All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Dalak]

It's a bad faith argument, nothing more nothing less.

Par for the course.

On the subject of discrimination in the workplace, what would some of you here say about those cases (featured on the news or elsewhere) where a person seen among left-leaning circles as a privileged identity group (white; male; etc.) successfully sues said workplace for discrimination from peers conversely deemed less privileged (nonwhite and/or female)?

Well it depends on the circumstances of each. It IS possible to be genuinely discriminated against no matter who you are and what 'identity group' you belong to, but with such a vague description I'd have to say I can't make a judgement.

As a side note I don't like the words identity group here, seemingly used to isolate people further rather than being inclusive. Of course that could just be a consequence of reading text without a tone or body language to help interpret.

[Mister Mets]

There are some interesting stories involving the ACLU.

It has refocused its priorities when Trump was in the White House.

Lara Bazelon, director of the University of San Francisco School of Law's Criminal and Juvenile Justice Law and Racial Justice Clinics, covers their problems, including the decision to ghostwrite an Op-Ed for Amber Heard that is central to Johnny Depp's lawsuit.

The heart of Depp’s claim is that Heard ruined his acting career when she published a 2018 op-ed in The Washington Post describing herself as “a public figure representing domestic abuse”—a thinly veiled reference to much-publicized accusations of assault she made against Depp in court filings toward the end of their short-lived marriage. But Heard hadn’t pitched the idea to the Post—the ACLU had. Terence Dougherty, the organization’s general counsel, testified via video deposition that after Heard promised to donate $3.5 million to the organization, the ACLU named her an “ambassador on women’s rights with a focus on gender-based violence.” The ACLU had also spearheaded the effort to place the op-ed, and served as Heard’s ghostwriter. When Heard failed to pay up, Dougherty said, the ACLU collected $100,000 from Depp himself, and another $500,000 from a fund connected to Elon Musk, whom Heard dated after the divorce. (The ACLU denies that it would ever request or solicit donations in exchange for ambassadorships or op-eds.)

The ACLU’s bestowal of an ambassadorship and scribe-for-hire services upon a scandal-plagued actor willing to pay seven figures to transform herself into a victims’ advocate and advance her acting career—Heard pushed for a publication date that coincided with the release of her film Aquaman—is part of the group’s continuing decline. Once a bastion of free speech and high-minded ideals, the ACLU has become in many respects a caricature of its former self.

Over the organization’s 100-year history, the ACLU’s unique value has been its apolitical willingness to stand up for all speech, regardless of the speaker’s identity, and to stand up for those accused, no matter what the accusation. This content-neutral, take-all-comers stance is based on the premise that the silencing of one side will inevitably lead to a collective hush irreconcilable with the free marketplace of ideas and the commitment to due process that are the hallmarks of our democracy. Doing this often-unpopular work turns on the belief that having an informed and independent-minded citizenry requires the ability to countenance, analyze, and, yes, at times defend opposing points of view.

On a sidenote, I recall a commentator saying that it represented a problem in modern politics of people leaving their lane, arguing that a professional speechwriter would have done a much better job than someone from the ACLU who has a different specialty.

One point I agree with is that it's not great for Democrats that free speech is becoming something that's coded right-wing.

An ACLU director recently defended Trump returning to Twitter, which seems to be a course correction for the organization.

ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero said in a statement Tuesday afternoon that Musk's willingness to allow Trump back on Twitter is "the right call."

Romero noted that ACLU is one of Trump's most steadfast opponents, but said "the public has a strong interest in hearing his speech" since he is one of the "most important political figures in this country."
"When a handful of individuals possess so much power over the most important forums for political speech, they should exercise that power with restraint. If Trump violates the platform rules again, Twitter should first employ lesser penalties like removing the offending post — rather than banning a political figure."

It's worth noting he doesn't hint that there's a legal obligation for Twitter to take back Trump.

The ACLU got in the news for a statement about people affected by a repeal of Roe V Wade.

Abortion bans disproportionately harm:
▪️ Black, Indigenous & other people of color
▪️ the LGBTQ community
▪️ immigrants
▪️ young people
▪️ those working to make ends meet
▪️ people with disabilities

Protecting abortion access is an urgent matter of racial and economic justice.

Women was not included, although gay men were. That's an odd choice.

[Mister Mets]

On the subject of discrimination in the workplace, what would some of you here say about those cases (featured on the news or elsewhere) where a person seen among left-leaning circles as a privileged identity group (white; male; etc.) successfully sues said workplace for discrimination from peers conversely deemed less privileged (nonwhite and/or female)?

It would depend on the context.

In most situations, most progressives would say that the workplace failed and that the decision is correct.

Pro-choice is not pro-abortion.



I don't understand this comparison. Abortion is something that affects just the woman, to a much smaller extent her family.
Discrimination in the workplace doesn't just affect the person responsible for the discrimination (which would be a parallel in your example), but people who are being discriminated. Not comparable at all.

It sounds like that argument that some conservatives like to use, that people achieving equal rights and protection is somehow a discrimination against those who had those rights already.

I'm surprised that you're completely unfamiliar with the argument against abortion. It's fine to dismiss the argument (just as it's fine to think that other stuff is more important) but it is surprising that you don't seem familiar with it.

The argument on the pro-life/ anti-abortion side is that the fetus is a living thing, which should be protected. It is not just an extension of the mother.

Most on the pro-life side (and many on the pro-choice side) would believe that it has a soul.

[Ragged Maw]

Par for the course.



Well it depends on the circumstances of each. It IS possible to be genuinely discriminated against no matter who you are and what 'identity group' you belong to, but with such a vague description I'd have to say I can't make a judgement.

Oh yeah. Judging on a case-by-case basis is a wise policy even it requires more effort on average. Won't fault you on that.

As a side note I don't like the words identity group here, seemingly used to isolate people further rather than being inclusive. Of course that could just be a consequence of reading text without a tone or body language to help interpret.

Thing is, just to illustrate, there's a not insignificant chance I could call someone of significantly darker or lighter complexion "black" or "white" respectively, only for them to insist they identify as "mixed" or a member of a certain geographical ancestry, first and foremost. And that's not even adding sex or gender into the mix. Hence why, depending on how the conversation, I use "identity group" as a cautionary, more general term to avoid such pitfalls, at least until specifics come into play. You never know, these days.

[thwhtGuardian]

It's probably better for our culture if there are some things that can be shared by people on the left and the right, rather than having all sorts of entertainment companies go out of their way to identify with one political group.

His argument is that he needs to verify Twitter's numbers on fake accounts. It could also be a pretext to abandon the deal, an effort at renegotiation, a way to keep the deal in the news or it could be God knows what.


I could see Russians being concerned about this due to projection.

Why do you believe his legal argument to be unreasonable?

Fortunately, bullets have gotten cheaper.

Stalin got to lead the Soviet Union, so he certainly counts as a bad Russian.

"Don't want abortions, don't get one" is an argument that the left doesn't accept in other situations. "If you don't like discrimination in the workplace, don't discriminate in the workplace."

I certainly agree that many voters are ignorant, and this has implications for policy preferences (for example, people consistently overestimate the levels of foreign aid.)

I don't see any indication that the average American believes a fetus to be viable after 14 weeks, when the second trimester begins.

That's because it doesn't work in other situations, but it does fit perfectly for abortions. It's 100% a value judgement, if your values don't allow you to think of it as an option for any reason then great I fully support you not getting one, but that individual value cannot and should not be applied to others who do not hold that value.

And again, it's not that voters are confused about 14 weeks they are ignorant on when exactly it even begins and their education tells them that in lay terms the second trimester begins when the fetus begins to develop observable human features and is viable with medical intervention. It does not break it down week by week.

[Malvolio]

There are some interesting stories involving the ACLU.

It has refocused its priorities when Trump was in the White House.

Lara Bazelon, director of the University of San Francisco School of Law's Criminal and Juvenile Justice Law and Racial Justice Clinics, covers their problems, including the decision to ghostwrite an Op-Ed for Amber Heard that is central to Johnny Depp's lawsuit.




On a sidenote, I recall a commentator saying that it represented a problem in modern politics of people leaving their lane, arguing that a professional speechwriter would have done a much better job than someone from the ACLU who has a different specialty.

One point I agree with is that it's not great for Democrats that free speech is becoming something that's coded right-wing.

An ACLU director recently defended Trump returning to Twitter, which seems to be a course correction for the organization.




It's worth noting he doesn't hint that there's a legal obligation for Twitter to take back Trump.

The ACLU got in the news for a statement about people affected by a repeal of Roe V Wade.



Women was not included, although gay men were. That's an odd choice.

It goes without saying that it affects women. However, the only way gay men are directly effected is if a gay transgender man who still has a uterus is raped and impregnated. I can't see any other way a gay man, even a transgender gay man could get accidentally pregnant.

[shooshoomanjoe]

Some dude in combat gear just shot a grocery store and killed ten people.

[babyblob]

Some dude in combat gear just shot a grocery store and killed ten people.

I just saw this on Cnn. This is tragic and sick that this keeps happening.

[babyblob]

Early reports. Not sure how true it is. But it seems to be a racial motivation. The suspect according to some news reports posted a racist manifesto online before the shooting. Could be false Not sure.

[shooshoomanjoe]

Early reports. Not sure how true it is. But it seems to be a racial motivation. The suspect according to some news reports posted a racist manifesto online before the shooting. Could be false Not sure.

White guy in military gear shooting up a grocery store in a black neighborhood. Yea, probably racially motivated.

[babyblob]

White guy in military gear shooting up a grocery store in a black neighborhood. Yea, probably racially motivated.

I am pretty sure thats the case. But no one has officially talked about the racist manifesto and his talk of wanting to target black people.

But it is pretty clear that is what is is.

[babyblob]

Remember when mass shootings were breaking news on tv? Now there are so many that happen they just give it the 3rd story treatment on the local news. We are so used to mass shootings it seems to be breaking news when one doesnt happen.

Even CNN stopped covering it to talk about a new book on Covid.

[4saken1]

This has implications for his presidential bid. We'd figure if he wants to be President again, this can be a source of revenue. Does this mean he's not running? Or does it mean he's running and recognizing the (correctly) bad optics? Or could it be something else (temporary tax break, exploitation of legal loophole, etc.)

With Trump's sycophant followers, there's no such thing as bad optics when it comes to him.

[The Cool Thatguy]

There are some interesting stories involving the ACLU.

It has refocused its priorities when Trump was in the White House.

[URL="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/05/aclu-johnny-depp-amber-heard-trial/629808/"]

The ACLU got in the news for a statement about people affected by a repeal of Roe V Wade.



Women was not included, although gay men were. That's an odd choice.

Do you not understand that LGTB isn't only gay men?

*Edit*

Also, the leaked draft pretty much nukes the right to privacy. So we'd see the return of anti-sodomy laws and striking down same sex marriage.

So yes, gay men would be very much affected.

[Panfoot]

Remember when mass shootings were breaking news on tv? Now there are so many that happen they just give it the 3rd story treatment on the local news. We are so used to mass shootings it seems to be breaking news when one doesnt happen.

Even CNN stopped covering it to talk about a new book on Covid.

Well have "thoughts and prayers" tonight, "it's too soon to talk about gun control" by tomorrow, and by Monday we will have fully moved on.