-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
TX State Senator leads 11 hour filibuster that successfully beats anti-abortion bill
- Thread starter ivysaur12
- Start date
- Status
faceless007
Member
Oh damn, I go out for one night this week and miss one of the most important reproductive right's stories in a while. So no one really knows what's happening at this point? Nothing's happening on the stream.
Those optics....
Are cowboy hats part of the mandatory dress code?
I brought this up in a gerrymandering thread before - but you are insane if you think this is something unique to republicans. Illinois redrew their districts in the recent past, and there's some truly loldistricts in that state.
For example:
Gerrymandering is always bad, and we need independent panels to draw districts but the complaint with Texas isn't that they are doing it to consolidate Republican power (actually, that is there defense -- verbatim), but that it is meant to disenfranchise minorities
You make a good point.
Devolution
Member
See the thing is, people who are staunchly against abortion will see it differently.
SolarPowered
Member
They don't care. Their base will continue to eat it up and vote for them.
There are a shit ton of center-right republicans that would be insulted by this ignorance.
smokeandmirrors
Banned
Sub_Level
wants to fuck an Asian grill.
They ignore the timestamp and say it passed anyway. What's to stop them? The rules?
crackhead_bob
Member
I would argue otherwise. I honestly believe that there needs to be an affirming dialogue on this issue that eschews the conventional pretense of shame. It's shame that empowers the religious right on this very issue -- that abortion is something that only sluts get. Statistically, one in three women alive today will have undergone an abortion by the time they reach the age of 45. The prolife movement for years have tried to craft this meme of the irresponsible, selfish woman having abortions, and it has cultivated an attitude among politicians that they can pull shit like what's happening in Texas. Women need to own this issue if they're to seriously break this impasse. They need to be fearless and unapologetic about it.
Gay people can now get married in about 9 states. They wouldn't be enjoying this right today if they were silent, obedient mice.They "came out" of the closet, and owned up to their sexuality. And they spent decade challenging the status quo. Because of the shifting generational demographics, it is going to be a harder sell to convince younger voters on the wisdom of denying gay people the right to marry on account of religious belief. That's a testament to their willingness to come forward and testify on their own behalf.
Likewise, women need to seriously take a page from the gay rights handbook, imo. I empathize with the argument that women who have abortions are entitled to anonymity, and I would respect that too. But seriously, the way this issue keeps going back and forth with antichoice politicians passing b.s. laws like mandatory ultrasounds, etc... I think it might benefit the prochoice movement to assess their losses, and try to evaluate why they seem to be hitting a wall in off election seasons.
DinnerRevealer
Neo Member
For State Troopers, yeah.
I think "how is this legal?" is an excellent question, which could lead to a genuinely excellent answer. It probably won't, though. At least not here.
It's really the only answer. It's legal because...it is. All it requires is for your party to be in power, and have a desire to stay there. All you have to do is make sure it can withstand a court challenge that it isn't racially motivated, and bam. Legal.
Exactly. They will have to call another session to pass the other bills anyway. Just suck it up and try again. Likely they'd rather avoid two rounds of bad press (even though it is good local press)
ClassyPenguin
Banned
Then do something. That is the official Republican Platform. It's not the Dems fault you guys went full Tea Party.
The altercation would have been outside of the senate chamber.
Angelus Errare
Banned
You're too nice, they've used every dog whistle in the book and have lately created some.
I brought this up in a gerrymandering thread before - but you are insane if you think this is something unique to republicans. Illinois redrew their districts in the recent past, and there's some truly loldistricts in that state.
For example:
God damn, there needs to some sort of minimum ratio of perimeter to area that needs to be met, that shit is ridiculous.
They can't actually win elections without massive string-pulling now due to them losing at least a generation. They're barely hanging on and are clawing to life.
Well, I more interpreted it as "why is this legal," which I think is a pretty good question. We don't let elected officials draw districts in California any more because it would, from my perspective, be dumb, and things seem to be working out pretty well. In my view, gerrymanders should be illegal at the federal level.
Well, it's possible it might be a little bit less popular after tonight.
Brawndo Addict
Banned
So if it does pass from the face to face vote call, would the democrats be able to object on the basis it was too loud to know what they were voting on? Or would it just matter if the person who tallied everything says that they knew?
But their own Bureau chief says otherwise.
I brought this up in a gerrymandering thread before - but you are insane if you think this is something unique to republicans. Illinois redrew their districts in the recent past, and there's some truly loldistricts in that state.
For example:
how exhausting is it to play the devil's advocate in every political thread?
NYCmetsfan
Banned
The AP is running with it passed.
That AP report will hit all the newspapers by morning if it goes past printing deadlines. Even if its factually wrong. Setting the narrative.
That AP report will hit all the newspapers by morning if it goes past printing deadlines. Even if its factually wrong. Setting the narrative.
Actually that last part just got thrown out this morning. Still incredibly unethical either way
Mercury Fred
Banned
Welp, it really can't be stated enough, but the modern Republican legislator is an intrinsically evil reprobate. There is no bigger problem the U.S. faces than the deeply corrupt, soulless monsters that make up the GOP leadership.
No there aren't.
How did that slightly sneak in there? You should probably do something about that.
No, they threw out pre-clearance (specifically the criteria for it). You can still challenge laws on the books
I never said I was a Republican, fuck that. At least practice some sort of rational discourse you crazy person.
True; although it currently heavily favors the GOP, gerrymandering can be done by whoever's in power at the right time. I'd love to see Iowa's redistricting procedures adopted countrywide. Unfortunately, since adopting those procedures would break up these insane districts and thus harm incumbents, it'd be really difficult to get the votes.
SolarPowered
Member
Most of these politicians are grey and old. Quite a few probably don't care about what happens beyond their elections.
This doesn't strike you as somewhat of a nihilistic view of law?
Do you think people have a right to equal representation?
They don't seem to elect center-right representatives.
Are you talking about voters? Because I want to believe that. If the republican party was the same party as Nixon and Reagan and Bush and Dole, then I'd be fine, and actually support a lot of their positions.
But the modern elected republican? I don't much in the way of center-right. Certainly not a single one in the US Senate, none of these GOP-run states seem to have many center-right voices, the US House also seems to be almost devoid of them....
User 100115
Banned
I was listening while doing other things. I want a clip of that woman who asked about when women were allowed to speak, please.
They have mechanisms in place. We just have to wait.
- Status