Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[vagel7]

Ah yes... if you do not know of it, let me pass on the aptly named www.republicansforrape.org

Dude, the US is fucked up.

Love how the rape zones are the Southern States.

[KaelGotDwarves]

What else is there to say? It's politics - quite a few republicans would rather stick it to the Democrats for "attacking" Halliburton than vote for a bill granting rape victims rights.

I remember a female Republican representative who was utterly appalled by the whole mess. I am too.

@Truean: Dating relationships not built around sex? There's plenty of decent guys around. They're either taken, in hiding, or not interested in you or anyone at the moment.

It's a bit trite to imply that all the men you date are hypocrites. Hell, at least they make their intent known rather than not and then being a rapist. Also, are you  lgbt?

[G-Flex]

They're probably more interested in corporate rights and "don't see a problem" with forcing arbitration. Protecting their own interests and all that.

Of course, I haven't read the bill, so they might be against it for other reasons, and I'd rather not assume too much.

[KaelGotDwarves]

It's a bill that gives a rape victim the ability to sue her rapists in the workplace...

Surely we can all agree that rapists should get prosecuted and rape victims ought to be... no?

Seriously, what the fuck else is there to assume?

[G-Flex]

It's a bill that gives a rape victim the ability to sue her rapists in the workplace...

Surely we can all agree that rapists should get prosecuted and rape victims ought to be... no?

Seriously, what the fuck else is there to assume?

Do you really think law is that simple? You don't even know what the bill actually says. You can't judge a bill based on a simple summary of its intended purpose. A bill can have an ostensibly decent purpose but still have negative effects attached to it, through anything from shoddy phrasing to ill-conceived implementation of that purpose in general.

You don't sign a bill just because it "sounds good". Well, actually, a lot of the time that does happen, but it's ridiculous. You have to consider all the implications of a bill as it is written, not just what the general purpose of it seems to be.

[RedKing]

It's a bill that gives a rape victim the ability to sue her rapists in the workplace...

Surely we can all agree that rapists should get prosecuted and rape victims ought to be... no?

Seriously, what the fuck else is there to assume?

There's the favorite GOP strawman: "One person might somehow abuse this law and sue a poor, innocent, defenseless corporation injustly. So no one should have the power to sue any corporation."

That's pretty much deregulation and "tort reform" in a nutshell.

[Truean]

I"m T....

So anyhow, arbitration in this country is a joke. The arbiters are made up of a panel of assholes, many of whom are not and never were judges. Sometimes they aren't even lawyers. There is no guarantee they know anything at all about justice. Moreover they are inherently biased because companies are repeat customers where as an individual usually isn't..... That's right, you pay for arbiters on a case by case basis. Court costs are nominal. It can cost thousands of dollars to pay an arbiter.....

It's called privatizing justice and it doesn't fucking work. Even most of the stanch libertarians like Ayn Rand thought the courts were a proper government function along with military and police to be paid for by the government. Fuck it, we're privatizing and selling those off too....

[G-Flex]

Well, we also have private (or rather, corporate-owned) prisons, so at this point nothing surprises me.

[Truean]

Conservatives have an overwhelming, irrational hatred of government.

I love how they say they love this country but they absolutely refuse to pay for it.

[ECrownofFire]

Conservatives have an overwhelming, irrational hatred of government.

I love how they say they love this country but they absolutely refuse to pay for it.

They just don't want to pay for somebody to run it into the ground

[G-Flex]

Or to run it, period.


EDIT: Sorry, I'm wrong. They'll gladly pay private contractors to do so.

[Leafsnail]

How the heck does the arbitration thing work?  I mean, is it really possible to sign away your right to legal recourse over serious sexual assault?  Or is it to do with the fact that the US doesn't have jurisdiction over what Halliburton does in Iraq?

[KaelGotDwarves]

@G-Flex: of course it's "more complicated". Did you see the recent interview with Boehner where he says that they'll do anything to tank Obama's chances at a 2nd term, even if it means temporarily tanking the economy?

Or where Pelosi and the democrats pulled the ole switch-a-roo and started voting Yes on an extreme far right budget, which the republicans bring up just to stall all the time. The republicans panicked, because if it passed they would have been on record as having authored a bill and attempted to completely kill medicare and social security so they voted against their own bill .

It's quickly getting to the point that the Republicans would legalise being able to punch babies in the face if Obama came out against it.

[Truean]

How the heck does the arbitration thing work?  I mean, is it really possible to sign away your right to legal recourse over serious sexual assault?  Or is it to do with the fact that the US doesn't have jurisdiction over what Halliburton does in Iraq?

Yeah, binding arbitration clauses suck. There's a bunch of bullshit about how they can technically be overridden if you sue about the clause, but for the most part, they are rarely disturbed, because the courts are overburdened. That is, of course, not the official answer but it's still true.

[G-Flex]

@G-Flex: of course it's "more complicated". Did you see the recent interview with Boehner where he says that they'll do anything to tank Obama's chances at a 2nd term, even if it means temporarily tanking the economy?

Or where Pelosi and the democrats pulled the ole switch-a-roo and started voting Yes on an extreme far right budget, which the republicans bring up just to stall all the time. The republicans panicked, because if it passed they would have been on record as having authored a bill and attempted to completely kill medicare and social security so they voted against their own bill .

It's quickly getting to the point that the Republicans would legalise being able to punch babies in the face if Obama came out against it.

Yeah, I have no love for the current political machine. My point was just that it's short-sighted to panic about people not supporting a bill just because you support the cause of a bill. Plenty of awful legislation is written regarding legitimate concerns.