American Politics Thread VI: Can't We All Just Get Along?

[Second Indus Order]

because the Vedas say so. Scripture is superior to all collective human wisdom. If scripture says intercourse and marriage are between a man and a woman, than intercourse and marriage are between a man and a woman.

No, they do not. The Vedas have, at times, referred to a third sex and the Kama Sutra, a Hindu text detailing the pleasures of sexuality, states that same-sex experience is "to be engaged in and enjoyed for its own sake as one of the arts." The Gay & Lesbian Vaishnava Association (GALVA) highlights, in its report Homosexuality, Hinduism and the Third Gender, the gender fluidity of Hindu deities, and notes that “everything in this world is a reflection of the original subtle and spiritual reality.” The epic Mahabharata features the transgender character Sikhandin, and depicts the warrior Arjuna cross-dressing to become Brihannala, teacher of fine arts. GALVA further notes, “Vedic culture allowed transgender people of the third sex, known as hijras, to live openly according to their gender identity.”

This is what happens when degenerates like you who have never read the Vedas talk about your opinion. Hijira means hermaphrodite, other than mentioning hermaphrodites no "rights" of them have been mentioned in the Vedas. The kama sutra is not a hindu text. It is not part of the vedas, itihasa, puranas, or any dharmashastra. It is an outside text written in sanskrit which violates every other Hindu scripture, including the vedas and dharmashastras like the manusmriti. You are not even a Hindu, you just googled "dinduism LGBT" and read neo-hindu reformists on the internet.

There is no such thing as "third gender gods" in Hindu dharma. Reincarnating as someone else in a different life does not validate transgender ideology. You absolute nincompoop.

[Neutraligon]

Still missing the point. The point was about laws crafted explicitly to target specific groups.

What do you mean to say?

Sodomy laws like what you support would disproportionately affect homosexuals. They are intended to cause harm to homosexuals. That was the point.

[Second Indus Order]

What do you mean to say?

Sodomy laws like what you support would disproportionately affect homosexuals. They are intended to cause harm to homosexuals. That was the point.

good.

[Neutraligon]

No, they do not. The Vedas have, at times, referred to a third sex and the Kama Sutra, a Hindu text detailing the pleasures of sexuality, states that same-sex experience is "to be engaged in and enjoyed for its own sake as one of the arts." The Gay & Lesbian Vaishnava Association (GALVA) highlights, in its report Homosexuality, Hinduism and the Third Gender, the gender fluidity of Hindu deities, and notes that “everything in this world is a reflection of the original subtle and spiritual reality.” The epic Mahabharata features the transgender character Sikhandin, and depicts the warrior Arjuna cross-dressing to become Brihannala, teacher of fine arts. GALVA further notes, “Vedic culture allowed transgender people of the third sex, known as hijras, to live openly according to their gender identity.”

This is what happens when degenerates like you who have never read the Vedas talk about your opinion. Hijira means hermaphrodite, other than mentioning hermaphrodites no "rights" of them have been mentioned in the Vedas. The kama sutra is not a hindu text. It is not part of the vedas, itihasa, puranas, or any dharmashastra. It is an outside text written in sanskrit which violates every other Hindu scripture, including the vedas and dharmashastras like the manusmriti. You are not even a Hindu, you just googled "dinduism LGBT" and read neo-hindu reformists on the internet.

Not acting as a mod, but I would suggest you read the rules

[Sundiata]

Sodomy laws like what you support would disproportionately affect homosexuals. They are intended to cause harm to homosexuals. That was the point.

good.

C'mon man.

[Neutraligon]

good.

C'mon man.

That is what you where implying with your complaint about it not being illegal. So your c'mon man is very much bark and no bite.

[Second Indus Order]

This is what happens when degenerates like you who have never read the Vedas talk about your opinion. Hijira means hermaphrodite, other than mentioning hermaphrodites no "rights" of them have been mentioned in the Vedas. The kama sutra is not a hindu text. It is not part of the vedas, itihasa, puranas, or any dharmashastra. It is an outside text written in sanskrit which violates every other Hindu scripture, including the vedas and dharmashastras like the manusmriti. You are not even a Hindu, you just googled "dinduism LGBT" and read neo-hindu reformists on the internet.

Not acting as a mod, but I would suggest you read the rules

I understand the restrictions of the rules regarding with my opinions on LGBT and thank you for notifying me on it. But I was merely refuting the claim that LGBT is approved in hindu dharma, not whether it is good or bad.

[Great Algerstonia]

good.

C'mon man.

I am confused. Are you for sodomy laws or against sodomy laws?

[Kowani]

We shouldn't make it illegal for blacks to vote...we just need to make sure that people pass a certain test in order to vote.

any IQ based test would keep a vast majority of blacks in the united states from voting. lol.

it's just gonna be one of those days

[Neutraligon]

Not acting as a mod, but I would suggest you read the rules

I understand the restrictions of the rules regarding with my opinions on LGBT and thank you for notifying me on it. But I was merely refuting the claim that LGBT is approved in hindu dharma, not whether it is good or bad.

The point was not your objection to LGBT individuals, it was to your attacking the poster, otherwise known as flaming.

[Second Indus Order]

I understand the restrictions of the rules regarding with my opinions on LGBT and thank you for notifying me on it. But I was merely refuting the claim that LGBT is approved in hindu dharma, not whether it is good or bad.

The point was not your objection to LGBT individuals, it was to your attacking the poster, otherwise known as flaming.

I understand and I deeply regret calling him a nincompoop.

[Reploid Productions]

We shouldn't make it illegal for blacks to vote...we just need to make sure that people pass a certain test in order to vote.

any IQ based test would keep a vast majority of blacks in the united states from voting. lol.

This is what happens when degenerates like you
<snip> You absolute nincompoop.

Sodomy laws like what you support would disproportionately affect homosexuals. They are intended to cause harm to homosexuals. That was the point.

good.

So... we've got flaming, we've got trolling, and we've got trolling of the "wishing harm" variety.

*** Second Indus Order, 3-day ban for blatant flaming/trolling. *** The site rules. Review them. Because if you keep on posting and "debating" in this manner, your time with us is going to end up cut short.

~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Mod
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku

[Meretica]

No, they do not. The Vedas have, at times, referred to a third sex and the Kama Sutra, a Hindu text detailing the pleasures of sexuality, states that same-sex experience is "to be engaged in and enjoyed for its own sake as one of the arts." The Gay & Lesbian Vaishnava Association (GALVA) highlights, in its report Homosexuality, Hinduism and the Third Gender, the gender fluidity of Hindu deities, and notes that “everything in this world is a reflection of the original subtle and spiritual reality.” The epic Mahabharata features the transgender character Sikhandin, and depicts the warrior Arjuna cross-dressing to become Brihannala, teacher of fine arts. GALVA further notes, “Vedic culture allowed transgender people of the third sex, known as hijras, to live openly according to their gender identity.”

This is what happens when degenerates like you who have never read the Vedas talk about your opinion. Hijira means hermaphrodite, other than mentioning hermaphrodites no "rights" of them have been mentioned in the Vedas. The kama sutra is not a hindu text. It is not part of the vedas, itihasa, puranas, or any dharmashastra. It is an outside text written in sanskrit which violates every other Hindu scripture, including the vedas and dharmashastras like the manusmriti. You are not even a Hindu, you just googled "dinduism LGBT" and read neo-hindu reformists on the internet.

There is no such thing as "third gender gods" in Hindu dharma. Reincarnating as someone else in a different life does not validate transgender ideology. You absolute nincompoop.

The Kama Sutra is one of the oldest surviving Hindu texts on erotic love. No, I am not a Hindu, but based on my understanding of Hindu culture, the nation of India, and the complexities that come from within one of the largest major religions on the planet and its connections to the largest democracy on the planet, while it is technically not wrong based on certain Hindu texts to be a homosexual, it is widely considered to be a wrong among practicing Hindus and Indians alike. Much opposition comes from tradition rather than from the texts themselves. Even the likes of Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and FDR were opposed to homosexual rights, largely because that was the kind of culture that they grew up in.

[Meretica]

Do you think that there would be any hope of holding a modern constitutional convention, or would that be doomed from the start? Why or why not?

My Answer:
I believe that a modern constitutional convention would have a 50/50 shot of working out, ideally with mostly moderates and centrists making up the bulk of the constitution's planners. People like the Romneys, the Rockefellers (economically right, socially left, extremely bipartisan, believe in compromise) would be able to help build a foundation based on popular and national sovereignty, enabling people to have a greater say in government. States would be dissolved and replaced by districts with each district having two representatives, one elected to represent the district itself and the other elected to represent the most popular party in that district. RCV would be used for these dual-member districts; the number of districts would determine the cubed root of the population of the nation and create half that many districts. (There are 328,000,000+ Americans. The cubed root of that is roughly 690. Half of that is 345. This would create 345 districts and 690 elected representatives.) The presidency would ideally be a separate office where the people nominate multiple candidates and host a jungle primary. Following that primary, RCV would be used to determine the presidential victor. The Supreme Court would be made up of 23 Justices (1 for every 15 Districts) that would be chosen from within 23 court zones. All justices would be appointed by the president and then approved by the legislature.

[Sundiata]

Do you think that there would be any hope of holding a modern constitutional convention, or would that be doomed from the start? Why or why not?

I believe it would be doomed from the start, as the American constitution was not designed for the poor, or for that matter, people of color. The Founding Fathers were the oligarchs of their time.

Many legal reforms would have to occur before a process like that could be fruitful for anyone who believes in democracy.

[Page]

I'm all for a Constitutional Convention, but only after the wealth of the oligarchs has been expropriated and their government lapdogs stripped of their power. Then we reaffirm the Bill of Rights and make a new bill of positive liberties, guaranteeing food, water, housing, utilities, health care, and education as inalienable rights. The next thing I would do is take away most of the President's war powers. Warfare would be redefined to include drone and air strike campaigns and boots on the ground in an advisory role. The President would only be empowered to command the military in the event of an attack or an imminent attack, and then Congress would have to vote on whether to proceed. Then automatic voter registration and mail ballots sent to the addresses of every US citizen 16 years old older. Then an amendment that actions that do not cause direct harm to others cannot be criminalized. Then a mandate to create a post-policing America in which armed officers are held in reserve only in the case of emergencies and arrest is only an option if the crime cannot be settled through mediation or offering aid.

Also pitbull bans are unconstitutional, also male genital mutilation is prohibited, also no HOA's ever again.

[Kilobugya]

There are a few scenarios where authoritarianism is preferable. America is in none of those situations

There are NO scenarios where authoritarianism is preferable, my guy.

Well, it's not a binary switch either full authoritarianism or none at all. There are situations, scenarios, for which some amount of authoritarianism is required. To tackle a pandemics, to fight climate change, to win a war for survival, to deal with the aftermath of a natural disaster, for example.

But we have to be very, very, very careful. Every time we resort to some kind of "authoritarian" measure, even if it's on a temporary basis and very justified by the situation, we do some damage to the fabric of society and we feed a downward spiral towards more and more authoritarianism. So we have to do it only when absolutely required, in the least authoritarian way, with all possible safeguards to ensure it doesn't extent beyond its original purpose.

[Kilobugya]

See, if I lived in Europe, I would gladly be part of the majority of their mainstream center-right parties. Definitely if were talking about the CDU in Germany or the LRM in France. The GOP is fucking batshit crazy and degenerate. It makes me want to puke.

LRM (actually usually written LREM) is "center-right" only in its image. In reality, it's the most authoritarian, extreme right enabler, free market fanatics bent on a systematic destruction of our social system that you can find, all centered on the cult of Jupiter (Macron) who can never be wrong.

[Sundiata]

C'mon man.

I am confused. Are you for sodomy laws or against sodomy laws?

For them, including amongst heterosexuals.

[Kilobugya]

Then an amendment that actions that do not cause direct harm to others cannot be criminalized.

I agree with most of the rest you said, that part is quite problematic, due to the very fuzzy nature of what constitute "direct" harm compared to "indirect" harm. Is pollution doing "direct" or "indirect" harm ? What about second-hand smoking ? What about driving when drunk or stoned, when it's only a risk of harm ? What about Ponzi schemes ? What about refusing to wear a mask or respect physical distancing during a pandemic ? I could continue for long with many examples where the line between "direct" and "indirect" harm is not that easy to draw. Having such an amendment would mean endless lawyer debate about what is "direct" and "indirect" and give an enormous power to those having a final say on that question (ie, Supreme Court).

[Kilobugya]

I am confused. Are you for sodomy laws or against sodomy laws?

For them, including amongst heterosexuals.

Why do you care so much what consenting adults do in their bedroom, as long as no one forces you to watch them or participate ?

[Sundiata]

For them, including amongst heterosexuals.

Why do you care so much what consenting adults do in their bedroom, as long as no one forces you to watch them or participate ?

Because whether heterosexual or homosexual, degradation is not good.

[Thermodolia]

The landslide to democrats if Roe is overturned would be so massive that the voting restrictions wouldn’t matter.


It won’t matter if the wave is large enough to utterly crush them

You cannot out-vote an election being overturned by Republican fiat

That’s not what I’m talking about though. I’m saying that you can defeat the voting restrictions by just voting in such a large number that it defeats the purpose

[Kilobugya]

Why do you care so much what consenting adults do in their bedroom, as long as no one forces you to watch them or participate ?

Because whether heterosexual or homosexual, degradation is not good.

How is consensual anal sex "degradation" and why is it your business ? What does "degradation" even mean ? If it's anything potentially harmful physically or psychologically if done wrong, well, then you should not only ban "sodomy" but about all kind of human activity.

[Thermodolia]

Republican Party is not a hivemind

It more or less is, though? If you don't kiss Trumps ass and parrot his talking points you're more or less kicked from the party by default. That's radically different from how the Dems work for example.

At times I wish the democrats where as lock step or as passionate as the republicans. Imagine the things that could get done. And then I do and I realize that I’m really wishing for a green progressive party