07-01-23  •  Ending Protection for Gay Weddings


BidBuddy: Small business owners shouldn't be forced to do something against a religious belief. I never understand why same sex couples seek out Christian based small business owners for wedding plans and then act surprised when it's against what they believe. It makes me feel they just want to stir the pot. Find someone else for same sex marriages. It's not that hard.

With that said I wouldn't agree with a big time business and company denying someone services based on this subject. There is a different between big business and small mom and pop family owned businesses.


Ask yourself, would it be okay to deny this service to someone because they are black? If it's not, then it's not okay to deny the service over sexual orientation. "It's against my religion" could be used to justify anything, any kind of prejudice. It's not a reasonable excuse for denial of services on the basis of a protected characteristic.

People do not have "a right" to run a business. If they don't want to serve the public - the whole public - then they can do something else.

Lastly, I'm sick and tired of people claiming with no evidence that something is "wrong". Before people can claim that something is fundamentally and basically evil they should have to show harm.

ETA: As it turns out, the designer in question was never even approached by an actual gay couple. The guy named in the lawsuit is a straight guy with a wife and kids who says he never requested a gay wedding website. It's all "hypothetical." So, who is stirring the pot?

It's a case about as flimsy as wet tissue. The court was just looking for an excuse to rule against gay rights.




06-30-23  •  Ending Affirmative Action


Lindsay: I applaud the Supreme Court's recent decision ending affirmative action. It's time for a colorblind society! Back when people were LITERALLY being told that they couldn’t be accepted because of the color of their skin, we needed to change that and set things in the other to right. That’s true. But not today.

Terry: That's like claiming there is no racism in America anymore.

Lindsay: There are racists everywhere in America.

But, *legalized* racism and sexism that holds people back from achieving their goals based on skin color and gender doesn’t exist anymore… it used to be rampant within our laws, but no longer is.


Terry: You admit there are racists everywhere but you ignore that those same folks run these establishments. Amazing..

Lindsay: No… I just don’t automatically assume that everyone on a college admittance board is racist...

It doesn't take everyone. It doesn't even take a lot of rabid racists on college boards. It just takes a few of those, and a whole lot of people with subtle biases and preferences they may not even be aware of, to statistically skew the American system so that on average, there is measurable disadvantage. For example, black Americans, on average, still face lower median incomes, higher poverty rates, and lower levels of wealth accumulation compared to white Americans. Disparities can also be seen in areas such as homeownership, access to quality healthcare and criminal justice.

That is what affirmative action is still countering - unconscious bias and small structural disadvantages that compound across a population.

The time to end the countering efforts is after the measurable disadvantage ends. Not while it still exists.



06-12-23  •  Top Surgeries


Alexia: It's illegal for women to go topless, but somehow okay if they are trans? Showing off their top surgeries...

There are many real women who as breast cancer survivors bear horrible scars and cannot afford reconstruction surgery. They are thankful to be alive and should NEVER have to witness this flagrant insult to their survival.

I'm not seeing how scars from breast removal are somehow spitting in the face of breast cancer survivors. Is it because it's "optional," do you think they are somehow mocking those for whom it was not optional? Because many transgender people say their choice was life or death, too.



06-01-23  •  A Parallel Oppression


Cherie: It's anti-Semitism, plain and simple. That's what it is when Israel is demonized by the Palestinians. There never was any land belonging to them called "Palestine," as decreed by the United Nations. Their version of "the Nakba" simply didn't happen. They exaggerate because they hate Jews and want to wipe Israel off the map.

Dee: Maybe it's because in the last year 3,412 housing units were built for Jewish settlers on occupied Palestinian lands.

Cherie: See? You just don’t get it… there aren’t any Palestinian occupied lands!!!! They don’t exist!!! You might as well accuse evil Jews of “occupying” Narnian territory.

There is "the place they used to live where they can't live anymore." That's real.


Cherie: Who says they can’t live there? There are many Palestinian settlements in the West Bank under the control of the Palestinian Authority. In fact there are 167 so called “islands” in the West Bank under the Palestinian Authority. And the Gaza Strip is also Palestinian land now, under the leadership of Hamas.


What you describe is their forcible confinement to reservations.


You may think there is no other choice. You may even be right. But read what you wrote, and think about life behind those walls, going through those daily military checkpoints, watching their homes and olive trees razed for settlements, and tell me why you think they are supposed to like it.


Dee: It does remind me of what America did to "Indian Country" in the 1800s and early 1900s.

It took hundreds of years for the Native Americans to be so divided, harassed and outmoded that they stopped resisting the occupation of their land. (Some still resist in many ways.) But it's not a happy ending, and it doesn't erase the horror and cruelty of what was done to make it happen. If we had a chance to do something different now, we should.


Cherie: Hey, that's their territory, it's not Israel's fault if it's inferior. I don't hear you complaining about how the Palestinians are living in a terrorist dictatorship. That's why we need the checkpoints and the military presence. Are you seriously saying that Israel should not protect itself whatsoever? If you don't want to be observed, don't be a freaking terrorist!


I think you could acknowledge that they lost a lot. Narnia, really? Tell me it's like Narnia when you can introduce me to people who actually grew up in Narnia and now can't go back to their homes.

Point is, there are two sides to this issue, and legitimate concerns for both. It's not "anti-Semitic" to examine both sides, or to find Israel wanting in some regards. Plenty of people are perfectly capable of being ok with the existence of Israel AND questioning if this is the best they could be doing.




05-12-23  •  Travel Advisory for Socialists in Florida


Wren: The NAACP issued a travel advisory for Florida, suggesting that the rights of people of color are not adequately protected there and it might be dangerous to visit. In retalition, Senator Rick Scott issued a Florida travel advisory that Florida is "openly hostile toward Socialists, Communists and those who enable them."

How stupid, capitalism and socialism are not opposed, in fact they can only work together, duh.


Dira: The issue lies in the fact that those that are trying to further spread socialism \ communism want to eradicate capitalism altogether. They're not talking about it working hand in hand.

As a society we do need some aspects of socialism \ communism such as the financial safety nets for the vulnerable that we have now, but we can't completely dismantle capitalism in favor of going full socialism. We need free enterprise.


Gel: Hear, hear!

Bel: I agree!



Who is trying to eradicate capitalism altogether, and in what way?






[crickets]




Can you provide any examples?





[crickets]




I'm going to cut to the chase here and say that, unless there is some evidence to the contrary, we do not have 'an issue' in this country with people who want to 'eradicate capitalism altogether.'

I think a much worse problem is this weird agreement that "capitalism" is under threat. It's not a result of any real efforts to end or even moderate capitalism. It's because of constant demonizing of milquetoast Democrats as a socialist, existential threat to capitalism, when they just aren't. That's all this statement from Scott is - scapegoating. That is a very bad problem.



Capitalism and Socialism belong together like Republicans and Democrats belong together in Congress, like conservatives and liberals belong together in society, as two halves of a whole. These two forces work together to moderate and prop up each other up, each by being strong where the other is weak. It's like a match made in heaven for a society where everyone gets enough, and people who do a lot more, get a lot more. What else could we ask for?

It's just a matter of getting people to see it.






05-04-23  •  Satan Clubs at School


Kel: They are saying that if they are going to allow a Christian club, they have to allow a Satan club. I’m all about expressing your religion. But if your religion is based on pissing Christians off, I’m not going to go to bat for them being able to be in schools…

Diff: Out of curiosity, are you saying you think the satanist club has the sole purpose of pissing off Christians?

Kel: Definitely.

The purpose of founding the club is to hold a mirror to Christianity. That said, I hope they have some compelling activities, because "making a point" doesn't give you that much to do once the point is made.


Diff: Do you think the purpose of Satanism in general is to piss of Christians and hold a mirror to Christianity, or just this club? It's not.

When the rationalization is, "If you are going to allow a Christian club, you have to allow a Satan club," then I would say yes, the purpose of *this* club is explicitly to hold a mirror to the existing power structure and challenge it. And why not? There is no reason Christians should have exclusive privilege and it shouldn't be taken for granted that all religion is Christianity. The Satan club makes the point elegantly, with the added rush of shocking the local lockities.

That may not apply to "Satanism in general," but since you seem to know I'm really curious - what is the purpose of Satanism?


(some side chat about religion)

IMHO, the most interesting aspect of religion is what it does. Are you familiar with the work of Dr. Loyal Rue? In his formulation, religion uses a story that ties the cosmological to the moral. For example in Christianity, God is considered to be both the creator of the universe and the author of the moral order. This ties explanations about what the world is to notions about how humans should act. This linkage gives cosmic significance to our actions, and prescribes a moral order to the universe. Heady stuff.



------------------- . _____________ . -----------------------


Kel: Jeez, can't they just admit that some religions are appropriate for school clubs and some aren't?

Diff: Come on Kel, you know if they allow one religion, they have to allow ALL religions, or it's discrimination.

Kel: Christians aren't doing human sacrifice.

Diff: Neither are Satanists. And, Christians have some practices that are pretty toxic.

Kel: There are certain sects that do, like FLDS- which should never be allowed on a High School campus either, but there’s nothing toxic about what Presbyterians teach… so they can have at it.

So, by your criteria here...Catholic Club? Why or why not?


Kel: Different Christian sects teach different things, some are horribly damaging, some sects are fine and dandy that help their followers lead happy and well-adjusted lives…

Can you really divide that by sect? Note: They ALL have sex scandals, including the Presbyterians.

The truth is that some people can get horribly damaged by church and some people can use it to lead happy and well adjusted lives in the same congregation. It's not as simple as Good Sect, Bad Sect.



Kel: I doubt anyone can name a Christian sect that still advocates for killing your daughter if she’s not a virgin and your son of he’s disrespectful…

How have they expressed their disavowal of this? Is it still in the book? Are there disclaimers in the text, saying "This is wrong and we don't believe in it anymore?" Do they have official statements of doctrine explaining how they no longer subscribe to such notions?

That is what it would take for Christianity to actually remove those beliefs from the religion. And, someday they might...it wouldn't be hard. In the meantime, it's still right there in the manual, whether they choose to remind anyone of this awkward fact or not.


------------------- . _____________ . -----------------------




Kel: Every religion, profession and club with over 10 members has sexual predators in it… they’re literally everywhere.

A scandal with a Catholic priest doesn’t mean my Catholic next door neighbor and her religion is any less moral.


So, yes on the Catholic Club, great!

But even putting scandals aside, I can't agree that ordinary Christian teachings necessarily lead to happy and well adjusted lives. Plenty of people have been horribly damaged by standard dogma like souls condemned to hell, tribal moral codes, exclusionary salvation, last times, etc. These are kind of central to the belief system, yet not always healthy. Can we make sure Presbyterians and Catholics don't bring these teachings to school clubs? I don't see how.



Kel: Presbyterianism doesn’t teach that at all…they’re the church flying gay flags and not giving any credence to revelations.

So, no Catholic Club after all, then? Beccause that's Catholic dogma. Would you only allow Christian sects that do not believe that souls can be condemned to hell, or in exclusively Christian salvation? Does that include or exclude Methodists or Baptists?



05-03-23  •  Caring about Those Guys


Sis: We can't ban guns. There are responsible gun owners who do carry firearm for protection.

Lax: I mean, I hear what you are saying and this isn't meant to be anything against or even aimed at you but, I don't care about those guys? Guns are the number one cause of death in kids. They are a legitimate public health crisis.

Sis: Care about what guys?

If I may interject...I'm getting tired of caring about the careful gun owner over the children. Yes, I understand the law-abiding gun owner didn't do anything wrong. But I don't think their needs are more important than the needs of children, to grow up in a society without so many dangerous time bombs. Putting gun rights first is resulting in way too many dead and maimed kids, which makes it hard to keep caring about 'those guys.' They aren't doing anything wrong necessarily, but, what they want isn't working.

That said, I think we could have forms of gun ownership for legitimate hunting and protection needs without the free-for-all we have at the moment.



Sis: As far as caring about people’s feelings or whatever, I don’t think that really has anything to do with coming up with realistic solutions like this.

It's not caring about "their feelings" like a big therapy session. It's caring about what they feel are their rights. Up until now, the rights of law-abiding gun owners have been considered to be the most important thing in the conversation...unquestionable, sacrosanct. Now, years of living with the modern day effects are making it clear that this is NOT good social policy. And so lots of people are thinking, maybe it's not a good idea to have this as an unmitigated right, after all. That's what it means to 'stop caring about those guys' - to stop considering their "right" as the only thing that matters, forever.

Hope that makes sense!




05-01-23  •  Gender in Sports


Kel: Republicans are massively against biological males competing in women's sports, Democrats are massively for it.

There is an obvious solution and that is competing in weight classes (or similar criteria) instead of gender classes.


Vim: Biological men do not belong in women's sports.

Sports do not need to be divided by gender.




Kel: They do…

And for lack of better phrasing, they need to be divided because God decided that men would be faster and stronger than women.

Obviously not for everyone on the planet, but for elite athletes, that’s how it works. Britney Greiner could be a phenomenal athlete, but she’s never going to be physically stronger than Shaq was when he was playing.

Women swimmers are fantastic athletes, but they’ll never get to the size, armspan, or lung capacity of Lia Thomas. It isnt a question of weight or height rankings, our best swimmers can’t measure up.


"God" did not make ALL men or ALL women anything in particular. That is why boxing has 17 different weight classes. Small guys compete against small guys. Is there some reason why women could not compete against small guys, if their skill levels were about equal?

Britney Greiner may never make an NBA team. That doesn't mean that no one who identifies as a woman ever could. When that happens, should she really be prevented from even trying?

As long as you are competing against others in your ability class, what difference does it make what their gender is?



Kel: It doesn’t matter for pre-pubescent…You could match anyone up in a wrestling match, boxing match, football game… it’s all the same, they’re kids in kid bodies.


But for adults, if you matched up 6’5, 245 pounds against someone who’s 5’10 and 166 pounds in a boxing match… fairness would not even be in question.

(those are the stats of Lennox Lewis and Laila Ali - top competitor athletes in the boxing game)


They wouldn't even put two men of such different statures in a ring together. Are you aware of how boxing works? There are seventeen different weight classes.

People can be matched by weight, size, and ability level. It's already done now and it's as fair as they can make it.



This has got me wondering about a thought experiment. What if a top NBA player tomorrow announced that she was female? Suppose she chose not to start medically transitioning while on the team, but still wanted to go by female pronouns or dress in feminine attire off the court.

It could happen. Would this female be off the team? On what grounds?


Kel: Ok, but Laila Ali is one of the biggest and best. There aren’t women available to fight in Lewis’ class.

True, the heaviest classes could be all men. But it just works out that way, it doesn't have to be a rule. And it would only be "all men" until one decides to reveal that they aren't. This can even happen to top athletes with Wheaties Box levels of masculinity.



05-01-23  •  Agree or Disagree?


Kel: Republicans are massively against biological males competing in women's sports, Democrats are massively for it. Americans do not agree on anything.

Most Americans agree on almost everything.
Skip

The Economy

82 percent of Americans think wealthy people have too much power and influence in Washington.
69 percent think large businesses have too much power and influence in Washington.
59 percent—and 72 percent of likely voters—think Wall Street has too much power and influence in Washington.
78 percent of likely voters support stronger rules and enforcement on the financial industry.
65 percent of Americans think our economic system “unfairly favors powerful interests.”
59 percent of Americans—and 43 percent of Republicans—think corporations make “too much profit.”

Inequality

82 percent of Americans think economic inequality is a “very big” (48 percent) or “moderately big” (34 percent) problem. Even 69 percent of Republicans share this view.
66 percent of Americans think money and wealth should be distributed more evenly.
72 percent of Americans say it is “extremely” or “very” important, and 23 percent say it is “somewhat important,” to reduce poverty.
59 percent of registered voters—and 51 percent of Republicans—favor raising the maximum amount that low-wage workers can make and still be eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit, from $14,820 to $18,000.

Money in Politics

96 percent of Americans—including 96 percent of Republicans—believe money in politics is to blame for the dysfunction of the U.S. political system.
84 percent of Americans—including 80 percent of Republicans—believe money has too much influence in politics.
78 percent of Americans say we need sweeping new laws to reduce the influence of money in politics.
73 percent of registered voters have an unfavorable opinion of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision.

Taxes

80 percent of Americans think some corporations don’t pay their fair share of taxes.
78 percent think some wealthy people don’t pay their fair share of taxes.
76 percent believe the wealthiest Americans should pay higher taxes.
60 percent of registered voters believe corporations pay too little in taxes.
87 percent of Americans say it is critical to preserve Social Security, even if it means increasing Social Security taxes paid by wealthy Americans.
67 percent of Americans support lifting the cap to require higher-income workers to pay Social Security taxes on all of their wages.

Minimum Wage

66 percent of Americans favor raising the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour.
59 percent favor raising the federal minimum wage to $12 an hour.
48 percent support raising the national minimum wage to $15 an hour. (A survey of registered voters found that 54 percent favored a $15 minimum wage.)
63 percent of registered voters think the minimum wage should be adjusted each year by the rate of inflation.

Workers' Rights

61 percent of Americans—including 42 percent of Republicans—approve of labor unions.
74 percent of registered voters—including 71 percent of Republicans—support requiring employers to offer paid parental and medical leave.
78 percent of likely voters favor establishing a national fund that offers all workers 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave.

Health Care

60 percent of Americans believe “it is the federal government’s responsibility to make sure all Americans have healthcare coverage.”
60 percent of registered voters favor “expanding Medicare to provide health insurance to every American.”
58 percent of the public favors replacing Obamacare with “a federally funded healthcare program providing insurance for all Americans.”
64 percent of registered voters favor their state accepting the Obamacare plan for expanding Medicaid in their state.

Education

63 percent of registered voters—including 47 percent of Republicans—of Americans favor making four-year public colleges and universities tuition-free.
59 percent of Americans favor free early-childhood education.

Climate Change and the Environment

76 percent of voters are “very concerned” or “somewhat concerned” about climate change.
68 percent of voters think it is possible to protect the environment and protect jobs.
72 percent of voters think it is a “bad idea” to cut funding for scientific research on the environment and climate change.
59 percent of voters say more needs to be done to address climate change.

Gun Safety

84 percent of Americans support requiring background checks for all gun buyers.
77 percent of gun owners support requiring background checks for all gun buyers.

Criminal Justice

57 percent of Americans believe police officers generally treat blacks and other minorities differently than they treat whites.
60 percent of Americans believe the recent killings of black men by police are part of a broader pattern of how police treat black Americans (compared with 39 percent who believe they are isolated incidents).

Immigration

68 percent of Americans—including 48 percent of Republicans—believe the country’s openness to people from around the world “is essential to who we are as a nation.” Just 29 percent say that “if America is too open to people from all over the world, we risk losing our identity as a nation.”
65 percent of Americans—including 42 percent of Republicans—say immigrants strengthen the country “because of their hard work and talents.” Just 26 percent say immigrants are a burden “because they take our jobs, housing and health care.”
64 percent of Americans think an increasing number of people from different races, ethnic groups, and nationalities makes the country a better place to live. Only 5 percent say it makes the United States a worse place to live, and 29 percent say it makes no difference.
76 percent of registered voters—including 69 percent of Republicans—support allowing undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children (Dreamers) to stay in the country. 58 percent think Dreamers should be allowed to stay and become citizens if they meet certain requirements. Another 18 percent think they should be allowed to stay and become legal residents, but not citizens. Only 15 percent think they should be removed or deported from the country.

Abortion and Women's Health

58 percent of Americans believe that abortion should be legal in all or most cases.
68 percent of Americans—including 54 percent of Republicans—support the requirement for private health insurance plans to cover the full cost of birth control.

Same-Sex Marriage

62 percent of Americans—including 70 percent of independents and 40 percent of Republicans—support same-sex marriage.
74 percent of millennials (born after 1981) support same-sex marriage.



Caveat, this was compiled in 2017, but on the actual issues people have not moved much. The "extremes" are just a distraction. This is a vast consensus.

Source: On policy, Americans Agree with Liberals





Kel: Putting aside the lack of sources, do you notice how many of these statistics are in the 50s and 60s? That actually shows a divided society. There are very little facts here that you can claim that Americans are agreeing upon when we’re talking about percentages in the 50s and 60s.

The source for the article is included and the source for every percentage is in that line of the original article. There is no lack of sources.

Almost all of these are 59 and above, showing broad agreement. I would go further and suggest that most people are far more alike than different, and that the differences have been exaggerated for effect.



Kel:So, 60 percent of Americans believe “it is the federal government’s responsibility to make sure all Americans have healthcare coverage”. A little bit more than half the people agree with that. So? Does that mean they agree on how it should be done? This just shows how divided America is.

That's a very glass-half-empty view, but the fact that a majority of Americans do agree that it's our collective responsibility to make sure our fellow citizens have healthcare is actually a really good thing. It's a place to start. It's like the really large majorities that actually favor gun control - it's not division among citizens that prevents action, it's special interests in Washington with outsized influence.

The society is not as divided as the media makes it out to be. How divided it gets from here is a choice. I'd like to see people as others like me who I can work with. Studies show that really makes cooperation and problem solving easier.


Barsade, S. G., & Gibson, D. E. (2007). Why does affect matter in organizations? Academy of Management Perspectives, 21(1), 36-59. https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/amp.2007.24286161

Gentry, W. A., Weber, R., & Sadri, G. (2007). Empathy in the workplace: A tool for effective leadership. The Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 13(4), 1-14. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10 ... 0130040101



Annie: Percentages of those asked and who took a survey doesn't add up to all Americans; only to those who took the time to answer.

You are so right, but I don't see anything to indicate that there are two different kinds of people in this country, right ones and wrong ones. Everyone is right about some stuff and we all do really agree on so many important things that make for a good life. Most people are kind folks who want to see their grandchildren thrive, right? I think if we put that first and let facts show the best ways to do that, people can agree on practical policies.

Instead, it's everyone inside their own media bubbles and constant demonizing of the opposition. That is the real source of the "divide."


Kel: That’s the thing though… I’m not even saying there are right ones and wrong ones.

I’m just saying they don’t agree.


On anything, though? That's a big overstatement, and itself divisive.

But, a lot depends on how the issues are framed. Remember when MTG proposed the "national divorce"? One response was, I agree, because we no longer have anything in common with liberals, who want to abolish prisons and just hand out free money to those who refuse to work. Of course you would want to part ways with people like that, right?

Except, is that really what Democrats - not a few extremists, but millions of ordinary Americans - want? Or is it an exaggeration, meant to make legitimate concerns about overpolicing and underservicing seem terrifying? (I'm sure there are examples of equal and opposite over-reactions from the left.)

When the issues are not framed as all-or-nothing extremism, people do agree on basic policy outlines, like increasing police funding and training to provide more mental health support.

Our problem is not a giant ideological divide. It's polemics that exaggerate the opposing views as extreme when they are not.




Read more in the Archives.