Republican WAR on women

Bardox

Loved Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Posts
2,234
Media
38
Likes
551
Points
198
Location
U.S.
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Ok, slight change of topic for a moment. I love it when any gay person stands up for republican politicians. These are people who see your very existence as an affront to god. They believe you to be an abomination. The majority of republicans run on issues directly against you and tell you outright "don't vote for me". Scott Walker tried to ban gay people from visiting their lover in the hosptial when they are hurt or sick... and you are defending these people? Just.... wow....
 

redneckgymrat

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Posts
1,479
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
73
Location
Texas
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Scott Walker tried to ban gay people from visiting their lover in the hosptial when they are hurt or sick... and you are defending these people? Just.... wow....

So, because you disagree with a single (though, apparently very important to you) plank in the Republican platform, you believe that all positions held by all Republicans are universally wrong?

Wow...just wow.

I actually thought his post was remarkably well considered, dispassionate, and thorough.
 

NightOwlGate

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2010
Posts
163
Media
2
Likes
8
Points
53
Sexuality
69% Gay, 31% Straight
Gender
Male
This typical liberal rhetoric is fucking hilarious, by the way.

Some people are just so obnoxiously ignorant. Darwin hates liberals because they contradict his theory of evolution.

So, because you disagree with a single (though, apparently very important to you) plank in the Republican platform, you believe that all positions held by all Republicans are universally wrong?

Wow...just wow.

I actually thought his post was remarkably well considered, dispassionate, and thorough.
Reasoning with a liberal is impossible. I've tried it many times, but no matter how many of their deluded ideas you prove wrong with facts, they still think they're morally and intellectually superior. The irony is incredible.
 

blazblue

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Posts
1,195
Media
0
Likes
35
Points
73
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
This typical liberal rhetoric is fucking hilarious, by the way.

Some people are just so obnoxiously ignorant. Darwin hates liberals because they contradict his theory of evolution.


Reasoning with a liberal is impossible. I've tried it many times, but no matter how many of their deluded ideas you prove wrong with facts, they still think they're morally and intellectually superior. The irony is incredible.

Reasoning with conservatives such as yourself is impossible as well.
 

redneckgymrat

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Posts
1,479
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
73
Location
Texas
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
If the right had its way, women couldn't vote, whites couldn't mary non-whites and rosa parks would have been locked up for trespassing.

Freed the slaves - Republican
Women's rights - Republican
Civil rights movement - Republican
Food stamps/government cheese - Republican

Separate but equal - Democrat
3/5 compromise - Democrat

Where do you get your upside down view of the world? Read history, and you'll see which side is the *true* champion of freedom and rights...and which side is not.
 
Last edited:

SR_Dee_Zasther

1st Like
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Posts
145
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
53
Sexuality
No Response
Freed the slaves - Republican
Women's rights - Republican
Civil rights movement - Republican
Food stamps/government cheese - Republican

Separate but equal - Democrat
5/8 compromise - Democrat

Where do you get your upside down view of the world? Read history, and you'll see which side is the *true* champion of freedom and rights...and which side is not.

So your point is what . . that the Republican party is less of a progressive and modern party that it was a century ago? I'll heartily agree with that. And for the record, I'm pretty sure that FDR (government cheese) was a a democrat, as was LBJ when he signed the Civil Rights Act and JFK before him when he was pushing it through. And that was pretty much the end of progressive, for the people republicans because immediately after that we got Nixon and his "make the Republican party the party of racism" Southern Strategy.
 

tamati

Sexy Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Posts
1,875
Media
7
Likes
94
Points
308
Location
NorCal
Verification
View
Gender
Male
Freed the slaves - Republican
Women's rights - Republican
Civil rights movement - Republican
Food stamps/government cheese - Republican

Separate but equal - Democrat
3/5 compromise - Democrat

Where do you get your upside down view of the world? Read history, and you'll see which side is the *true* champion of freedom and rights...and which side is not.

Im not taking about the old gop, the one with a soul. I mean the current, believe anything on faux as gospel, perversion that the gop has become since regan.
 

Klingsor

Worshipped Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Posts
10,888
Media
4
Likes
11,638
Points
293
Location
Champaign (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
Actually you are correct, and quite honestly in private business transactions there is room for discrimination. A private bus company should ultimately have the right to make whatever rules it chooses, even discriminatory ones, as long as there are alternatives. No one is denied a basic liberty or right by not being able to ride in a certain seat on the bus. Obviously, if the service is provided publicly the rules are different and any rules set by the company would have to adhere to a number of legal restrictions. The only reason we protect workers rights to fair pay is because work is not an optional service like a bus ride. Most people cannot maintain any standard of living without a job.

We'll have to agree to disagree there; I don't see how being a private company entitles you to discriminate.

It's interesting that you make an exception for a private company offering service to the general public. Your conservative predecessors would have called you a flaming liberal for that, since they fought tooth and nail against that very provision of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Backs up my theory that, on social issues at least, a conservtive is just a liberal who's a generation behind the times. :wink:

Those might be the breaks in a bad economy. Whats wrong with a little competition?

I'll leave you to consider just how many injustices that old "those are just the breaks" argument has defended.

I offer hispanics as a perfect example. I dont have any statistics on hand but I would imagine hispanics get paid on average less than their white counterparts. It is my perception that hispanics, on average, value family more than the population in general. If hispanic workers tend to put their families before their jobs, it is possible that they do not commit as strongly to certain job responsibility as others. If a company perceives a worker to have higher priorities than their job, even if they are relatively good at it, they may not be offered the same opportunities for advancement or raises. And why should they? A company often makes major investments in its workers when it chooses to advance them or transition them into any new role. Why make an investment in someone who shows signs of not making the most out of that investment?

"I don't have any statistics . . . it is my perception . . . if . . . if . . . if."

You're gonna need a LOT more evidence if you want to argue that hispanics don't work as hard as others.

Because sweeping legislation to end all discriminatory practices would require unconscionable government intervention and downright intrusion. Ive already said, unfair pay practices need to be addressed on a case by case basis, and thats what the courts are for.

A basic philosophical difference. I believe there are unjust circumstances where government intervention, intrusion, whatever you want to call it, is absolutely warranted. Otherwise, there's little point in having a government at all.

I would go so far as to say, it would be okay if every single woman in the United States got paid less than every single man in the United States. Conversely, it would also be okay if every single woman in the United States got paid MORE than every single man. So long as people are WILLING and able to enter contractual employment, they can earn whatever they are able to negotiate.

A strange notion. You know full well, it would be statistically impossible for every woman to get paid less than every man, or vice versa, purely by chance. The fact that women do get paid less than men so consistently shows that we're dealing with more than just individual negotiations on a level playing field.

Hardly. First of all it is not the same battle. Each case is individual, which is why some are lost and some are won. Again, I wont debate the efficiency of the court system, but to call it unjust is simply ignorant.

Each case is individual, but the discrimination is systemic. It's the latter that needs to be countered on an equally broad basis.
 
Last edited:

sbat

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2010
Posts
2,295
Media
0
Likes
28
Points
73
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Freed the slaves - Republican
Women's rights - Republican
Civil rights movement - Republican
Food stamps/government cheese - Republican

Separate but equal - Democrat
3/5 compromise - Democrat

Where do you get your upside down view of the world? Read history, and you'll see which side is the *true* champion of freedom and rights...and which side is not.

True, but the Republicans were the "liberal" party until the realignment of the Nixon era. Thread should read "Conservatives' WAR on women"
 

sbat

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2010
Posts
2,295
Media
0
Likes
28
Points
73
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
We'll have to agree to disagree there; I don't see how being a private company entitles you to discriminate.

As a private business owner, I'd like to be able to legally defend my decision-making when hedging against losses (and going out of business) when I take business risks. If I can't say "I won't award a contract to this company because they have a horrible track record" because they happen to be minority owned and have the right to sue me for discrimination, you've basically killed incentives for profit making behaviors. We're looking at just a different flavor of Soviet Russia in its heyday.