What do you think about with current News and Opinions?

Tweety, BSN, RN · May 17, 2022

7 hours ago, Justlookingfornow said:

Would it be acceptable for Christian pro life protesters to do the same to a Justice that presented a pro choice law? (Not a deflection to what if) I am interested.

Since I said it wasn't acceptable for the pro-choice people, then it wouldn't be okay for the pro-lifers.

But for someone that thinks these protests are okay would you think they would answer "no, it's not okay for pro-lifers to demonstrate but it's okay for pro-choice people".

But I see where you're going. If Roe vs. Wade were upheld and pro-lifers went to protest at the homes of those who voted to keep it, how would pro-choice people behave. Probably in a way similar to the situation now, some would say it's okay, some would say it's wrong, probably some Democrat senators would push for their arrest and Fox News wouldn't have it as a headline.

In my opinion.

Tweety, BSN, RN · May 17, 2022

Quote

The absence of coverage of the motive was revealing, given Fox News’s most popular host, Tucker Carlson, has pushed the concept of replacement theory in more than 400 of his shows – and has arguably done more than anyone in the US to popularize the racist conspiracy.

I would think at the very least Tucker Carlson would condemn this twisting of the conspiracy theory and condemn it's use as justification for murder.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/may/17/buffalo-shooting-fox-news-tucker-carlson-great-replacement-theory?fbclid=IwAR1aXbWtbAbl7qJLZqtHkcLbiC63ANppOtSSxzTQ02Nu4_3R_iWejQjiZAM

Beerman, BSN · May 17, 2022

16 hours ago, Tweety said:

Agree. As I mentioned above, I can't wrap my head around the idea of them choosing a student out of the blue for liberal indoctrination. Doesn't make sense. They probably aren't going to violate any privacy and we'll never know.

Welcome back by the way.

More likely, it wasn't just one student. But, just the parent of one who went public with it.

Tweety, BSN, RN · May 17, 2022

15 minutes ago, Beerman said:

More likely, it wasn't just one student. But, just the parent of one who went public with it.

I wouldn't discount that, but it's a bit too conspiracy theorist for me to think it's a wide scale problem. Hopefully, as is often the case when one person steps up and says something wrong happened, others follow.

Again, I'm not condoning what happened.

Justlookingfornow · May 17, 2022

3 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

We have quite a bit of experience with "pro-life" protesters, they've already proven that they can be aggressive and violent.

I believe that the 1st amendment allows public protest regardless of the status of the individual that might be the focus of the protest. We should test that law that says we cannot protest again justices and their thinking.

Where's the line between your last paragraph and interference?

Do you believe justices should make non bias, partisan decisions? Would a protest be crossing a line to influence or intimidation?

A loose comparison would be people protesting outside of criminal court judges home. Would that be acceptable?

Should they not be free to live their private lives?

toomuchbaloney · May 17, 2022

7 minutes ago, Tweety said:

I would think at the very least Tucker Carlson would condemn this twisting of the conspiracy theory and condemn it's use as justification for murder.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/may/17/buffalo-shooting-fox-news-tucker-carlson-great-replacement-theory?fbclid=IwAR1aXbWtbAbl7qJLZqtHkcLbiC63ANppOtSSxzTQ02Nu4_3R_iWejQjiZAM

I agree. Tucker will attempt to spin this in a favorable breeze of baloney... that's what propagandists and charlatans do.

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/10/10/when-white-nationalists-chant-their-weird-slogans-what-do-they-mean

Justlookingfornow · May 17, 2022

3 hours ago, nursej22 said:

Half the country did not vote for Trump. Only 66% of eligible voters voted in the last presidential election, Trump received 47% of the votes. Trump received about 30% of eligible votes.

Okay so most of the 30% are Q fanatics?

Justlookingfornow · May 17, 2022

18 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:

Where's the line between your last paragraph and interference?

Do you believe justices should make non bias, partisan decisions? Would a protest be crossing a line to influence or intimidation?

A loose comparison would be people protesting outside of criminal court judges home. Would that be acceptable? Or would that be trying intimidating or influence a Justice?

Should they not be free to live their private lives?

toomuchbaloney · May 17, 2022

30 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:

Where's the line between your last paragraph and interference?

Do you believe justices should make non bias, partisan decisions? Would a protest be crossing a line to influence or intimidation?

A loose comparison would be people protesting outside of criminal court judges home. Would that be acceptable?

Should they not be free to live their private lives?

There was a grammatical and punctuating closure of one thought before a clear introduction of a separate thought.

Justices should follow judicial precedent and the law when offering opinions in cases. There's no question that SCOTUS decisions should be nonpartisan on a political level. Yes they should be as impartial and unbiased as possible, that's why temperament and character are so important in those who occupy those seats.

As I've previously mentioned, I believe that our first amendment right to peaceful public protest allows protest in the neighborhoods and public areas of this country. If that means that they (the focus of the protest) think that they need protection, OK, we have weak gun laws and some triggered zealots running around so it's completely understandable. In this case people are protesting what they believe to be the decision of this court. They are expressing their disappointment and anger and betrayal. IMV

As far as other judges, most are subject to the will of we the people. For instance, the judge who presided over the Brock Turner rape case was recalled by the community. He lived that protest in the public marketing of that response over time. They are certainly free to live their lives but they aren't beneficiary to some insulation from the consequences of flawed decisions. Public protest might be one of those consequences.

Justlookingfornow · May 17, 2022

3 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

Do you think that my words made that claim? The word "some" is different from the word "most", right? No half of the country Isn't crazy, but do you think that half of republican voters might be? Just consider some of the crazy things they get caught up in believing... stolen election lies, CRT nonsense, book banning, wall building donations to conmen, pizza parlor pedophiles, birther conspiracy, death panels, deep state garbage, Biden/Ukraine propaganda, red flags and FEMA camp anxieties...I could go on and on. There is a pattern of fear mongering within conservative political circles, IMV.

No. I do not determine a person's mental health on how they voted or what political party they subscribe to.

Some of the topics you referenced are still up for debate.

An example is the "book banning". I have not heard of any conservative requesting for books to be banned. They do not want books depicting Mediaography and inappropriate content for school children. "Book banning" is a reference to historical instances in which a tolitarian government removed books in which did not align with their rhetoric. A deliberate attempt to subscribe this to conservatives that do not want their children to be exposed to inappropriate content. No one has advocated to remove these books from public libraries or book stores or anywhere else. (I'm sure there is an exception somewhere but in general).

nursej22, MSN, RN · May 17, 2022

26 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:

Okay so most of the 30% are Q fanatics?

I believe that TMB stated that some Trump voters were followers of Q, and I agree. I have no way to quantify how many. I see from news reports that many who attend Trump rallies sport Q signage and clothing.

Tweety, BSN, RN · May 17, 2022

4 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:

No. I do not determine a person's mental health on how they voted or what political party they subscribe to.

Some of the topics you referenced are still up for debate.

An example is the "book banning". I have not heard of any conservative requesting for books to be banned. They do not want books depicting Mediaography and inappropriate content for school children. "Book banning" is a reference to historical instances in which a tolitarian government removed books in which did not align with their rhetoric. A deliberate attempt to subscribe this to conservatives that do not want their children to be exposed to inappropriate content. No one has advocated to remove these books from public libraries or book stores or anywhere else. (I'm sure there is an exception somewhere but in general).

That is a good distinction to make that removing books for children's consumption is not the same as book banning. The books are still allowed to exist.

For me the problem is what some people consider "inappropriate content". In the 90's I remember a book called "Heather Has Two Mommies" that was highly controversial because it was anti-family and pro-homosexual. I think that perhaps books should be monitored by their parents, and if a child brings home a book they don't want them to read, then they don't read it. But to remove it as "inappropriate" doesn't seem fair.

I don't think that children should be exposed to sexually explicit literature, although I think high schoolers can handle it. I read sexually explicit books (not from the library) when I was in high school and wasn't corrupted or traumatized by it.

http://www.newnownext.com/heather-has-two-mommies-30th-anniversary-banned-books-week/09/2019/