Two interesting proposed legislations

Status
Not open for further replies.
CrimsonSoul

CrimsonSoul

So I went to early voting today for the Texas Primary and two proposed pieces of legislation caught my eye. Number 1: "Public acknowledgment of god" making it okay to display things such as the ten commandments in a public place. Number 2: a proposal that would make it a requirement for mothers to get a sonogram and be shown it before getting a medically unnecessary abortion.

Not going to say how I voted as that's troll bait either way I roll but I thought it was interesting and wanted to share
 
Dave

Dave

Staff member
Both proposals are abhorrent. But as this is Texas they will both probably pass as they are very "feel good". Both will be struck down if passed but who cares about that? Let's waste the time to try and circumvent the separation of church and state and use bullshit legislation to browbeat or intimidate women who already have a difficult path to walk.
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

If they're going to allow the ten commandments, then they should also allow Jews to write religious passages in Hebrew over doorways (such is their custom in some areas) and Muslims to post passages from the Qur'an. Maybe allow space in public parks for Wiccans to practice. It'd be only fair, right?

The abortion thing? How about a stronger promotion of safe sex in the schools, instead? Short of returning chastity belts, you can't stop 'em, so you educate 'em as best as possible.
 
Krisken

Krisken

Usually I'd be all over something like this, but all I have to say is "Yup, thats Texas for ya."

Ok, I have more, but I'll keep it to myself.
 
C

Chibibar

The abortion thing, why not have better sex education? A lot of faculty don't really talk about it in school and nothing is really taught in most homes (some do but most don't). If you have safer sex, then there will be less need for abortion.

I think the god thing is a bit far. There are SO many religion in Texas that is not Christian base but recognize. Buddhist for example, are we going to have praying area or large golden statues? Muslim pray 6 times a day? will there be breaks to allow student to pray?
 
Espy

Espy

If the first one has language to show and protect ALL religions... I still don't like it. It's not something I want my government doing or condoning. As to the sonogram thing? I have no issue with someone actually making an informed decision.
 
C

Chazwozel

ThatNickGuy said:
If they're going to allow the ten commandments, then they should also allow Jews to write religious passages in Hebrew over doorways (such is their custom in some areas) and Muslims to post passages from the Qur'an. Maybe allow space in public parks for Wiccans to practice. It'd be only fair, right?

The abortion thing? How about a stronger promotion of safe sex in the schools, instead? Short of returning chastity belts, you can't stop 'em, so you educate 'em as best as possible.
Click to expand...

Fuck that. I want to post Satanist scripture in public places and see how that flies.
 
C

Chibibar

Chazwozel;341911][QUOTE=ThatNickGuy said:
If they're going to allow the ten commandments, then they should also allow Jews to write religious passages in Hebrew over doorways (such is their custom in some areas) and Muslims to post passages from the Qur'an. Maybe allow space in public parks for Wiccans to practice. It'd be only fair, right?

The abortion thing? How about a stronger promotion of safe sex in the schools, instead? Short of returning chastity belts, you can't stop 'em, so you educate 'em as best as possible.
Click to expand...

Fuck that. I want to post Satanist scripture in public places and see how that flies.[/QUOTE]

or voodoo (or whatever religion that can sacrifice animals) I want an alter so I can do my weekly sacrifice ;)
 
tegid

tegid

Why should it be forbidden to have a sign with the ten commandments hanging on my balcony (or saying 'Moses was a hack', for that matter)?
 
Krisken

Krisken

tegid said:
Why should it be forbidden to have a sign with the ten commandments hanging on my balcony (or saying 'Moses was a hack', for that matter)?
Click to expand...
No, no. On public buildings. Like a courthouse, or City Hall, or the Police Station. On your property, you can do what you want so long as it doesn't break city statutes.
 
AshburnerX

AshburnerX

tegid said:
Why should it be forbidden to have a sign with the ten commandments hanging on my balcony (or saying 'Moses was a hack', for that matter)?
Click to expand...
It's not, if your a private residence or business. They are trying to get something through so they can have these things in public and government locations like parks and courthouses. Lots of government buildings in more conservative areas have had to take down ten commandments monuments, crosses, and Christmas displays because people were complaining about the separation of Church & State and how having these things were seen as the government promoting one religion or sect above the others.
 
tegid

tegid

Ah, ok! I was misunderstanding the 'public places' part.

If it's like this then yeah, what the fuck Texas.
 
R

rabbitgod

Something I've never quite understood about the whole 10 commandments at courthouses thing is, How often are you there that you need to see the 10 commandments? I mean, if you put them up in your house you see them everyday, including days you go to court. I've been to the various levels of courts maybe 12 times in my life. Once to get my marriage license and almost all the rest of the times for field trips. Hell the only time I've been to our county recorders office is to look at it's architecture for school.
 
C

Chibibar

rabbitgod said:
Something I've never quite understood about the whole 10 commandments at courthouses thing is, How often are you there that you need to see the 10 commandments? I mean, if you put them up in your house you see them everyday, including days you go to court. I've been to the various levels of courts maybe 12 times in my life. Once to get my marriage license and almost all the rest of the times for field trips. Hell the only time I've been to our county recorders office is to look at it's architecture for school.
Click to expand...
It is not how often you see it, it is the message it "represent"

the 10 commandment are Christian base religion. Having the cross, 10 commandments and stuff like that in Government building could represent that government is partial toward that religion (i.e. promotion of that religion above others) that kind break the rules of everyone is free to practice their own religion.

I believe there was an issue with couple of supreme court houses had those commandment and had to be taken down.
 
R

rabbitgod

Actually Chibi, I'm referring to the people who want to put any religious symbols in public buildings. Outside of the legality.

They want it so bad, but they can see it at anytime at their house. Instead of spending all that time trying to get the government to put up these symbols they could be doing real stuff, you know...like how their religion wants them too.
 
AshburnerX

AshburnerX

rabbitgod said:
Actually Chibi, I'm referring to the people who want to put any religious symbols in public buildings. Outside of the legality.

They want it so bad, but they can see it at anytime at their house. Instead of spending all that time trying to get the government to put up these symbols they could be doing real stuff, you know...like how their religion wants them too.
Click to expand...
It's mainly a play to get the Government to sponsor a Christian Faith as it's officially recognized religion, so they can pass Faith-based legislation to discriminate against anyone not part of that sect. Apparently a lot of Christians have so little faith that they need to wipe out any signs of other faiths in order to feel secure about their own.

However, most of us realize that doing this would basically turn the US into a theocracy and we don't enjoy the idea of living in a fucking war zone.
 
@Li3n

@Li3n

First one is dumb unless anyone can put up religious stuff on official government buildings.

The second one sounds like a waste of money... not to mention that the foetus is probably not very developed for the legal abortions anyway. But i don't agree with Dave that it making a difficult decision tougher is bad in itself, i for one wouldn't have wanted to be aborted because it might have inconvenienced my mother to have me ( as long as we're not talking discouragment through threats of punishment)
 
AshburnerX

AshburnerX

@Li3n said:
The second one sounds like a waste of money... not to mention that the foetus is probably not very developed for the legal abortions anyway. But i don't agree with Dave that it making a difficult decision tougher is bad in itself, i for one wouldn't have wanted to be aborted because it might have inconvenienced my mother to have me ( as long as we're not talking discouragment through threats of punishment)
Click to expand...
I honestly think it's another attempt to lengthen the whole process, in order to make people close to the deadline miss it. It certainly wouldn't be the first time, considering their have been DOCTORS who cancel appointments or make up excuses to push the procedure past the deadline in order to prevent an abortion from happening.
 
C

Chibibar

AshburnerX;342210][QUOTE=@Li3n said:
The second one sounds like a waste of money... not to mention that the foetus is probably not very developed for the legal abortions anyway. But i don't agree with Dave that it making a difficult decision tougher is bad in itself, i for one wouldn't have wanted to be aborted because it might have inconvenienced my mother to have me ( as long as we're not talking discouragment through threats of punishment)
Click to expand...
I honestly think it's another attempt to lengthen the whole process, in order to make people close to the deadline miss it. It certainly wouldn't be the first time, considering their have been DOCTORS who cancel appointments or make up excuses to push the procedure past the deadline in order to prevent an abortion from happening.[/QUOTE]

I can totally see this happening.
 
C

Chazwozel

@Li3n said:
First one is dumb unless anyone can put up religious stuff on official government buildings.

The second one sounds like a waste of money... not to mention that the foetus is probably not very developed for the legal abortions anyway. But i don't agree with Dave that it making a difficult decision tougher is bad in itself, i for one wouldn't have wanted to be aborted because it might have inconvenienced my mother to have me ( as long as we're not talking discouragment through threats of punishment)
Click to expand...

Dude, it's hardly any money to do the routine 8-10 week ultrasound and print out a picture. The main issue is really forcing someone to do it and see the picture if they don't want to. Believe me these legislator douches know what they're doing. It's pretty hard to see that little heart beating a mile a minute and make that kind of decision, even if the whole thing does look like a little peanut. I fell in love with my daughter the very moment I saw that ultrasound. It's taking an extremely difficult decision and compounding it 1000X fold.

---------- Post added at 09:49 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:48 AM ----------
AshburnerX;342210][QUOTE=@Li3n said:
The second one sounds like a waste of money... not to mention that the foetus is probably not very developed for the legal abortions anyway. But i don't agree with Dave that it making a difficult decision tougher is bad in itself, i for one wouldn't have wanted to be aborted because it might have inconvenienced my mother to have me ( as long as we're not talking discouragment through threats of punishment)
Click to expand...
I honestly think it's another attempt to lengthen the whole process, in order to make people close to the deadline miss it. It certainly wouldn't be the first time, considering their have been DOCTORS who cancel appointments or make up excuses to push the procedure past the deadline in order to prevent an abortion from happening.[/QUOTE]

ugh...I hate it when doctors push their own agenda over what's best for their patients.
 
@Li3n

@Li3n

AshburnerX;342210][QUOTE=@Li3n said:
The second one sounds like a waste of money... not to mention that the foetus is probably not very developed for the legal abortions anyway. But i don't agree with Dave that it making a difficult decision tougher is bad in itself, i for one wouldn't have wanted to be aborted because it might have inconvenienced my mother to have me ( as long as we're not talking discouragment through threats of punishment)
Click to expand...
I honestly think it's another attempt to lengthen the whole process, in order to make people close to the deadline miss it. It certainly wouldn't be the first time, considering their have been DOCTORS who cancel appointments or make up excuses to push the procedure past the deadline in order to prevent an abortion from happening.[/QUOTE]

See, this is something you should be able to sue over... make the doc pay for the kid's upbringing...

---------- Post added at 03:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:10 PM ----------
Dude, it's hardly any money to do the routine 8-10 week ultrasound and print out a picture.
Click to expand...
If they're gonna do it the state should have to pay for it, otherwise it's BS.
 
W

WolfOfOdin

...Oh joy. Texas is also the place where the woman put in charge of school boards believes "Public school is unconstitutional and anyone holding public office must pass a biblical test".

Honestly? if the first one passes the ACLU will have it reversed in a heartbeat. It looks like legislature that's made to fail, so when it does people can raise a stink and shriek persecution.

Besides, if that's passed I can see some of the far-right fundies down there having a hissy fit if a Muslim official hangs up a passage from the Koran.
 
SpecialKO

SpecialKO

Didn't the Supreme Court rule on this sort of thing already? Separation of church and state isn't in the "optional" portion of the Constitution.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top