Sooooo.... Texas?

[4everwarriors]

I believe there is a zero percent chance the 50 US states will be one country in 100 years.   Frankly, zero chance in 50 years too.   50/50 chance in 25 years .. and I'd put it at 25% chance in 5 years.

How in 5 years?  In 2016, Trump won and there was a movement called Calexit that spelled out a path to California seceding, with a "Proposition" on the ballot to change their constitution, if passed then a vote to secede.  It lost energy.

Say in 2024, Trump runs and wins, the GOP wins the house and Senate -- very plausible.  Liberals across the country are enraged and Calexit starts with complete intensity -- again, very plausible.    In 2017, polling had Calexit at 32% .. I could easily see it passing in ~2025 if the GOP was in control again.

Next is federal ratification.  Surely that wouldn't happen, right?   But Trump is in office and he's no Abe Lincoln.  The GOP sees this as a golden opportunity to wipe away CA's 55 electoral votes and win permanent control of the Presidency.   Trump says: California, you're fired, I'm rid of Nancy Pelosi forever.

No one fires a shot.  Lawyers work out the details.  Oregon and Washington are on the clock.

We thought people using horse dewormer to fight a pandemic was far fetched 5 years ago.  The above scenario .. is more likely.

Civil war, aina?

[forgetful]

Wait until you hear about what cows do for the environment.

To get this back on to the original topic. The environment should not be a factor in the legality of man-cow relationships.

[WarriorFan]

Great article in this week's economist trying to define what's happening.
Don't get confused by the title... equal responsibility is hung on the illiberal left and the irresponsible right.
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2021/09/04/the-threat-from-the-illiberal-left

I should also caution that the word "liberal" is used not in the american political context but in the original definition as an adjective from the Oxford dictionary.

If one believes as I do that history repeats itself, we're somewhere in the early 1900's again with the Bolsheviks and the Fascists stretching their wings.  Yes, as someone said in an earlier post, there's a whole huge space opening in the middle for some sensibility, but imho a massive shortage of sensibility to exploit that opening.

[NCMUFan]

Hats off for Tayhaas. Some pretty brave folks.  Where you stand on this topic probably defines what you believe and who you are more than any other.

[naginiF]

To get this back on to the original topic. The environment should not be a factor in the legality of man-cow relationships.

That term is degrading to both parties involved. Please use the more acceptable term "re-worming" in these troubled times of scarce ivermectin availability.

[GB Warrior]

To get this back on to the original topic. The environment should not be a factor in the legality of man-cow relationships.

Suppose people can marry Badger fans if they want.

[muwarrior69]

Half the country does not believe this. Hell, at this point I'm not certain that 50% of American Christians believe this.

I see this language thrown around a lot with social issues. Half this country doesn't support gay marriage. Half this country doesn't support gun control. Half this country doesn't support the BLM movement (not the organization). Half this country doesn't believe in mask mandates or vaccines. None of these are true. The social liberals make up well over half of this country. There is just a very vocal and very well resourced minority that has ensured that progress is slowed on these topic areas and the will of the people is not realized.

So half the people don't follow the science? So why do the prochoice folks say it is a difficult choice for the woman?

[#UnleashSean]

Suppose people can marry Badger fans if they want.

Let's not get crazy now

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

To get this back on to the original topic. The environment should not be a factor in the legality of man-cow relationships.

He agrees

[Uncle Rico]

Texas is back!

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

So half the people don't follow the science? So why do the prochoice folks say it is a difficult choice for the woman?

What?

[MU82]

All of Those 'Hysterical' Women Were Right

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/trump-supreme-court-abortion-ban/619963/?fbclid=IwAR2KhRDJXLMIIrpqFXdhxpMM2Bh176udlIiPVULpUA1y-hwPCSdQEOaQQvY

For half a decade, Republicans—especially self-described moderate members of the party—have been gaslighting America on the issue of abortion rights, pretending they didn't know that Donald Trump's Supreme Court picks were always planning to overturn Roe. A central goal of the conservative judicial movement that these justices came out of is overturning Roe. The Federalist Society handpicked them for that reason. It's a transparently phony act, one that's now been exposed as such.

[Pakuni]

George Carlin's epic rant on abortion:

"Why, why, why, why is it that most of the people who are against abortion are people you wouldn't want to f*ck in the first place, huh? Boy, these conservatives are really something, aren't they? They're all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you're born, you're on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don't want to know about you. They don't want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you're preborn, you're fine; if you're preschool, you're f*cked."

https://scrapsfromtheloft.com/comedy/george-carlin-back-town-1996-full-transcript/

[MU82]

George Carlin's epic rant on abortion:

"Why, why, why, why is it that most of the people who are against abortion are people you wouldn't want to f*ck in the first place, huh? Boy, these conservatives are really something, aren't they? They're all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you're born, you're on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don't want to know about you. They don't want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you're preborn, you're fine; if you're preschool, you're f*cked."

https://scrapsfromtheloft.com/comedy/george-carlin-back-town-1996-full-transcript/

I remember that rant. It's funny ... but it's not ... because it's true. He'd have some real interesting things to say today.

[brewcity77]

George Carlin's epic rant on abortion:

Good share. Here's another gem my wife found. Exposes the pure hypocrisy of those that claim to care about "the unborn."

"The unborn" are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don't resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don't ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don't bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It's almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe.

Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.

--Pastor Dave Barnhart

[MU82]

Good share. Here's another gem my wife found. Exposes the pure hypocrisy of those that claim to care about "the unborn."

"The unborn" are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don't resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don't ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don't bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It's almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe.

Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.

--Pastor Dave Barnhart

Very powerful, brew. Thanks for sharing that.

I like to think that most of our anti-abortion-rights Scoopers are very much into helping children who are less fortunate than their own kids.

But sadly there are many people out there who would force even a woman who was raped and risking death to have a child she won't be able to care for ... and then those same people would spend years whining about that child being a burden on society -- a "taker."

In 2020, there were almost 50,000 Texas children in foster care. Where are the "all life is precious" Texans after the fetuses they fought for become human beings? Hell, I would think Texas lawmakers would have adopted them all!

Oh, and Texas offers no earned-income tax credit for low-income parents, no child tax credit, and no child and dependent care tax credit -- https://www.taxcreditsforworkersandfamilies.org/state/texas/

The fetuses ain't fetuses any more, so eff 'em!

But hey, when you're busy trying to rig future elections with your new Elimination of Voting Rights Law and busy pitting citizens against each other with your new Abortion Vigilante Law, who has time to worry about actual, living, breathing kids?

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Oh, and Texas offers no earned-income tax credit for low-income parents, no child tax credit, and no child and dependent care tax credit -- https://www.taxcreditsforworkersandfamilies.org/state/texas/

While I don't disagree with your point...I believe this is because Texas has no state income tax.

[MU82]

While I don't disagree with your point...I believe this is because Texas has no state income tax.

Thanks for pointing that out, and that's my bad.

Has Texas enacted any kind of child-care programs and the like? Maybe it has.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Thanks for pointing that out, and that's my bad.

Has Texas enacted any kind of child-care programs and the like? Maybe it has.

Yes, there is a state-sponsored child care program for low income families available through the Texas Workforce Commission. You can debate whether or not it is substantial enough.

[dgies9156]

The sad thing about the Texas debate is it rekindled a battle that's never ending. It's always going to be here in one form or another.

Before Roe vs. Wade was announced, I was in high school in Nashville. There was a huge billboard at Eighth Avenue and Church Street advertising for abortion services. At the time, abortions in the State of Tennessee were hugely illegal. What it meant was that Tennessee women who sought an elective abortion called this agency and arranged for travel to and service in New York, where abortion was legal.

If Roe vs. Wade suddenly was overruled, our nation would have a patchwork of abortion laws, as it did in 1971. I doubt the number of abortions performed in the nation would decrease substantially. What we're arguing is symbolism and low income abortion access. The only thing that changes this would be a human rights amendment defining life as beginning at conception. That definitely IS NOT happening in my lifetime.

All that said, I'm about as pro-life as they come. The difference is I don't believe the government can do what the priests and bishops, preachers and ministers, Imans, Rabbis and other holy people can't do — limit abortions. What we need to do in this country is to limit the demand for abortion, rather than the supply — and that ain't easy. We need alternatives to abortion, including everything from effective birth control to embracing women with unwanted pregnancies and fostering the love that ensures their child gets the home it deserves.

[MU82]

I doubt the number of abortions performed in the nation would decrease substantially. What we're arguing is symbolism and low income abortion access.

Thanks for getting it, sir.

Rich folks -- including the politicians who impregnate their mistresses and prostitutes -- will still be able to get abortions, no problem.

[21Jumpstreet]

The new version of the war on drugs now that marijuana is becoming increasingly legal?

[ZiggysFryBoy]

The new version of the war on drugs now that marijuana is becoming increasingly legal?

We've seen how the war on drugs has gone...

[NCMUFan]

What would Jesus do?

[Uncle Rico]

What would Jesus do?

Shoot cows and eat them