses and will deny services if they are unsure of someone's identity. Now most establishments are outfitted with a book that helps tell a real license from a fake. But you can't guarantee there will be time to use that. Some establishments also have card readers that will automatically reveal the real identity..., except they are beyond expensive and not even retail chains carry them 100%. System upgrades are expensive and really hard to repair.

Just labeling FTM or MTF just makes the situation easier. Not everyone fully transitions or can on a level that makes them easily identifiable as male or female. That discrepancy is going to cause problems especially as a person ages and the longer they go before updating the license.

Not to mention is this doesn't outlaw trans people. It just takes away the identity. Meaning that it makes it easier to assume an identity if one can argue they are transitioning to make up for a discrepancy. This can also royally **** over businesses who now have to account for this discrepancy on top of everything else.




But you didn't think about that because you wanted the icky trans people to go away.
RRR can eat all the ass over this. Thanks for making everyone's lives more complicated instead of just adding 1 label you jackasses!

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Republicans don't want castes, or social strata that can't be escaped or changed.

I have a one word counter argument to that claim:

BULLSHIT!!

[Kevinroc]

Republicans don't want castes, or social strata that can't be escaped or changed. I think you've got the wrong understanding on a lot of this stuff. One reason for pushback on Democratic policies is that they often don't acknowledge that there are other forces than the individual or the state.

Do you even know what your party stands for?

[master of read]

if the GOP doesn't want castes, then i'm lead-belly.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

This thread has literally become.

1. A bunch of people arguing with Mets because he's conservative and takes a conservative viewpoint.
2. Arguing about Bernie and Hillary

[Mister Mets]

Seriously, your only answer is that it offers clarity? It doesn't matter that this would open up a whole bunch of people who already face discrimination to even more discrimination, just for "this word definitively refers to ___". What a load of horseshit and you know it.

You asked about positive purpose, and whether there's any good to it beyond making the lives of around 1.4 million people harder. Responding to that doesn't require demonstrating there are greater benefits, just that there are any benefits.

I've also noted there are other benefits than clarity, including the reduction of regulations, and going closer to the original purpose of a 1972 law.

If we want better federal protections for transgender individuals, we could advocate for Congress to make new laws. Should there be pushback, this can be made into an election issue, and resolved democratically.

The Left is constantly defining what they want, an Immigration policy that Doesn't separate families, incarcerate children, jail immigrants for the crime of daring to step on American Soil. One that gives all immigrants a pathway to citizenship, and allows foreign workers to continue to work in jobs that no American is willing to do. An Immigration Policy that removes the word "Illegal" from the word Immigrant, and treats everyone with respect, dignity, and gives them a right to request asylum and have it processed judiciously and quickly.

There is no need for a Border Wall, what there is need of is a functioning diplomatic corp, State Department, and Intelligence all working to find solutions to the problems we caused in other countries so that the people who live there have no need to leave. Immigration is a problem caused by decades of pushing our problems out onto other countries, or worse.

Make South and Central America Safer, more democratic, and more economically sound, and the people who live there won't want to leave.

The left is vague on much of what they want, in that there aren't any clearly stated limits on immigration. At best, there's a promise to get to that after we make things better for the current illegal immigrants.

There is a fair point that some on the left argue about making things better for South and Central America, to reduce overall immigration, although this remains incomplete. There are some improvements the US can push for, but what can we do about bad policies and corruption in other countries?

That's just it. If you want clarity, your paperwork reading female but looking and acting male complicates that.

Because at the end of the day, it's an I.D problem. And it doesn't solve the problem. In fact it makes somebody carding someone that much harder. If you are listed male and yet everything else reads female, I don't know if you realize this, but people do read licenses and will deny services if they are unsure of someone's identity. Now most establishments are outfitted with a book that helps tell a real license from a fake. But you can't guarantee there will be time to use that. Some establishments also have card readers that will automatically reveal the real identity..., except they are beyond expensive and not even retail chains carry them 100%. System upgrades are expensive and really hard to repair.

Just labeling FTM or MTF just makes the situation easier. Not everyone fully transitions or can on a level that makes them easily identifiable as male or female. That discrepancy is going to cause problems especially as a person ages and the longer they go before updating the license.

Not to mention is this doesn't outlaw trans people. It just takes away the identity. Meaning that it makes it easier to assume an identity if one can argue they are transitioning to make up for a discrepancy. This can also royally **** over businesses who now have to account for this discrepancy on top of everything else.


But you didn't think about that because you wanted the icky trans people to go away.
RRR can eat all the ass over this. Thanks for making everyone's lives more complicated instead of just adding 1 label you jackasses!

Title IX was not intended to solve identification issues for transgender people.

Do you even know what your party stands for?

If you're referring to make America great again, that's not about caste systems. Hell, the Oratio Alger stories are part of the mythology of what they want to return to.

[Baseman]

This thread has literally become.

1. A bunch of people arguing with Mets because he's conservative and takes a conservative viewpoint.
2. Arguing about Bernie and Hillary

Not really surprising.The thread's has a majority left wing view point.Any conservative viewpoint on here is going to be shouted down.

[Malvolio]

That's just it. If you want clarity, your paperwork reading female but looking and acting male complicates that.

Because at the end of the day, it's an I.D problem. And it doesn't solve the problem. In fact it makes somebody carding someone that much harder. If you are listed male and yet everything else reads female, I don't know if you realize this, but people do read licenses and will deny services if they are unsure of someone's identity. Now most establishments are outfitted with a book that helps tell a real license from a fake. But you can't guarantee there will be time to use that. Some establishments also have card readers that will automatically reveal the real identity..., except they are beyond expensive and not even retail chains carry them 100%. System upgrades are expensive and really hard to repair.

Just labeling FTM or MTF just makes the situation easier. Not everyone fully transitions or can on a level that makes them easily identifiable as male or female. That discrepancy is going to cause problems especially as a person ages and the longer they go before updating the license.

Not to mention is this doesn't outlaw trans people. It just takes away the identity. Meaning that it makes it easier to assume an identity if one can argue they are transitioning to make up for a discrepancy. This can also royally **** over businesses who now have to account for this discrepancy on top of everything else.




But you didn't think about that because you wanted the icky trans people to go away.
RRR can eat all the ass over this. Thanks for making everyone's lives more complicated instead of just adding 1 label you jackasses!

Reminds me of people who whine about having to press "1" for English for customer service or at the ATM. They actually think that their minor inconvenience is more important than people being able to communicate while they're learning English, but haven't quite mastered it yet.