Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jan 2, 2013, 06:46 PM   #1
AhmedFaisal
Guest
 
After caving on sandy, boehner kicks back on women this time

<snip>

Last edited by AhmedFaisal; Nov 16, 2013 at 06:01 PM.
  4 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2013, 07:36 PM   #2
leekohler
Banned
 
leekohler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Keep it up, GOP! You'll be a much smaller minority next time around!
leekohler is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2013, 07:38 PM   #3
webbuzz
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Chicago
Quote:
Originally Posted by AhmedFaisal View Post
After his thinly veiled attempt to punish governor christie for his "defection" from obama hatred after sandy, boehner has now moved on to punish women for daring to vote against the party that wants to control their uteri.

Of course the fact that the bill would also protect those damnable gays as well didn't help........ Stay classy GOP
Nobody was punishing Governor Christie. Have you seen the amount of pork in the Sandy Relief Bill? It was close to one billion dollars.

Step out of your echo chamber
webbuzz is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 08:31 AM   #4
mcrain
Banned
 
mcrain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Illinois
Quote:
Originally Posted by webbuzz View Post
Nobody was punishing Governor Christie. Have you seen the amount of pork in the Sandy Relief Bill? It was close to one billion dollars.

Step out of your echo chamber
1 Billion Dollars of "pork?" What is your definition of "pork?" Did you see that a chunk of that was for a new roof for the Smithsonian? Perhaps it wasn't directly related to Sandy, but are you honestly arguing against all government spending on things that need to be done? Or, are you arguing for a "single subject rule" so that amendments can't be added to bills that are unrelated? If so, I've got your back.
mcrain is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 08:45 AM   #5
Huntn
macrumors 603
 
Huntn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Tallest Tree in The Misty Mountains
I agree completely that the GOP is tone deaf when it comes to governing and tends to be hostile towards legislation regarding women.

However I'm not clear on need for the Vioence Against Women Act. This feeling kind of goes along with Hate Crimes legislation. Here is an example: if we have laws against assault and murder, why have separate law that attempts to address the motivations behind specific kinds of assault and murder? Why not incorporate these provisions into existing law, or is that what these kinds of laws accomplish- incorporate specific punishments based on motivations? Is that necessary? Lets say you beat someone up. Now lets say you beat a woman up. Are there different provisions for beating a woman up versus a man? Should they be different? Any words of wisdom appreciated.
__________________
The modern business ethos: "I'm worth it, you're not, and I'm a glutton!"
MBP, 2.2 GHz intel i7, Radeon HD 6750M, Bootcamp: W7.
PC: i5 4670k, 8GB RAM, Asus GTX670 (2GB VRAM), W7.
Huntn is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 09:36 AM   #6
mcrain
Banned
 
mcrain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Illinois
The Violence Against Women Act...
Quote:
provided $1.6 billion toward investigation and prosecution of violent crimes against women, imposed automatic and mandatory restitution on those convicted, and allowed civil redress in cases prosecutors chose to leave unprosecuted. The Act also established the Office on Violence Against Women within the Department of Justice. Wiki
I am not aware of any special funding, restitution or rights to civil redress unless this Act were continued. It always was before, in a bipartisan way. Why not now?
mcrain is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 11:14 AM   #7
lannister80
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicagoland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huntn View Post
if we have laws against assault and murder, why have separate law that attempts to address the motivations behind specific kinds of assault and murder?)
Would you argue that 1st degree murder, 2nd degree murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, etc all be rolled into a single charge/penalty? Same logic, no?
__________________
Early 2008 Mac Pro, 8x2.8GHz, 3.25TB, 18GB RAM
UnRAID NAS, 9TB storage, 3TB parity, 400GB cache
lannister80 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 11:19 AM   #8
skottichan
macrumors 6502a
 
skottichan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Columbus, OH
Send a message via AIM to skottichan Send a message via MSN to skottichan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huntn View Post
I agree completely that the GOP is tone deaf when it comes to governing and tends to be hostile towards legislation regarding women.

However I'm not clear on need for the Vioence Against Women Act. This feeling kind of goes along with Hate Crimes legislation. Here is an example: if we have laws against assault and murder, why have separate law that attempts to address the motivations behind specific kinds of assault and murder? Why not incorporate these provisions into existing law, or is that what these kinds of laws accomplish- incorporate specific punishments based on motivations? Is that necessary? Lets say you beat someone up. Now lets say you beat a woman up. Are there different provisions for beating a woman up versus a man? Should they be different? Any words of wisdom appreciated.
Actually most of the provisions in the act are to set up funding for women's rescue centers and support systems. I find it adorable when cis-gendered, hetero, white men think the standing laws somehow protect minorities and other victimized people. Even today, judges will dismiss domestic violence cases and send the abused back to the abuser, so yes, apparently the standing laws aren't working. If humans weren't dicks to people that don't fit into their little niches, then we wouldn't need hate crime/domestic violence provisions.
skottichan is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 11:57 AM   #9
Happybunny
macrumors 65816
 
Happybunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 's-Hertogenbosch Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by AhmedFaisal View Post
After his thinly veiled attempt to punish governor christie for his "defection" from obama hatred after sandy, boehner has now moved on to punish women for daring to vote against the party that wants to control their uteri.

Of course the fact that the bill would also protect those damnable gays as well didn't help........ Stay classy GOP
After reading this I have the idea that prospective Republican candidates are required to skin a live puppy, and burn a kitten alive, before they are allowed to join the nasty party.
__________________
'You cannot undo history, but you can learn from it'
Happybunny is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 12:06 PM   #10
Huntn
macrumors 603
 
Huntn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Tallest Tree in The Misty Mountains
Quote:
Originally Posted by lannister80 View Post
Would you argue that 1st degree murder, 2nd degree murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, etc all be rolled into a single charge/penalty? Same logic, no?
I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing that the different degrees of murder covers the act of murder for whatever the motivation does it not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by skottichan View Post
Actually most of the provisions in the act are to set up funding for women's rescue centers and support systems. I find it adorable when cis-gendered, hetero, white men think the standing laws somehow protect minorities and other victimized people. Even today, judges will dismiss domestic violence cases and send the abused back to the abuser, so yes, apparently the standing laws aren't working. If humans weren't dicks to people that don't fit into their little niches, then we wouldn't need hate crime/domestic violence provisions.
Thanks for this info.
__________________
The modern business ethos: "I'm worth it, you're not, and I'm a glutton!"
MBP, 2.2 GHz intel i7, Radeon HD 6750M, Bootcamp: W7.
PC: i5 4670k, 8GB RAM, Asus GTX670 (2GB VRAM), W7.
Huntn is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 12:07 PM   #11
PracticalMac
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by leekohler View Post
Keep it up, GOP! You'll be a much smaller minority next time around!
cannot happen fast enough!
__________________
FireWire 1394 Intelligent network guaranteed data transfer, 1500mA power, Ethernet compatible
Read: 160 files, 650MB total, FW400 70% faster then USB2
Write: 160 files, 650MB total, FW400 48% faster
PracticalMac is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2013, 09:51 AM   #12
Zombie Acorn
macrumors 65816
 
Zombie Acorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Actually the house passed a non-amended version of the bill, Obama threatened to veto it. So the real question might be, why does Obama hate women so much that he would compromise their safety in order to take up separate issues in the same bill and/or change a bill that has had bipartisan support in the past?

I don't think illegals who are victims of domestic abuse should have a route to legal status, we have laws on the books that already protect against these abuses, call the police. Oh wait... you are here illegally.
__________________
--2.6 C2Q 4gb DDR3 GTX 260-Win 7--
--2.0 CE Macbook Alum-Leopard--
Zombie Acorn is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2013, 09:59 AM   #13
Bug-Creator
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zombie Acorn View Post
we have laws on the books that already protect against these abuses, call the police. Oh wait... you are here illegally.
Or in other words, you want to make sure pervs can still buy women from abroad (wether as "wife" or visiting them in a brothel) without the danger of getting prosecuted on any violent behaviour ?

If one wants to root out human-trafficing and sex-slaves one has to make sure that the victims are protected from any legal backclash.

(and no, I don't know whether that really was part of the orginal bill)
Bug-Creator is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2013, 01:33 PM   #14
Zombie Acorn
macrumors 65816
 
Zombie Acorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bug-Creator View Post
Or in other words, you want to make sure pervs can still buy women from abroad (wether as "wife" or visiting them in a brothel) without the danger of getting prosecuted on any violent behaviour ?

If one wants to root out human-trafficing and sex-slaves one has to make sure that the victims are protected from any legal backclash.

(and no, I don't know whether that really was part of the orginal bill)
Mail order brides aren't what is being targeted here, we don't have an epidemic of illegals from any country besides one.
Zombie Acorn is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2013, 04:31 PM   #15
Bug-Creator
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Germany
Targeted or not, they still get hit ....

If you want to do something bout all those illegals, I've got a novel thought for you:

Don't crimilize those poor people who just want to make a slightly better life, target those profiting from them.

Read all those farmers employing them in the harvesting season .... ouch thats gonna put a whole new price tag on your food.

Don't forget all those upper-middle class families having an "Esmeralda" cleaning the house and look after the kids.

Make sure they get caught and heavily fined and don't forget to send the middle-men to jail.
Once that is done illegal immigration will drop massivly.
Bug-Creator is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2013, 06:27 PM   #16
skunk
macrumors Demi-God
 
skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Republic of Ukistan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bug-Creator View Post
Targeted or not, they still get hit ....

If you want to do something bout all those illegals, I've got a novel thought for you:

Don't crimilize those poor people who just want to make a slightly better life, target those profiting from them.

Read all those farmers employing them in the harvesting season .... ouch thats gonna put a whole new price tag on your food.

Don't forget all those upper-middle class families having an "Esmeralda" cleaning the house and look after the kids.

Make sure they get caught and heavily fined and don't forget to send the middle-men to jail.
Once that is done illegal immigration will drop massivly.
Even better, why not make it easier for enough people to cross the border legally to satisfy the obvious demand?
__________________
"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted the spoons." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
skunk is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 05:50 PM   #17
Zombie Acorn
macrumors 65816
 
Zombie Acorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bug-Creator View Post
Targeted or not, they still get hit ....

If you want to do something bout all those illegals, I've got a novel thought for you:

Don't crimilize those poor people who just want to make a slightly better life, target those profiting from them.

Read all those farmers employing them in the harvesting season .... ouch thats gonna put a whole new price tag on your food.

Don't forget all those upper-middle class families having an "Esmeralda" cleaning the house and look after the kids.

Make sure they get caught and heavily fined and don't forget to send the middle-men to jail.
Once that is done illegal immigration will drop massivly.
Id actually like the prices to go up, especially if we stop subsidizing corporate farming. It might allow local farmers to get a leg up.
__________________
--2.6 C2Q 4gb DDR3 GTX 260-Win 7--
--2.0 CE Macbook Alum-Leopard--
Zombie Acorn is offline   0 Reply With Quote


Reply
MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:18 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC