- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 20, 2012 at 6:47 pm #750713
JoBParticipantdyn99
“”Marriage” is a religious concept that pre-dates the state or really any form of modern government.”
you had likely better fact check that assertion..
i think you will find that the legal construct of marriage had more to do with property rights and inheritance than with religion..
it is true that in some societies, the church was the keeper of records… but not necessarily the arbiter of marriage…
did you know that the ancient Celts married by announcement..
and divorced the same way?
Property rights were tied to clan rights
not to religion..
What any church chooses to do about the ceremony of marriage is their business as long as they don’t accept federal funds which prevent them from discrimination.
However, marriage itself is a civil union with civil rights and responsibilities…
March 20, 2012 at 6:57 pm #750714
JoBParticipantdyn99
“name a state law that provides reduced legal rights for women vs. men. I’d love to research it.”
check tonight’s news:)
any state that passes laws that pertain only to women’s health is discriminating against women.
heck.. Arizona is well on it’s way to requiring a woman to disclose to her employer exactly what medical condition she has that has caused her doctor to prescribe medications that are also used as birth control.
don’t you find that just a tad discriminatory?
if legislators were suggesting we invade your personal medical privacy on the basis of your sex i am pretty sure you would find that discriminatory…
March 20, 2012 at 7:04 pm #750715
waterworldParticipantJV: The data does not really support the claim that many convicted murderers go on to kill again if given a second chance. While I don’t know what you mean by “many” in this context, what the data shows is that the recidivism rate among people convicted of murder and later released is lower than that for any other category of crime.
Also, I think it’s important not to conflate the different degrees of murder in a discussion of capital punishment and alternative sentences. There is no state that authorizes capital punishment for every level of murder; statutes distinguish between premeditated, intentional killings and those that are not premeditated or are not intentional. Capital punishment is generally reserved only for those murders that are not only premeditated and intentional, but that also have one or more aggravating factors, such as murder to cover up some other crime, or multiple murders, or murder combined with a sex crime. And even in the case of aggravated, premeditated, intentional killing, the jury can choose to not impose the death penalty. In this state, the automatic sentence for these most serious homicides is life without parole, unless the jury unanimously agrees to impose death. All the other murders — meaning the vast majority of them — are punished with sentences that are less than the remainder of the offender’s life.
Considering that people convicted of murder, along with virtually every other kind of crime, are very likely to be released at some point in their lives, it is at least worth discussing whether it is in our best interests to ensure that offenders have access to some means of improving or rehabilitating themselves. The single greatest predictor of recidivism across all categories of crime other than sex offenses is the availability of work. A person who is released after serving a sentence for a violent crime, a drug crime, a financial crime, or a property crime is less likely to reoffend if he or she can get a job. So I don’t begrudge prisoners who are trying to earn their high school equivalents or degrees. It adds very little to the expense of incarceration to provide education and work training, it reduces the numbers of infractions committed in prison, and the cost-savings to society in terms of future harm avoided is enormous. When we get caught up in imagining how luxurious prison must be if inmates are able to learn a trade or get some education, we miss the boat entirely: our own interests in being safe in the future, affordably so, are served by these programs. (Besides, no one who has spent time in prison will say it compares favorably to your “college days.” That’s just nuts.)
Also, FWIW, inmates on death row or in maximum security settings are not eligible for conjugal visits in this state. Actually, it is not easy to qualify for what the Department of Corrections calls “extended family visits.” While we tend to think of these solely as visits for the purpose of married prisoners hooking up with their spouses, in reality, as often as not, the visits are used by inmates who are parents to spend private time with their children. And sexually explicit materials are prohibited in all state prisons, to the best of my knowledge. If an offender receives explicit pornography in the mail, it does not get delivered to him.
March 20, 2012 at 7:39 pm #750716
JVMemberThat’s nice and all, but here’s the real world results of your policies…this week. It involved no searching, it was the first Google result.
If you don’t want to read the whole thing, read just the first sentence: TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — A convicted murderer is accused of killing a guard at a north Florida prison, Department of Corrections officials said Monday.
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/19/2702130/inmate-accused-of-killing-florida.html#storylink=cpy
March 20, 2012 at 7:42 pm #750717
JVMemberOr if you want a local example within the last year. It’s so “rare” that google has pages of these stories.
March 20, 2012 at 8:12 pm #750718
kootchmanMemberNo Job.. it wouldn’t… it would lead me to believe that the expansion of both abortion and birth control .. has had pretty much no effect. The data shows … shielded from consequences, an assurance that the safety net is now an uncomfortable hammock… and the single largest contributor to income disparity is the choice to have out of wedlock chldren as you, CDC, DHHS, all point to. We may have done it in the Haystack in the Rumble seat , at rock concerts…. but the stats show… that any cautions in that regard have been thrown to the wind. Look at the numbers. The fellahs didn’t let it fly … so to speak.. not without galoshes and some very practical alternative methods of expresson.. and some social mores. You yourself said it.. want to be poor? Be unmarried and have children. So far increased access to abortion and birth control has meant an increase in fatherless, single parents, living in poverty. You calling that a victory lap?
March 20, 2012 at 8:19 pm #750719
kootchmanMemberHey redblack…. owning a Porsche is legal too… doesn’t mean I should pay for yours. Roe v Wade says it;’s legal … no where does it say I am obliged to pay for it. That’s an entitlement, not a right. One is not like the other.
March 20, 2012 at 8:30 pm #750720
dyn99Participant“Although the institution of marriage pre-dates reliable recorded history, many cultures have legends concerning the origins of marriage” – Wikipedia.
Since everyone else seems to think Wiki is a reliable source, is that good enough for you?
“pre-dates reliable recorded history” certainly means that it pre-dates modern civil society.
And you can take the “church” to mean whatever you want, as it means different things in different religious/cultural backgrounds.
But my statement stands.
March 20, 2012 at 8:33 pm #750721
dyn99ParticipantJoB – I still haven’t heard of a specific law.
And as an employer, my employees have to disclose all medications and medical conditions to our insurer as a condition of our group medical plan, so I don’t see your Arizona law as any different that what men are required to do here.
In any case, my argument was for equal legal rights. I flat out said that discrimination does exist. But I don’t see your example as discriminatory given that my male employees have to do the same thing as a condition of receiving health care (required by the insurer not me).
March 20, 2012 at 9:16 pm #750722
NFiorentiniMemberHere’s a doctor speaking out against one aspect of the War on Women: State-mandated rape…ummmm…I meant “transvaginal ultrasound” legislation…
“Fellow physicians, once again we are being used as tools to screw people over.”
March 20, 2012 at 9:31 pm #750723
dyn99ParticipantNF – I don’t think you’d get many arguments from anyone here that the type of legislation you mention is totally inappropriate.
On a Federal level, it would be unconstitutional.
Any conservative worth their salt would say that this is major government intrustion in their lives that they have no right to do.
I can’t think of a true conservative that thinks if it’s not the Federal Government’s job to do something, then the state should just automatically step in and do it if they feel it should be done.
Most of us just want the government to leave us alone and do what is best for ourselves, our businesses and our families.
But the fact of the matter is that if I was a woman that was subject to that procedure, I would sue the state in Federal court. I’m not a lawyer, but I’ve got to think that violates some sort of federal law.
March 20, 2012 at 9:47 pm #750724
NFiorentiniMember“Any conservative worth their salt would say that this is major government intrustion in their lives that they have no right to do.”
Completely agree. This type of stuff is completely at odds with the things that should be the philosophical underpinnings of conservatism. The problem is … the evangelical nuts have hijacked the GOP and cast aside the real conservatives.
So instead of getting less government, we get laws mandating transvaginal ultrasounds, further restrictions on abortion and family planning, government money for Viagra=OK…contraception=NO!, laws defining marriage, (for the Santorum types) laws upholding someone’s definition of Internet decency, etc.
March 20, 2012 at 10:35 pm #750725
JoBParticipantkootch…
those fellows who let fly
gave rise to the phrase
shotgun wedding
and to many of our family trees
do a little geneology on the wedding dates and first born birthdays in your family tree
only be sure to document the results
because when they could get away with it.. they lied.
you might also want to check the actual birth certificates on some of those “siblings”.
the big difference in those stats
between then and now
is that a guy no longer feels he has to marry a woman when he knocks her up
he doens’t feel he has to support her and his child either
but hey..
it’s all those single mothers, you know
March 20, 2012 at 10:35 pm #750726
JVMemberNF, sorry to upset your little straw man bashing session, but nobody is calling for mandating transvaginal ultrasounds. I guess you just need to talk about SOMETHING to keep people from paying attention to the economy.
Furthermore, we don’t want government money to be used for Viagra OR contraception. It’s not the government’s role.
March 20, 2012 at 10:40 pm #750727
JoBParticipantdyn99
there is quite a bit of recorded Celtic history available to you..
so look it up.
i use the celts as a good example because i am familiar with their legal system
and because they were the “great” civilization in Europe prior to the advent of “the” church.
but you might want to take a look at the Chinese too
whose complex legal system stood apart from their religion
if you overlook that little thing they shared with Europe for so long..
the divinity of their Emperor.
March 20, 2012 at 10:42 pm #750728
NFiorentiniMemberJV-You really should learn to use a search engine before posting. Here’s a bunch of links that you won’t click for news articles…
http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/02/25/3763085/texas-abortion-measure-flies-under.html
http://www.mcall.com/news/local/mc-politics-as-usual-031812-20120317,0,6230336.story
http://www.care2.com/causes/fetus-to-testify-in-ohio-abortion-bill-hearing.html
There are at least a dozen more from various states on this issue.
March 20, 2012 at 10:43 pm #750729
JoBParticipantJV..
sorry to have missed your post
“Again, the Conservative argument comes down to numbers and the Progressive argumet comes down to feelings.”
if only that were true, you and i would have the basis for conversation.
You do know that the presumption of innocence is the cornerstone of our judicial system, don’t you?
nothing touchy feely about that.
March 20, 2012 at 10:51 pm #750730
JVMemberJoB, you just made sense (in post#238), even though it was unintentional!
First, you can check birth certificates…because our relatives weren’t aborted.
Second, the reason that dead beat guys don’t feel like they have to stay around and support their children is because the Gubmint will do it for them! There is a financial incentive to remain unmarried. The dead beat is just reacting to the market forces that were manipulated by the Gubmint.
Welcome to the results of another liberal policy that has had a devastating impact on the country, children, and families.
March 20, 2012 at 10:55 pm #750731
JoBParticipantdyn99..
The Blunt ammendment and it’s clones are working their way through the federal legislature as we speak.
You can call them religious bills if you want to ..
as for the idea that having to release medical information privately to your insurer is the same thing as having to release it to your employer…
how about if we substitute sexual peccadillo for birth control medication and require you to release information about any sexual activity you have which does not confirm to sex for the sole purpose of procreation to your employer…
every time you indulge.
Lets go one further.. lets process that through the office staff so there is plenty of opportunity to gossip…
and lets follow that up with a little “talk” with your boss..
we can make yours female since a woman’s boss is more likely to be male than not.
are you just a little uncomfortable yet?
let’s go a little further..
let’s let that boss get a little nosy
and maybe a lot helpful
and have them explain to you why you have other options ..
you know other than soiling your lovely wife with prurient thoughts and desires…
are you having fun yet?
conversations very like these happened when i first entered the working world between women and their male bosses.
after all.. whether you had a family or not..
you had a uterus and therefore family planning was germane.
It’s a funny thing
but women are as disinclined to discuss their private parts with their boss as men are…
imagine that.
March 20, 2012 at 11:04 pm #750732
JoBParticipantJV..
i don’t know how to break this to you..
but there were abortions and abortionists long before Roe V Wade.
there is a story that floats around among the women in my mother’s family… about an aunt who was one of the first female doctors in North Platte, NE and drove around in a big black car.
I was never able to track down that aunti in my genealogical research until i visited North Platte for a family reunion and ducked into a local bookstore.
I always gravitate to local history.. so imagine my surprise when i discovered that Aunti was the local women’s health practitioner. She delivered the local babies and saw to women’s reproductive health .. including abortions.
You will have to cut Grandma some slack. She had several miscarriages and gave birth to 17 children who lived long enough to get birth certificates.. in a period spanning roughly 20 years.
Grandma didn’t want any more children
especially after gramps took to coming home only for his husbandly rights.
He was into race horses.
So “aunti” visited often.
to give you some historical perspective..
I am over 60
grandma was a little over 50 when her baby girl had me.
that would have made it about a hundred years ago give or take a few
when gramps was playing at the race track
instead of supporting his kids
btw.. too early for those government programs that you say created deadbeat dads
on my husband’s side
his grandfather left his mother in the care of her aunt (her mom’s sister) and her uncle (his brother) when his wife died in childbirth
He never surfaced again in my husband’s grandmother’s life ..
but he does surface in Missouri with another family later on…
deadbeat dads arent’ a new phenomenon.
middle class deadbeat dads who don’t marry the women they impregnate are..
that trend didn’t take off till about 35 years ago..
mine was still the last generation who were expected to marry when “accidents” occurred.
March 20, 2012 at 11:06 pm #750733
JVMemberNF, I was wondering if you read this part from your post
“Although the Texas law doesn’t specify what kind of ultrasound — belly or transvaginal — abortion providers say they almost always must use the transvaginal probe to pick up the heartbeat and describe the fetus in the early stages of pregnancy.
Texas’ sonogram law drew vocal opposition, including from Democratic lawmakers wielding vaginal probes on the House floor.”
No need to discuss it rationally, when MSNBC will show video of Democratic lawmakers wielding vaginal probes on the House floor!
Emotion usually works better than facts when you are trying to appeal to Dim voters.
March 20, 2012 at 11:09 pm #750734
dyn99ParticipantJo – the information is provided to the employer on the application for health insurance which is transmitted from the employer/HR department to the insurance company.
The information is not filed directly with the insurer.
Not how I would like to see it done, but that’s how it’s done. If I wanted to be nosey, I could. But I choose not to. It does me no good as an employer.
The fact of the matter is that employers shouldn’t get involved in ANY aspect of the decision making on insurance or health coverage for their workers. It is a stupid system created in the late 40’s and early 50’s to provide additional incentive for men coming back from the war to be able to support the medical needs of their new families.
It has spiraled into an out of control method by which 30% of the population gets huge, untaxed benefits, and every working class adult thinks should be their “right” like candy coming out of a Pez dispenser.
The only way we fix that problem is by taking the employer out of the equation and making it the individual’s responsibility again.
And it just gets worse when the government gets involved…oh boy…don’t get me started on this again.
Plus, Redblack won’t give up his Cadillac plan to make my compromise, so my single-payer plan is off the table and I’m back to individual responsibility.
I tried compromising, and just got union pushback instead. It seems like unless unions and government employees are willing to give up their non-taxable cadillac coverage, then Goldman employees shouldn’t be expected to either.
Not that I would ever work for Goldman…
March 20, 2012 at 11:19 pm #750735
JoBParticipantdyn99
you didn’t answer my question..
even if you technically have access to personal medical information before you hire…
the law working it’s way through the books in Arizona would give employers access exclusively to women’s medical information after they had been hired.
As for your union pushback quip re: health insurance
you neglect to mention that redblack’s Cadillac plan wasn’t the only hitch in the works
your insistence that you should get to opt out and put money in a tax free plan of your choice was also a sticking point.
an option btw that would only be available to those with means
and you sound like such a reasonable man
March 20, 2012 at 11:22 pm #750736
WorldCitizenParticipantJV Said:
“Second, the reason that dead beat guys don’t feel like they have to stay around and support their children is because the Gubmint will do it for them! There is a financial incentive to remain unmarried. The dead beat is just reacting to the market forces that were manipulated by the Gubmint.
Welcome to the results of another liberal policy that has had a devastating impact on the country, children, and families.”
WorldCitizen Said:
“Haaaaahahahahahahahahaaaaahahahahahhaaaaaa!! ooohhhhhh hahahahahahahahaaaaaa!! ohh ohhh ohhhh…hahahahahaaa!!!!”
Yeah, that’s it…That’s the reason right there – You nailed it! Market forces…Now I’ve heard everything. That’s awesome! Thank you for that.
Really.
Thank you.
March 20, 2012 at 11:31 pm #750737
dyn99ParticipantJoB –
The tax free plan wasn’t an issue. Anyone who wanted could put health care dollars in an HSA account under HSA rules as far as I’m concerned. I just don’t think most people who were struggling to survive would have the means (financial or inherent capabilities) of managing this responsibly. Redblack didn’t really seem concerned with the tax treatment.
The idea was creating the art of a compromise. I gave on the single-payer option for the poor, working poor, and middle class. I would guess that most upper-middle and upper class would opt-out to the private plans. But a fair number of middle class people would too. There are plenty of middle-class families that would prefer to manage their health choices themselves.
Plus my tax proposal on how to pay for it was VERY reasonable. Especially since people with income solely from capital gains & dividends would have to pay for it. And since I subsidized the out of pocket max for people who couldn’t afford it…I was really being fair.
There are some really good conservative ideas that would make the world a better place. But you guys have to be willing to compromise too.
This country needs to be the freeist country in the world at the end of the day. Anything less that will just drive us to be the party of “NO”.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.