The Biden Presidency - 2020

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Lathum

My wife had one and it required an abortion. It was horrible. She told my 9 year old daughter about it tonight.

I'm sorry she had to go through that. I've been reading horror stories from women on this and it's heartbreaking.

[CrimsonFox]

A 18th Century DIY German Abortion Kit

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Atocep

I'm sorry she had to go through that. I've been reading horror stories from women on this and it's heartbreaking.

Thanks. It was a rough time for sure but we now have an amazing 9 year old spitfire of a daughter so it was all worth it.

[larrymcg421]

Some post-Dobbs movement on my PredictIt bet for Dems to keep Senate control. It has moved from .25 to .30 over the last couple days.

[Brian Swartz]

The recent conversations have convinced me that I'm doing more harm than good posting here and that it's probably not best for my mental health either. Taking an indefinite and possibly permanent break. I wish all of you well.

[GrantDawg]

Our congress in action: between now and labor day (10 weeks) the house will only have 12 days of work, and the Senate will have 16.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

The recent conversations have convinced me that I'm doing more harm than good posting here and that it's probably not best for my mental health either. Taking an indefinite and possibly permanent break. I wish all of you well.

Best on your mental health. Drop by once in a while

[JPhillips]

It's a single poll, close to a major event, but a Marist poll has the generic ballot going from 44D-47R to 48D-41R.

I want to see this replicated before I buy it, but I do think Dobbs makes a lot of the polling done so far invalid. We'll have to see how much the new abortion landscape matters for November.

The gun and EPA decisions also just further establish that this is a runaway right-wing court.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

It's a single poll, close to a major event, but a Marist poll has the generic ballot going from 44D-47R to 48D-41R.

I want to see this replicated before I buy it, but I do think Dobbs makes a lot of the polling done so far invalid. We'll have to see how much the new abortion landscape matters for November.

The gun and EPA decisions also just further establish that this is a runaway right-wing court.

I saw the tweet. That was a bit of selective data. They showed the change from April to June, but May was 47D-42R. Now, maybe that already baked in the impact of Roe based on the leaked opinion, but the needle hasn't moved much more since May.

[Lathum]

So would the federal government be able to withhold funding, such as medicare or medicade, from states that refuse to provide access to safe abortions?

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I saw the tweet. That was a bit of selective data. They showed the change from April to June, but May was 47D-42R. Now, maybe that already baked in the impact of Roe based on the leaked opinion, but the needle hasn't moved much more since May.

I'm skeptical until we see this replicated in other polling, I just think that Dobbs is going to make a hash of pre-decision polling.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

It really feels like the R's are angling for a Department of Vice and Virtue. You know who else has a governmental department called that? The Taliban.

We've been heading down the extremist right path for a while now, and it's only accelerating. The Russians have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams in that regard.

How about a Catholic Taliban?

White nationalist Nick Fuentes rejoices that in overturning Roe, the Supreme Court has laid out a blueprint for banning gay marriage, sodomy, and contraception and imposing "Catholic Taliban rule": "We're having something like Taliban rule in America, in a good way!" pic.twitter.com/ZhSxZMBTIh

— Right Wing Watch (@RightWingWatch) June 27, 2022

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

The gun and EPA decisions also just further establish that this is a runaway right-wing court.

The EPA one is going to be so weird. Genuinely curious to see how they try to explain it. The case is against a policy that actually doesn't exist. And they are trying to use legal doctrine that doesn't exist in this country.

I don't think I've ever seen a ruling like that before in my life.

[Edward64]

First poll is out.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/america...ll-2022-06-26/
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/27/polit...oll/index.html

A 59% majority of US adults disapprove, with 41% approving. About half (52%) call the decision a step backward for America, with 31% calling it a step forward and 17% saying it's neither.

Among women, two-thirds (67%) disapprove of the ruling, with just 33% approving. A 56% majority of women say that the decision will make the lives of most American women worse.

A 58% majority of Americans say they'd favor a federal law making abortion legal nationwide, while 42% would oppose this. And 64% say they'd like abortion in their states to be legal in most or all cases.

In the CBS article that had specific questions/results, thought this question was interesting. Wonder if it'll really play out this way.

[Edward64]

Definitely think its good for some companies willing to assist their employees with logistics (and assume some funding) so they can travel and have "safe" abortions if they choose. Then there's other companies that are a no, which is okay also as they are willing to bear the consequences with their workforce and customers.

For those companies willing to support, not sure if they have really thought out all the details like the one below.

Tech Companies Won't Say If They’ll Give Cops Abortion Data

Motherboard asked some of the biggest tech companies on the planet if they'll provide law enforcement with user data related to abortions. None of them answered the question.
:
Many of the biggest tech and social media companies in the world, including Facebook, Amazon, Twitter, and Snapchat, have refused to clarify whether they would fulfill or deny law enforcement requests for data that related to investigations involving those seeking or providing abortions.

The news signals the looming battleground over users’ data

[Lathum]

If this decision pushes women to come out and vote it will be very bad for the right.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The EPA one is going to be so weird. Genuinely curious to see how they try to explain it. The case is against a policy that actually doesn't exist. And they are trying to use legal doctrine that doesn't exist in this country.

I don't think I've ever seen a ruling like that before in my life.

Makes it a lot easier when you don't care about the law or consistency and just use whatever you find to justify what you want to do.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Definitely think its good for some companies willing to assist their employees with logistics (and assume some funding) so they can travel and have "safe" abortions if they choose. Then there's other companies that are a no, which is okay also as they are willing to bear the consequences with their workforce and customers.

For those companies willing to support, not sure if they have really thought out all the details like the one below.

Tech Companies Won't Say If They’ll Give Cops Abortion Data

Considering they're more than happy to sell us out for everything else, why would this be any different?

SI

[Izulde]

Originally Posted by Lathum

If this decision pushes women to come out and vote it will be very bad for the right.

That was my thought, too - more specifically, the suburban women vote

[Atocep]

Dems would be positioned to better take advantage of this if they could form a plan that's more detailed than "Roe v Wade is on the ballot in November".

[GrantDawg]

I don't know where to put this, but they just 42 people dead inside a tractor-trailer outside of San Antonio.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Dems would be positioned to better take advantage of this if they could form a plan that's more detailed than "Roe v Wade is on the ballot in November".

I mean the WH said today that Biden is going around the country to talk about fighting inflation.

When the American fascists finally fall, historians will have a great time trying to understand how we let it happen.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I mean the WH said today that Biden is going around the country to talk about fighting inflation.

When the American fascists finally fall, historians will have a great time trying to understand how we let it happen.

Pelosi is going to have the House vote on a bunch of shit that will never be voted on in Senate to show the differences between Dems and GOP on this issue.

I'm pretty sure everyone already knows where both sides stand. What they're waiting for is for dems to explain how they're going to fight back. Ya know, instead of roll over like they do on everything else.

[Drake]

This might be one of the most thoughtful takes on overturning Roe that I've seen yet...and it's from one of the former Operation Rescue guys who walked away from the movement.

Fmr. Pro-Life Leader on Abortion Ruling: Our Movement Has Lost its Soul | Amanpour and Company - YouTube

Worth a listen if you're into longer form video journalism.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Drake

Just to clarify, I wasn't disagreeing with you at all.

I can't tell from the tone of your text whether you took my comment as snide or not, so I just want to assure you that it wasn't.

I thought that might be the case, which is why I purposely didn't include you in the statement.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

I don't know where to put this, but they just 42 people dead inside a tractor-trailer outside of San Antonio.

That is just brutal.

If that driver did leave illegals up in his trailer like that, I hope they crucify him. Article did not say but assume it was locked trailer.

The tractor-trailer was abandoned in a remote area near railroad tracks and the driver remains at large, according to the New York Times.

[whomario]

The Supreme Court’s “praying coach� decision rests on a bed of lies - Vox

[Ksyrup]

This won't help the domestic supply...

Byproduct of KY's abortion ban:

A Lexington OB-GYN told me this morning that yesterday, alone, her clinic got *91* appointment requests from women wishing to get surgically sterilized (tubes tied). Said that's far & away the most, ever. Tubals are permanent birth control.

— Alex Acquisto (@AcquistoA) June 28, 2022

[Flasch186]

Re the SC decision on the praying coach…

In Florida now can a teacher teach whatever the F they want in contradiction of the recently passed laws controlling what they can or cannot teach?

Then also can the religion/passing occur in the classroom?

What if it’s Muslim prayer?

I’m trying to extrapolate out the unforeseen consequences of the blending of church and state at schools now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[larrymcg421]

No, because the court said the coach wasn't acting in his official duties and he wasn't encouraging others to pray. Now that's bullshit based on the available evidence, but they would find a way to distinguish this case from a teacher who taught a BLM lesson in Florida.

Even if it's the same exact circumstances for a Muslim coach, I bet they'd come up with some bullshit justification about how the prayer rug is visual and thus less private than a Christian prayer.

[JPhillips]

Muslim football coaches weren't a thing in 1680 England, so...

[PilotMan]

I'm totally sure it'll be fine for a Muslim coach to lay his mat down on the 50 yrd line and invite his team to pray with him after their games now. Surely, it'll be accepted by everyone in Texas as ok.

[BYU 14]

I really think we are blurring the lines here. Outside of an elective religion based course (seminary in the Mormon faith, which takes place before regular school hours IIRC) Religion should never be taught in public schools in conjunction with core curriculum. If a school wanted to offer CRT as an elective, at the the appropriate learning level (remember CRT is a graduate level course) they should be allowed to.

What this coach was doing is akin to an elective class, after the main 'course work' I.E football game is over. He did not invite, encourage or coerce players to join him. Just like you see collegiate and pro football players often kneel together after games. There is zero indication looking at this case, that the coach forced anybody to participate, it was his thing, which many of us that coach have little quirks associated with game night.

I have been on staffs that recited the Lords prayer after games and staffs that don't pray. In the former players were not required to participate. In fact at North Canyon 20 years ago we had a Muslim kid who would stand respectfully outside the circle and nobody said a thing. In fact a couple of us started standing next to him so he was not isolated. No big deal IMO and again, just my way of looking at it based on what I know. Especially when there are much more serious things being attacked like Roe and most likely soon to be contraception and gay marriage. I just don't see this ruling having the same widespread, damaging effect as other potential rulings out there.

Edit: And yes, once you let this Genie out of the bottle, it better be damn sure okay for any coach of any religious belief to do the same thing.

[Lathum]

The problem is it still happened at an official school function on school properties while carrying out his duty to the school. Would it be OK for a science teacher to recite a prayer prior to a test?

I get what you’re saying about kids choosing to not participate, but cmon, peer pressure is a strong thing.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by BYU 14

I really think we are blurring the lines here. Outside of an elective religion based course (seminary in the Mormon faith, which takes place before regular school hours IIRC) Religion should never be taught in public schools in conjunction with core curriculum. If a school wanted to offer CRT as an elective, at the the appropriate learning level (remember CRT is a graduate level course) they should be allowed to.

What this coach was doing is akin to an elective class, after the main 'course work' I.E football game is over. He did not invite, encourage or coerce players to join him. Just like you see collegiate and pro football players often kneel together after games. There is zero indication looking at this case, that the coach forced anybody to participate, it was his thing, which many of us that coach have little quirks associated with game night.

I have been on staffs that recited the Lords prayer after games and staffs that don't pray. In the former players were not required to participate. In fact at North Canyon 20 years ago we had a Muslim kid who would stand respectfully outside the circle and nobody said a thing. In fact a couple of us started standing next to him so he was not isolated. No big deal IMO and again, just my way of looking at it based on what I know. Especially when there are much more serious things being attacked like Roe and most likely soon to be contraception and gay marriage. I just don't see this ruling having the same widespread, damaging effect as other potential rulings out there.

Edit: And yes, once you let this Genie out of the bottle, it better be damn sure okay for any coach of any religious belief to do the same thing.

The school received a complaint that it was making one of the players uncomfortable and they requested he move his prayer from the field to a more private area. He initially agreed, but after doing a big media tour which landed him on Good Morning America and other TV shows he came back and said he wasn't going to stop doing it at midfield. With the added media attention he brought on himself it started drawing the big crowds.

IMO when it comes to prayer while conducing your official duties for the school and especially on school property all it takes is one complaint and you knock it off or take it elsewhere.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by BYU 14

What this coach was doing is akin to an elective class, after the main 'course work' I.E football game is over. He did not invite, encourage or coerce players to join him. Just like you see collegiate and pro football players often kneel together after games. There is zero indication looking at this case, that the coach forced anybody to participate, it was his thing, which many of us that coach have little quirks associated with game night.

Have you seen the pictures? He's facing kids and leading them in prayer. That's just ridiculously inappropriate. Even if the coach never ordered somebody to do it or took action against a player for not joining, there's no way of knowing how it made specific players feel.

I have been on staffs that recited the Lords prayer after games and staffs that don't pray. In the former players were not required to participate. In fact at North Canyon 20 years ago we had a Muslim kid who would stand respectfully outside the circle and nobody said a thing. In fact a couple of us started standing next to him so he was not isolated. No big deal IMO and again, just my way of looking at it based on what I know. Especially when there are much more serious things being attacked like Roe and most likely soon to be contraception and gay marriage. I just don't see this ruling having the same widespread, damaging effect as other potential rulings out there.

And this is ridiculously inappropriate as well. I know it goes on regularly, but it's 100% wrong. That's great that some of you stood by him so he didn't feel excluded, but it's still a public way to demonstrate that he's different from other players on the team. And you never know how many players joined those prayers because they were afraid of being benched or just being picked on by their teammates for being different.

Edit: And yes, once you let this Genie out of the bottle, it better be damn sure okay for any coach of any religious belief to do the same thing.

But it won't be. You get that, right? Even if SCOTUS is consistent here, which I doubt, public pressure would never allow a Muslim coach to do the same thing in many communities.

[larrymcg421]

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Have you seen the pictures? He's facing kids and leading them in prayer. That's just ridiculously inappropriate. Even if the coach never ordered somebody to do it or took action against a player for not joining, there's no way of knowing how it made specific players feel.


But it won't be. You get that, right? Even if SCOTUS is consistent here, which I doubt, public pressure would never allow a Muslim coach to do the same thing in many communities.

In regards to the first paragraph, I get the pressure point, but I am going off the story I read, where he went off by himself and other players came to join him, not him standing in front of the entire team and starting to pray.

In regards to the second point, I get that too, but fuck those people, you either have freedom or you don't and it can't be selective. I would love to see the lawsuits that would arise from that. Then you are going against the intent of the 1st amendment.

Again, I know religion is a heated topic and I am not really that religious, nor am I specifically against it, as long as the rules are consistent. So maybe that causes me to look at it a little more passively. I just think there are a lot bigger fish to fry.

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

As I mentioned, that is not the whole team and includes players from the other team too.

Also, in context, I have never seen teams meet post game as a unit at midfield in 30+ years of coaching. We always go to our respective end zones, both teams talk to their kids and leave. If this is him going to mid field and some of his players and some from the other team joining him there, not that big a deal, sorry, just my opinion.

[BYU 14]

And dola, I want to make it clear, I do not think it is wise, nor completely respectful to do this anyway in todays social climate. It is after all a Football game, not a church service and views have changed a great deal since i got into coaching. It is why we don't do it where I am at now. I am merely offering an opinion on my thoughts about where this stacks up against other social issues.

[larrymcg421]

Then I'm not sure the whole point of this digression, which seemed to be defending what the coach did. If your whole point is that the Roe decision is more worrisome than this one, I don't know who you're arguing against. I think that's where most people here would fall, but we can be mad/upset at more than one thing at a time.

[Ksyrup]

My daughter's high school softball team did the Lord's prayer before every game, no coaches involved. After games, I'd say about a quarter of the time, the other team would gather around the pitching circle, with coaches, and some/most of our girls would join for some sort of prayer.

Pretty common here, and of course, no one is going to speak up about it even if they objected. But no one was forced to participate and our coaches weren't involved (except one I can recall doing the after game circle).

[GrantDawg]

Performative religion is performative.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

My daughter's high school softball team did the Lord's prayer before every game, no coaches involved. After games, I'd say about a quarter of the time, the other team would gather around the pitching circle, with coaches, and some/most of our girls would join for some sort of prayer.

Pretty common here, and of course, no one is going to speak up about it even if they objected. But no one was forced to participate and our coaches weren't involved (except one I can recall doing the after game circle).

Again, the only inappropriate part here is when any coaches joined. Students are free to pray whenever they want, including during school hours as long as it is not disruptive. The whole point is official government endorsement of religion, which should be completely avoided.

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Then I'm not sure the whole point of this digression, which seemed to be defending what the coach did. If your whole point is that the Roe decision is more worrisome than this one, I don't know who you're arguing against. I think that's where most people here would fall, but we can be mad/upset at more than one thing at a time.

That was just a reference point, as stated I don't see this as a huge issue to be concerned with, I.E Football coaches are now going to go crazy making their players pray, because they are still not allowed to do that. When we all know what red states are doing with Roe and what will follow with gay marriage etc.

I offered my opinion, reasoning and experience on the matter, and respect your opinion as well.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Again, the only inappropriate part here is when any coaches joined. Students are free to pray whenever they want, including during school hours as long as it is not disruptive. The whole point is official government endorsement of religion, which should be completely avoided.

My issue is you're a coach and you are told you're making at least one of your players uncomfortable, you're asked to move it to a more private area, and you go on a media tour and then double down on it while now doing your prayers surrounded by media, parents, ect.

As someone that coached for about a decade, if I had been told something I was doing was making a player or players uncomfortable and there were favoritism concerns and I was offered a pretty reasonable accommodation I would feel like an asshole if I continued. And this guy didn't just continue, he went out to attract as much attention as he possibly could before continuing.

[Flasch186]

Because

religion first
Institution second
Kids third

The above is replaceable

But religion first

Then every thing second or lower including a willingness to lie cheat and steal on the things below the religion tranche


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by Atocep

My issue is you're a coach and you are told you're making at least one of your players uncomfortable, you're asked to move it to a more private area, and you go on a media tour and then double down on it while now doing your prayers surrounded by media, parents, ect.

As someone that coached for about a decade, if I had been told something I was doing was making a player or players uncomfortable and there were favoritism concerns and I was offered a pretty reasonable accommodation I would feel like an asshole if I continued. And this guy didn't just continue, he went out to attract as much attention as he possibly could before continuing.

If it makes one player uncomfortable but thirty players feel better because of it (based on the photo)it’s up to the one player to adjust and take himself somewhere more private.

[Flasch186]

Unless of course it’s sanctioned by a public body ie. School

Unless of course schools are truly able to be religious schools for the majority and minority religions be dammed


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by BYU 14

I really think we are blurring the lines here. Outside of an elective religion based course (seminary in the Mormon faith, which takes place before regular school hours IIRC) Religion should never be taught in public schools in conjunction with core curriculum. If a school wanted to offer CRT as an elective, at the the appropriate learning level (remember CRT is a graduate level course) they should be allowed to.

What this coach was doing is akin to an elective class, after the main 'course work' I.E football game is over. He did not invite, encourage or coerce players to join him. Just like you see collegiate and pro football players often kneel together after games. There is zero indication looking at this case, that the coach forced anybody to participate, it was his thing, which many of us that coach have little quirks associated with game night.

I have been on staffs that recited the Lords prayer after games and staffs that don't pray. In the former players were not required to participate. In fact at North Canyon 20 years ago we had a Muslim kid who would stand respectfully outside the circle and nobody said a thing. In fact a couple of us started standing next to him so he was not isolated. No big deal IMO and again, just my way of looking at it based on what I know. Especially when there are much more serious things being attacked like Roe and most likely soon to be contraception and gay marriage. I just don't see this ruling having the same widespread, damaging effect as other potential rulings out there.

Edit: And yes, once you let this Genie out of the bottle, it better be damn sure okay for any coach of any religious belief to do the same thing.

Putting aside the constitutional merits of the case (which is what the court did), I think there are a few issues at play.

Were kids felt compelled to participate? A tough question to answer. Some kids said they were, the coach said it had no bearing. Regardless, it is someone with a position of authority over others. When our coach had "voluntary workouts" in the offseason, we knew they weren't "voluntary". It's a similar situation to a professor asking out a student or a boss asking out an employee. You aren't obligated to participate, but you have to trust that the person in power is not going to hold that over you.

The next is whether he used taxpayer dollars to preach. The answer to that is yes.

And I guess finally, the question is would this be allowed for other religions? Would a Muslim coach be allowed to hold group prayer at midfield and would he be allowed to use stories from the Quran during practice? Would a scientologist be allowed to read from Dianetics? I have a feeling I know how the courts would have sided on this, but it would have been interesting to see if it was a less followed religion in this scenario.