American Politics: Fiscal Cliffhanger

[Pizza Friday Forever91]

Yes, that's correct.

Why is spraypainting one garage door with a symbol expressing one's dislike of the owner acceptable but doing so to another is not?

Because one is spraypainting the garage door of a man who wants to kill kids, and the other is a neo nazi.

[Elwher]

Why is spraypainting one garage door with a symbol expressing one's dislike of the owner acceptable but doing so to another is not?

Because one is spraypainting the garage door of a man who wants to kill kids, and the other is a neo nazi.

So all morality is relative, there are no moral absolutes?

[Pizza Friday Forever91]

Because one is spraypainting the garage door of a man who wants to kill kids, and the other is a neo nazi.

So all morality is relative, there are no moral absolutes?

I think there was a dril tweet about this.

[Elwher]

So all morality is relative, there are no moral absolutes?

I think there was a dril tweet about this.

Excuse an old fart's ignorance, but WTF is a dril tweet?

[Pizza Friday Forever91]

I think there was a dril tweet about this.

Excuse an old fart's ignorance, but WTF is a dril tweet?

Not willing to find it right now but it has something to do with no difference between good and bad things.

[Neutraligon]

Because one is spraypainting the garage door of a man who wants to kill kids, and the other is a neo nazi.

So all morality is relative, there are no moral absolutes?

By definition of morality...yes. Morality is in the end the value system by which humans believe we should interact with each other and possibly the animals and environment we live with. Since it is a value system, it is by its very nature subjective. Now, considering that humans do in the end have the same physical needs, are there commonalities, hell yes. The very nature of being a social animal species means that there will be certain commonalities because the societies that do not follow those commonalities tend to die out.

[Elwher]

So all morality is relative, there are no moral absolutes?

By definition of morality...yes. Morality is in the end the value system by which humans believe we should interact with each other and possibly the animals and environment we live with. Since it is a value system, it is by its very nature subjective. Now, considering that humans do in the end have the same physical needs, are there commonalities, hell yes. The very nature of being a social animal species means that there will be certain commonalities because the societies that do not follow those commonalities tend to die out.

Would you then be willing to state that there is no action, no matter how trivial or significant, that is by its very nature good or bad, but it is only so depending on who does it or for what reason?

[Ifreann]

Yes, that's correct.

Why is spraypainting one garage door with a symbol expressing one's dislike of the owner acceptable but doing so to another is not?

Why is killing children by banning life saving healthcare acceptable?

[The Black Forrest]

Yes it is. You routinely go on at some length about how you're so mad about rich people and their expensive apartments that you wish their building was sabotaged in a way that would make living there uncomfortable for them. So, would you approve if that happened to people in affordable housing? Or do you just approve of bad things happening to people you don't like?






Spray painting "FASH" on someone's garage isn't violent.

But spray painting a swastika on someone's garage is a hate crime.

Considering it’s usually left for jews and well minorities; yes it is.

[Elwher]

Why is spraypainting one garage door with a symbol expressing one's dislike of the owner acceptable but doing so to another is not?

Why is killing children by banning life saving healthcare acceptable?

It is not. Why is damaging someone's home acceptable?

[Dominionist Virginia]

Spray paint ain't a hate crime at all, dude. It's spray paint. It is vandalism, however.

This isn't as clever as you want it to be.

Is it hateful? Yes. Is it a petty crime? Sure. But it isn't murder or any other kind of violent crime motivated by hate. It's a petty crime motivated by hate, so technically, I suppose you could call it a "hate crime," but it ranks pretty low down the scale.

[Cannot think of a name]

This isn't as clever as you want it to be.

Is it hateful? Yes. Is it a petty crime? Sure. But it isn't murder or any other kind of violent crime motivated by hate. It's a petty crime motivated by hate, so technically, I suppose you could call it a "hate crime," but it ranks pretty low down the scale.

Still not as clever as you want it to be.

[Dominionist Virginia]

Is it hateful? Yes. Is it a petty crime? Sure. But it isn't murder or any other kind of violent crime motivated by hate. It's a petty crime motivated by hate, so technically, I suppose you could call it a "hate crime," but it ranks pretty low down the scale.

Still not as clever as you want it to be.

Not sure what you mean by "clever" here. I'm not trying to be clever. I'm trying to point out that spray paint is a form of expression, even if it vandalizes things. It's not an act of violence. All spray painting stuff is relatively minor by comparison.

[Terra dei Cittadini]

Still not as clever as you want it to be.

Not sure what you mean by "clever" here. I'm not trying to be clever. I'm trying to point out that spray paint is a form of expression, even if it vandalizes things. It's not an act of violence. All spray painting stuff is relatively minor by comparison.

A hate crime is a hate crime. Doesn't matter if it is physical or not.

Congress has a rightful duty to protect its marginalized residents from all forms of hate, so burning a pride flag or spray painting a swastika is justly a hate crime that can be prosecuted.

[Neutraligon]

By definition of morality...yes. Morality is in the end the value system by which humans believe we should interact with each other and possibly the animals and environment we live with. Since it is a value system, it is by its very nature subjective. Now, considering that humans do in the end have the same physical needs, are there commonalities, hell yes. The very nature of being a social animal species means that there will be certain commonalities because the societies that do not follow those commonalities tend to die out.

Would you then be willing to state that there is no action, no matter how trivial or significant, that is by its very nature good or bad, but it is only so depending on who does it or for what reason?

I do not see how this followed from what I said? I have a value system I prefer (clearly), thus what I say is good or bad is what fits with that value system. Something is not objectively good or bad, because good or bad is subjective by definition. It is how people want each other to act.

[The Black Forrest]

Ah Texas: the State's Senate just passed a bill requiring public school classrooms to display Ten Commandments.

Just further proof that Republicans don't like Separation of Church and State, nothing new:

Senate Bill 1515, authored by state Sen. Phil King, a Republican, requires the Ten Commandments to be displayed in a “conspicuous place” in each classroom in a “size and typeface that is legible to a person with average vision from anywhere in the classroom.”

King has previously said the bill will help restore religious liberties “that were lost” and it “reminds students all across Texas of the importance of a fundamental foundation” of America.

“This Act applies beginning with the 2023-2024 school year,” the bill reads. “This Act takes effect immediately if it receives a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house … If this Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, this Act takes effect September 1, 2023.”

Also Thursday, the Senate passed another bill relating to religion, one which would require schools to allow time for students and employees to pray and read the Bible on each school day. Senate Bill 1396 also passed with a 17-12 vote.

Unfortunately, we can’t say “only in Texas”. As other red states will probably jump on that.

Such actions fascinate me. Also, the lies. Prayer was never banned. Students could pray if they felt the need. Only teacher led prayer was banned.

Still; it’s fascinating peoples faith is weak to where you have to post the 10 commandments and have prayers…meaning teacher led which I am assuming will be back.

[Neutraligon]

Ah Texas: the State's Senate just passed a bill requiring public school classrooms to display Ten Commandments.

Just further proof that Republicans don't like Separation of Church and State, nothing new:

Senate Bill 1515, authored by state Sen. Phil King, a Republican, requires the Ten Commandments to be displayed in a “conspicuous place” in each classroom in a “size and typeface that is legible to a person with average vision from anywhere in the classroom.”

King has previously said the bill will help restore religious liberties “that were lost” and it “reminds students all across Texas of the importance of a fundamental foundation” of America.

“This Act applies beginning with the 2023-2024 school year,” the bill reads. “This Act takes effect immediately if it receives a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house … If this Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, this Act takes effect September 1, 2023.”

Also Thursday, the Senate passed another bill relating to religion, one which would require schools to allow time for students and employees to pray and read the Bible on each school day. Senate Bill 1396 also passed with a 17-12 vote.

Unfortunately, we can’t say “only in Texas”. As other red states will probably jump on that.

Such actions fascinate me. Also, the lies. Prayer was never banned. Students could pray if they felt the need. Only teacher led prayer was banned.

Still; it’s fascinating peoples faith is weak to where you have to post the 10 commandments and have prayers…meaning teacher led which I am assuming will be back.

I wonder which 10 commandments will be put up. Personally if I where a teacher I would put up the ones actually called the 10 commandments. You know the ones that involve not eating a kid in its mother's milk. Well...actually I would not put up the 10 commandments. Or maybe I would put the 7 tenants of Satanism.

[Necroghastia]

Yes, that's correct.

Why is spraypainting one garage door with a symbol expressing one's dislike of the owner acceptable but doing so to another is not?

But spray painting a swastika on someone's garage is a hate crime.

Is it the spray painting that makes it a hate crime, or the symbols and the context where they are used?

[Dominionist Virginia]

Not sure what you mean by "clever" here. I'm not trying to be clever. I'm trying to point out that spray paint is a form of expression, even if it vandalizes things. It's not an act of violence. All spray painting stuff is relatively minor by comparison.

A hate crime is a hate crime. Doesn't matter if it is physical or not.

Congress has a rightful duty to protect its marginalized residents from all forms of hate, so burning a pride flag or spray painting a swastika is justly a hate crime that can be prosecuted.

Ah, that pesky little thing called the First Amendment. But never mind that. All speech is protected, even hate speech, man. Even absolutely horrendous hate speech that I would ban from my house. It's protected from Congressional statute....and from state and local legislation, for that matter. It is not, however, protected from my own personal edict that such people are not welcome in my home.

[San Lumen]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/23/us/missi ... cp-lawsuit

NAACP files lawsuit after Mississippi governor signs legislation expanding state control over Jackson’s judicial system and policing

[Elwher]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/23/us/mississippi-jackson-naacp-lawsuit

NAACP files lawsuit after Mississippi governor signs legislation expanding state control over Jackson’s judicial system and policing

To ask the same question often asked about the abortion pill lawsuits, where doe the NAACP find standing to legitimately file such a suit?

[The Black Forrest]

A hate crime is a hate crime. Doesn't matter if it is physical or not.

Congress has a rightful duty to protect its marginalized residents from all forms of hate, so burning a pride flag or spray painting a swastika is justly a hate crime that can be prosecuted.

Ah, that pesky little thing called the First Amendment. But never mind that. All speech is protected, even hate speech, man. Even absolutely horrendous hate speech that I would ban from my house. It's protected from Congressional statute....and from state and local legislation, for that matter. It is not, however, protected from my own personal edict that such people are not welcome in my home.

Actually, the First is not absolute. It is highly nuanced. Sure you can drop the N bomb. It only annoys people. Use it to incite people? That’s where the hate crimes start.

Hate speeches as well. Sure you aren’t punished by the state for speaking dumb fuckery. Now when such speeches are used to motivate people; you will be……

[The Black Forrest]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/23/us/mississippi-jackson-naacp-lawsuit

NAACP files lawsuit after Mississippi governor signs legislation expanding state control over Jackson’s judicial system and policing

To ask the same question often asked about the abortion pill lawsuits, where doe the NAACP find standing to legitimately file such a suit?

Did you miss the part where they are placing mostly white conservatives in charge of an area which is 80% black?

Not seeing the comparison of this action with the abortion pill lawsuits. Are you arguing that only the people affected can file lawsuits?

[Elwher]

To ask the same question often asked about the abortion pill lawsuits, where doe the NAACP find standing to legitimately file such a suit?

Did you miss the part where they are placing mostly white conservatives in charge of an area which is 80% black?

Not seeing the comparison of this action with the abortion pill lawsuits. Are you arguing that only the people affected can file lawsuits?

That is what the entire concept of legal standing boils down to, so yes.

[The Black Forrest]

Did you miss the part where they are placing mostly white conservatives in charge of an area which is 80% black?

Not seeing the comparison of this action with the abortion pill lawsuits. Are you arguing that only the people affected can file lawsuits?

That is what the entire concept of legal standing boils down to, so yes.

Groups have been filing lawsuits on behalf of others for a long time.