roe v wade

[fishy 1,757]

I am so fucking sick of being told that I should be tolerant of intolerance by hate sympathizers. No, I will not take pity on someone who believes that some people are undeserving of human rights. I'm BEYOND the point of being willing to be gentle with someone who goes onto a thread where people are fucking grieving to effectively say that this oppressive ass system is the way it should be. Miss me with the centrist bullshit. Civil rights movements throughout history are rarely characterized by peaceful protests & compromising on the justice they're fighting for. They're characterized by being unrelenting & DEMANDING the justice owed to the people.

[NSG 498]

29 minutes ago, fishy said:

Civil rights movements throughout history are rarely characterized by peaceful protests & compromising on the justice they're fighting for. They're characterized by being unrelenting & DEMANDING the justice owed to the people.

Everything you said, except for the compromising part, is not mutually exclusive. Look at King, Mandela, and Ghandi. 2 wanted the end of legal segregation/apartheid and 1 wanted his country to be independent. They did plenty of nonviolent protests to gain public support and what got them that support was their peace in the face of government retaliation, and India became independent, segregation was no longer legal, and apartheid was abolished. 

 

However, it was a much different time then, and now there is massive political division that won't be solved overnight. So all that to say, I'm not preaching inaction, which I guess is the centrist thing to do, rather peaceful action. 

 

And I don't blame you at all for feeling that way. Even the people I mentioned felt that way too. But they channeled their and others' feelings and emotions into tirelessly (but peacefully) protesting for change, and I reckon we all stand a better chance if we follow suit.

[fishy 1,757]

how long do we have to peacefully protest while watching our country to continue to regress until we decide it's not fucking working

[NSG 498]

13 minutes ago, fishy said:

how long do we have to peacefully protest while watching our country to continue to regress until we decide it's not fucking working

Well I don't know but violent protests will just set off a civil war and the Republicans have more guns

[NSG 498]

And maybe I'm dumb but I don't see any easy solutions out there

[Ledge 1,131]

 

 

Found this while looking through Reddit the past few days. Very useful information for me, all points that back up my opinion that the government has no right to tell women what to do with their bodies, no matter the cause. The wants and needs of a woman are more important than an unborn, not yet conscious fetus.

 

I am personally quite scared right now because this verdict being returned could start a domino affect that eventually lands on outlawing gay marriage, which is absolutely horrible (not to say the verdict on Roe isn't horrible, of course). I'm far from an expert on current events and the American justice system, but I know logically that these things are wrong and I will show my support for the righteous parties involved.

 

15 hours ago, Jack Johnson said:

I would like to come out and say I was dared to do all this for $25. I actually think this was really bad

 

You can politely fuck right off. This was not intended to be a trolling thread, whether or not you were fucking around or you're backpedaling like an idiot. Just stop.

[Baozi 1,658]

3 hours ago, JardyB10 said:

I don't know if I agree with the conduct toward Jack Johnson here. I agree that his opinions are poorly formed and his takes are bad, but last I checked this wasn't a place where anyone can say "Have XYZ opinion or GTFO." You all know as well I do that he's a literal child, and even if he wasn't, it's more effective for everyone's growth to have a mature discourse instead of jumping down his throat. Yeah, the preteen has his foot perpetually in his mouth, what a shock. The fact that the $25 bet thing was used as justification for a suspension even though we all know that's a backpedaling lie is just silly.

 

I don't love getting involved in politics here any more than I do IRL, but it just seems like poor form for someone to suspend a kid for abusive behaviour when they made this comment earlier.

 

Listen, I love and appreciate Fong for everything he does. But God forbid someone has a contrary opinion in this thread. There's certainly an argument that JJ should be suspended, but I don't love how this has been handled.

 

For the record, just in case I hadn't made myself clear, this decision by the SC is fucked up and dystopian. Further on the record though, I also think it's fucked up that I feel I have to clarify my non-contrarian view on this to feel safer posting in this thread. 

 

I had this discussion elsewhere but I'll give you the TLDR. To me there is no "opinion" here that one can side with. There is a right and there is a wrong. There is a 1+1 = 2 here, not "I like strawberry over blueberry". So just stating that fact and I am going to die on this hill. There is no way in hell I would let someone decide what I get to do with my balls, so there is no way in hell I would allow myself or someone else dictate what a woman should do with theirs.

 

If there was a legitimate "opinion" here regardless of which side you choose there would pros and cons and likely a zero sum gain/loss. Those are what I pose as legitimate opinions.

 

In this case I assessed that a certain viewpoint or category of statements are incredible harmful and damaging to an important group of people at the VHL. As mandated by my appointment and position, and even if you don't necessarily believe in my direction of this situation, I stand by my decision to protect this community and group of people in our community from people making those statements.

 

Let me perfectly clear on my stance here. There is no politics, there is no opinion. There is a right and wrong and I did what was necessary to remove one problem from this community. Even worse was the backpedaling or the attempted "joke bait" depending how you want to deem it but I will not compromise my principles to safeguard members here that would feel threatened or unsafe with allowing those "pov" to remain here. 

 

I will not be a bystander in this situation.

Edited June 26, 2022 by Baozi

[InstantRockstar 1,243]

The only question that should be asked of those that voted to get rid of this policy is, which one of them is raising all of the children that will now go into foster care, orphanges, not be loved, possibly dumped, and more? Who is going to financially support all of these babies that now "must" be born because the government chose to waive the right to make a decision for yourself? 

My wife & I willingly chose to create our family... when we were ready to do so. At our own free will. No one FORCED us to have our kids, no one FORCED us to provide for our kids. We were financially stable, in a good place in our lives & thus, chose to have kids. 

 

That is not the case for everyone, but it's so simple for those people to make a ruling when it doesn't affect them. Those in power that chose to get rid of this right aren't even in the position or being put in the position so many people will now be forced to be put in... 

 

It's just sad. In 2022 it should not be a matter of removing a legislation that has been around for years... we've gone backwards & I can only feel sorry for anyone this impacts. The burden it's going to put on people is going to be massive, and those poor kids that are just going to be left to fend for themselves... awful. 

[fromtheinside 1,290]

Genuine question. Is this area of the forums moderated with a different set of rules from the rest of the forums/discord or is this considered like a thunderdome type of area? 

[Baozi 1,658]

59 minutes ago, InstantRockstar said:

The only question that should be asked of those that voted to get rid of this policy is, which one of them is raising all of the children that will now go into foster care, orphanges, not be loved, possibly dumped, and more? Who is going to financially support all of these babies that now "must" be born because the government chose to waive the right to make a decision for yourself? 

My wife & I willingly chose to create our family... when we were ready to do so. At our own free will. No one FORCED us to have our kids, no one FORCED us to provide for our kids. We were financially stable, in a good place in our lives & thus, chose to have kids. 

 

That is not the case for everyone, but it's so simple for those people to make a ruling when it doesn't affect them. Those in power that chose to get rid of this right aren't even in the position or being put in the position so many people will now be forced to be put in... 

 

It's just sad. In 2022 it should not be a matter of removing a legislation that has been around for years... we've gone backwards & I can only feel sorry for anyone this impacts. The burden it's going to put on people is going to be massive, and those poor kids that are just going to be left to fend for themselves... awful. 

 

That's what I feel people on that side don't understand. Its literally giving people choice. But no pro lifer really cares about the kid after 1 years, where is that funding for education, the cost of therapy for a young unready mother, opportunity cost for lost career development. Adoption systems or medical or anything else they don't even consider the cost and the risk to peoples livelihoods.

[samx 1,173]

4 minutes ago, fromtheinside said:

Genuine question. Is this area of the forums moderated with a different set of rules from the rest of the forums/discord or is this considered like a thunderdome type of area? 

Forums we allow "politic" talk etc if it's in off-topic/ thunder dome. We still watch it to make sure that it stays in line with rules etc but it's not like discord where we ask you to stay completely away from politics.

[Baozi 1,658]

5 minutes ago, fromtheinside said:

Genuine question. Is this area of the forums moderated with a different set of rules from the rest of the forums/discord or is this considered like a thunderdome type of area? 

 

Yes and no, there is a bit more tolerance and discussionary threads in OT and thunderdome are generally easier to manage from a modding point so you're free to discuss this unless a mod shuts it down.

[fromtheinside 1,290]

Just now, samx said:

Forums we allow "politic" talk etc if it's in off-topic/ thunder dome. We still watch it to make sure that it stays in line with rules etc but it's not like discord where we ask you to stay completely away from politics.

 

ok thanks for clarification. I know this probably won't be met with agreement, but maybe it's time we shut down political-related talk on the forums too. There's a ton of people who can't act like normal human beings on the forums and that leads to these kind of trainwreck threads. I totally get fishy wanting to express their opinions and feelings, but fishy knows enough people in the community that they could just do that privately on Discord with people and avoid the BS. 

[samx 1,173]

Just now, fromtheinside said:

 

ok thanks for clarification. I know this probably won't be met with agreement, but maybe it's time we shut down political-related talk on the forums too. There's a ton of people who can't act like normal human beings on the forums and that leads to these kind of trainwreck threads. I totally get fishy wanting to express their opinions and feelings, but fishy knows enough people in the community that they could just do that privately on Discord with people and avoid the BS. 

I mean truthfully this specific issue shouldn't even be considered political. it had turned political however it should not be. it's a human rights issue turned political. But I hear you and is something we should probably discuss going forward with what we allow.

[fromtheinside 1,290]

Just now, samx said:

I mean truthfully this specific issue shouldn't even be considered political. it had turned political however it should not be. it's a human rights issue turned political. But I hear you and is something we should probably discuss going forward with what we allow.

 

I get what you are saying, but I disagree. This is all coming from a court decision which was overturned, and is deeply routed in politics. That's not to say it isn't a human rights issue too, but it's both. And any time politics is involved, things get nasty.

[samx 1,173]

5 minutes ago, fromtheinside said:

 

I get what you are saying, but I disagree. This is all coming from a court decision which was overturned, and is deeply routed in politics. That's not to say it isn't a human rights issue too, but it's both. And any time politics is involved, things get nasty.

I understand that. but the abortion debate goes far beyond the overturning of this. Maybe better wording would have been yes now it's a political issue but at it's core it really isn't. To me it's one of those things that became political for the benefit of cannidates beliefs not because it should be political. 

[fishy 1,757]

39 minutes ago, fromtheinside said:

fishy knows enough people in the community that they could just do that privately on Discord with people and avoid the BS

this take completely lacks the awareness of the critical importance for community in times of mourning and grieving. creating safe spaces for hard topics is a good, healthy, and vital thing. 

 

every single survey that's conducted in this league about why people stay shows that community plays a significant role. why does community only count when it's what you want? it is extremely valuable to have people from around the WORLD on this website for the huge variety of human experience it allows, and even more valuable because I've had a chance to develop personal relationships with many of them. i think it's foolish to believe that value doesn't transfer to difficult topics, and i see no reason why it shouldn't be leveraged. 

 

to say that it feels at all appropriate for me (or anyone else) to be expected to reach out to people individually and ask them to meet me where i am on something this monumental is obscene. people handle these kinds of things extremely differently l, and who's to say that someone would be able to give me the support i need and vice versa? 

 

the fact that people have thanked me for opening thread says enough. having a space for people to share their stories and connections with this issue and how they are seeing victimization as a result of the court's decision allows for collective healing and bonding. there is not a single ounce of me that regrets creating this thread.

[fromtheinside 1,290]

5 minutes ago, fishy said:

this take completely lacks the awareness of the critical importance for community in times of mourning and grieving. creating safe spaces for hard topics is a good, healthy, and vital thing. 

 

every single survey that's conducted in this league about why people stay shows that community plays a significant role. why does community only count when it's what you want? it is extremely valuable to have people from around the WORLD on this website for the huge variety of human experience it allows, and even more valuable because I've had a chance to develop personal relationships with many of them. i think it's foolish to believe that value doesn't transfer to difficult topics, and i see no reason why it shouldn't be leveraged. 

 

to say that it feels at all appropriate for me (or anyone else) to be expected to reach out to people individually and ask them to meet me where i am on something this monumental is obscene. people handle these kinds of things extremely differently l, and who's to say that someone would be able to give me the support i need and vice versa? 

 

the fact that people have thanked me for opening thread says enough. having a space for people to share their stories and connections with this issue and how they are seeing victimization as a result of the court's decision allows for collective healing and bonding. there is not a single ounce of me that regrets creating this thread.

 

 

I'm not going to post a giant rebuttal, but when I saw this thread existed, I thought "oh, that's gonna be a shitshow". And it was. You can be angry and spiteful towards me all you want, I don't really care. My point is, there's a lot of younger audiences as well as ignorant audiences that are always going to be present for these threads and things will always dissolve into a gong show. I'm not looking for you to regret anything, but there's a reason why certain policies were put into place on the Discord, it doesn't seem like a stretch that the same policies should be consistent here on the forums also. 

[JardyB10 4,865]

2 hours ago, Baozi said:

 

I had this discussion elsewhere but I'll give you the TLDR. To me there is no "opinion" here that one can side with. There is a right and there is a wrong. There is a 1+1 = 2 here, not "I like strawberry over blueberry". So just stating that fact and I am going to die on this hill. There is no way in hell I would let someone decide what I get to do with my balls, so there is no way in hell I would allow myself or someone else dictate what a woman should do with theirs.

 

If there was a legitimate "opinion" here regardless of which side you choose there would pros and cons and likely a zero sum gain/loss. Those are what I pose as legitimate opinions.

 

In this case I assessed that a certain viewpoint or category of statements are incredible harmful and damaging to an important group of people at the VHL. As mandated by my appointment and position, and even if you don't necessarily believe in my direction of this situation, I stand by my decision to protect this community and group of people in our community from people making those statements.

 

Let me perfectly clear on my stance here. There is no politics, there is no opinion. There is a right and wrong and I did what was necessary to remove one problem from this community. Even worse was the backpedaling or the attempted "joke bait" depending how you want to deem it but I will not compromise my principles to safeguard members here that would feel threatened or unsafe with allowing those "pov" to remain here. 

 

I will not be a bystander in this situation.

Well it’s a little bit more complicated than 1+1=2 obviously. If for no other reason than that I can understand someone being anti-abortion. I think that in itself is an arguably reasonable enough opinion to have (Heck, even what’s “right” and “wrong” is more of a matter of philosophical opinion, but that’s a whole different can of worms and not relevant besides).
 

At any rate, it is clear that this decision was a huge blow to human rights, and discourse around that fact is important. I’m not mourning the loss of a problematic teen, but he was literally told that everyone hated him and was kicked out, which I don’t think was necessarily the best way to challenge his worldview. After all, for all we know, he could grow up to be a Supreme Court judge. Or a teacher. Or a parent. 

 

Anyway, that’s my piece, I don’t want to take up more space in this thread if it indeed more of a place to grieve and vent.

[der meister 3,183]

 

 

An insightful anecdote 

 

[Daniel Janser 2,165]

 

 

3 hours ago, Baozi said:

 To me there is no "opinion" here that one can side with.

And that is your opinion. Apparently 20-30% of the American public (depending on sources) share the opinion you do obviously not like.

 

3 hours ago, Baozi said:

There is a right and there is a wrong.

And who gets to decide what is right and wrong? A higher being, if yes which one? The majority, if yes regular or qualified? A group of select people, if yes by which criteria are they selected? A holy book, if yes which one?

 

3 hours ago, Baozi said:

In this case I assessed that a certain viewpoint or category of statements are incredible harmful and damaging to an important group of people at the VHL.

You mean statements like the below, issued by a mod?

 

Quote

Your mom was pretty upset as I understand it.

 

The above to me seems to be a crass violation of the COC: 

Quote

There is no tolerance for personal attacks, whether it is as an aggressor, or in retaliation.

 

Do we need to change the COC to the following?

 

The VHL aims to curate a welcoming, inclusive community intended to provide enjoyment for all its members, regardless of ethnicity, nationality, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or disability, provided they share the same opinions as the moderators.

 

Or maybe we could add in the title of threads which have an inherent risk of controversial dispute a tag 'contrary opinion not welcome' or something to that extent.

 

I do not share Jack Johnson's opinions on the matter at all, but I understand that not everyone has the same view point and that from another person's perspective, my opinion might very well be the 'wrong one'. 

[Baozi 1,658]

2 hours ago, Daniel Janser said:

And who gets to decide what is right and wrong? A higher being, if yes which one? The majority, if yes regular or qualified? A group of select people, if yes by which criteria are they selected? A holy book, if yes which one?

 

 

This is all addressed by this and the VHL is a private community and the direction is governed by the management of this league and the discretion of the mod team.

 

Quote

And that is your opinion. Apparently 20-30% of the American public (depending on sources) share the opinion you do obviously not like.

 

Its easier to explain that it isn't an opinion of 20-30% But rather 20-30% of people are wrong in treating women as anything less than a person equal that of a man. Much like a % of people believe in flat earth theory or that some people are wrong scientifically, these people are also wrong in believing that a woman doesn't get to control what happens to their own wellbeing or giving them the choice.

 

 

Quote

The league moderators and Commissioners reserve the right to interpret the spirit of the rule rather than the word of the rule in order to achieve the best outcome.

 

Here is where our interpretations come into play.

 

My interpretations and assessment is that these rulings are not opinions but a matter of right and wrong (in the case of human rights especially) and are not open to "opinions". At the end of the day, despite what the rules you feel may be lawyered, I have a responsibility to interpret and assess risks and the harmful nature of situations to the community and act as required. Complaints of this nature of my conduct can be reported to other mods as they can investigate and launch inquiries on other mod team members as can commish level staff.

 

If you feel the reasoning behind my actions is unjust, you are encouraged to report these actions (we also have an anonymous reporting function that will also launch inquiries. I would not handle my own investigation.

 

2 hours ago, Daniel Janser said:

The above to me seems to be a crass violation of the COC: 

 

In reply to the originating statement I feel it is an in-line and appropriate response. I will not tolerate those kinds of remarks on any such level.

Edited June 27, 2022 by Baozi

[Ben 200]

Fuck politics 

[Ben 200]

On a real note states making it illegal will lead to a lot of metal coat hangers being used which is not good 

Edited June 27, 2022 by Ben

[Baozi 1,658]

19 minutes ago, Ben said:

On a real note states making it illegal will lead to a lot of metal coat hangers being used which is not good 

 

Its actually such a scary thought for real.