roe v wade

[Daniel Janser 2,197]

13 hours ago, Baozi said:

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.

It baffles me that I need to point out the obvious here, as you quoted the respective section several times when banning other users:

 

Quote

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

 

And the fact that you even think it is appropriate to wish another user was not born (or insinuate that his mother would/should have aborted said user) in my eyes disqualifies you as a moderator. If you hold esteem for the function you are currently holding, you would bring this up to the other mods yourself, as in your heart of hearts you know it was in violation of the COC. I do not know if @jRuutu had already raised this issue. He is a grown man and can decide on his own whether he wants to bring this up as it is him who was targeted, he does not need me to do it for him.

[NSG 498]

The intent of this topic was...

 

Spoiler

so yeah, i'm opening up this space for other people to be pissed and scared

 

This has gone really far off the rails since then so as a dude who's on the EFL's BOD, y'all need to take this stuff to DMs.

[Quik 4,113]

Definitely a lot to unpack in this thread, but I won't comment on stuff other than the actual ruling.

 

It's an extremely sad day when, in 2022, we are continuing to revert to archaic laws and rulings.

 

This ruling won't stop anything but safe abortions, and will actively increase unsafe back-alley abortions. I am saddened on behalf of the young women who undergo unwanted pregnancies (many of whom live in areas that do not teach safe sex in schools that would go a long way towards preventing said unwanted pregnancies, along with the other various issues that can come about), who will have no legal recourse other than a long/arduous journey across state/country lines, or else have to decide to risk a black-market abortion or worse. I can't begin to imagine the feelings of isolation they will go through- just picturing having to take a bus 8-12 hours away to somewhere that allows legal abortions, undergoing the procedure which can be hard enough, and then having to take that bus ride back is fucking harrowing.

 

Hell, even women who are older and just do not want kids (or even to have more kids). Whatever reason why they may not want to proceed with that specific pregnancy, should be more than enough.

 

So, either you're creating extremely unsafe conditions for women who have essentially already decided they do not want to proceed with their pregnancy, or you are forcing a child into the world whose parent(s) is unwilling and will likely not be providing a safe/stable life for that child. Who wins here?

 

I know people on the "pro-life" side will go to the "If you don't want the child, you can just put them up for adoption," but why the fuck would that be the primary option? There are enough children in the system whose lives are difficult enough. Why force trauma on a woman to add to that system?

 

And then there's the obvious irony of being "pro-life", when living, breathing people are being killed every day in gun violence, and nothing is being done to prevent that.

 

The fact that Roe v Wade has been overturned, and there's definitely members of SCOTUS and congress who have benefited from abortions, in one way or another...it's just insane to me, and like I said, extremely sad, that this can be allowed to happen in 2022.

Edited June 27, 2022 by Quik

[Beketov 9,041]

24 minutes ago, Quik said:

I can't begin to imagine the feelings of isolation they will go through- just picturing having to take a bus 8-12 hours away to somewhere that allows legal abortions, undergoing the procedure which can be hard enough, and then having to take that bus ride back is fucking harrowing.

Don't forget having to go into the building past a bunch of people screaming how you're a murderer; a bonus fun part of the trip!

[Quik 4,113]

8 minutes ago, Beketov said:

Don't forget having to go into the building past a bunch of people screaming how you're a murderer; a bonus fun part of the trip!

Oh, for sure, but that already comes with the package (not that it's any less disgusting) - too bad those same people don't line up outside gun shops...

[der meister 3,214]

But hey, at least prayer in schools is legal now, as of today. smh

 

This rogue court needs to be shut down asap

[Beketov 9,041]

54 minutes ago, der meister said:

But hey, at least prayer in schools is legal now, as of today. smh

 

This rogue court needs to be shut down asap

Rogue implies they are going against orders. They are doing precisely what they were put there to do.

[Ledge 1,131]

6 minutes ago, Beketov said:

Rogue implies they are going against orders. They are doing precisely what they were put there to do.

 

By Republicans.....I see your point. This is all part of their agenda. You can imagine how much faster this all would have been if Trump won office, or does win office, which is the scariest part of it all.

[Daniel Janser 2,197]

2 hours ago, Quik said:

Definitely a lot to unpack in this thread, but I won't comment on stuff other than the actual ruling.

 

It's an extremely sad day when, in 2022, we are continuing to revert to archaic laws and rulings.

 

This ruling won't stop anything but safe abortions, and will actively increase unsafe back-alley abortions. I am saddened on behalf of the young women who undergo unwanted pregnancies (many of whom live in areas that do not teach safe sex in schools that would go a long way towards preventing said unwanted pregnancies, along with the other various issues that can come about), who will have no legal recourse other than a long/arduous journey across state/country lines, or else have to decide to risk a black-market abortion or worse. I can't begin to imagine the feelings of isolation they will go through- just picturing having to take a bus 8-12 hours away to somewhere that allows legal abortions, undergoing the procedure which can be hard enough, and then having to take that bus ride back is fucking harrowing.

 

Hell, even women who are older and just do not want kids (or even to have more kids). Whatever reason why they may not want to proceed with that specific pregnancy, should be more than enough.

 

So, either you're creating extremely unsafe conditions for women who have essentially already decided they do not want to proceed with their pregnancy, or you are forcing a child into the world whose parent(s) is unwilling and will likely not be providing a safe/stable life for that child. Who wins here?

 

I know people on the "pro-life" side will go to the "If you don't want the child, you can just put them up for adoption," but why the fuck would that be the primary option? There are enough children in the system whose lives are difficult enough. Why force trauma on a woman to add to that system?

 

And then there's the obvious irony of being "pro-life", when living, breathing people are being killed every day in gun violence, and nothing is being done to prevent that.

 

The fact that Roe v Wade has been overturned, and there's definitely members of SCOTUS and congress who have benefited from abortions, in one way or another...it's just insane to me, and like I said, extremely sad, that this can be allowed to happen in 2022.

I just read today an article sent to me by a working colleague about the study of Donohue and Levitt who could plausibly make a connection from the legalisation of abortion in 1973 to the massive decline of violent crimes under the Clinton administration.

 

Their reasoning is that statistically unwanted children are rather prone to violent behaviour than children that feel wanted and loved. Apparently legal abortion can claim up to 90% of the decline in violent crimes.

 

This is only a short summary as I understood the article, I do not have the link atm (it is on the work computer) but will post it at a later stage. Please do read it yourself, as I may have misunderstood the content. If I did, this was a honest mistake.

 

If my understanding is correct, this is tragic to start with (I think every story where a woman is in a situation when abortion is the least bad option) and actually works much against the Reps, who always aim for less crime (or so they make the public believe). 

 

 

Edited June 27, 2022 by Daniel Janser

[Baozi 1,660]

3 hours ago, Daniel Janser said:

It baffles me that I need to point out the obvious here, as you quoted the respective section several times when banning other users:

 

 

And the fact that you even think it is appropriate to wish another user was not born (or insinuate that his mother would/should have aborted said user) in my eyes disqualifies you as a moderator. If you hold esteem for the function you are currently holding, you would bring this up to the other mods yourself, as in your heart of hearts you know it was in violation of the COC. I do not know if @jRuutu had already raised this issue. He is a grown man and can decide on his own whether he wants to bring this up as it is him who was targeted, he does not need me to do it for him.

 

Its not unlike me finding it baffling you feel that someone that holds human rights violations stances deserves the same protection and respect afforded to the community they are attacking.

Edited June 27, 2022 by Baozi

[NSG 498]

3 hours ago, NSG said:

The intent of this topic was...

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

so yeah, i'm opening up this space for other people to be pissed and scared

 

This has gone really far off the rails since then so as a dude who's on the EFL's BOD, y'all need to take this stuff to DMs.

 

[Ben 200]

This thread is starting to get longer then some town of Salem games

[diacope 1,696]

2 minutes ago, Ben said:

This thread is starting to get longer then some town of Salem games

 

"gen chat is not a place for it"

[Daniel Janser 2,197]

7 minutes ago, Baozi said:

 

Its not unlike me finding it baffling you feel that someone that holds human rights violations stances deserves the same protection and respect afforded to the community they are attacking.

So it is 'rules for thee but not for me' then. Noted.

 

to quote once more the COC rule 1.1.

 

 

Quote

 

1.1 VHL Code of Conduct

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. There is no tolerance for personal attacks, whether it is as an aggressor, or in retaliation. This includes baiting others into arguments.

Anyone found to be acting in a manner counter to the league's code of conduct will be subject to punishment at the discretion of the league's moderators and Commissioners, including, but not limited to:

• Warnings
• Removal of content
• Player penalties
• Probationary Periods
• Removal of Job Positions in the League
• TPE/Point Task Ban
• Suspension from posting privileges on the forum, discord, or both
• Removal from the league

 

If Ruutu's comment were interpreted as an attack on the community as you stated, the above listed sanctions are the ones which are appropriate. And while it reads 'but not limited to' and suggest that the list can be enhanced, I doubt that the community would accept a retaliation as displayed by you as a viable option. You basically told a member of this community that he should not exist which imo is only one teeny-tiny step away from 'go kill yourself'. 

 

I have learnt a long time ago, that 'an eye for an eye' leaves the whole world blind. And maybe one day you will come to the same conclusion. 

 

I will not spend more time on the matter since it is obvious to me that you only accept one opinion: Your own. More worrying: you do not care what the rules you are meant to enforce say in regards to the statement you made against ruutu.

 

Live long and prosper

 

[Baozi 1,660]

16 minutes ago, Daniel Janser said:

So it is 'rules for thee but not for me' then. Noted.

 

to quote once more the COC rule 1.1.

 

 

If Ruutu's comment were interpreted as an attack on the community as you stated, the above listed sanctions are the ones which are appropriate. And while it reads 'but not limited to' and suggest that the list can be enhanced, I doubt that the community would accept a retaliation as displayed by you as a viable option. You basically told a member of this community that he should not exist which imo is only one teeny-tiny step away from 'go kill yourself'. 

 

I have learnt a long time ago, that 'an eye for an eye' leaves the whole world blind. And maybe one day you will come to the same conclusion. 

 

I will not spend more time on the matter since it is obvious to me that you only accept one opinion: Your own. More worrying: you do not care what the rules you are meant to enforce say in regards to the statement you made against ruutu.

 

Live long and prosper

 

 

This already goes beyond his current comments anyways which you may have not noticed or have background to I suppose. He is persona non grata already so saying is a member of the community at this point is really only a technicality as I mentioned before.

 

I don't actually believe an eye for an eye since that phrase is often used out of context. This is more comparable unrestricted warfare against an enemy combatant.

 

If you feel you really want to lawyer it out this part of the clause more or less covers it.

 

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. 

 

Edited June 27, 2022 by Baozi

[NSG 498]

3 hours ago, NSG said:

The intent of this topic was...

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

so yeah, i'm opening up this space for other people to be pissed and scared

 

This has gone really far off the rails since then so as a dude who's on the EFL's BOD, y'all need to take this stuff to DMs.

Here let's say this for the 3rd time in as many hours and see if anything changes or whether our fiery friends will continue to go after each other for all the world to see

[hedgehog337 3,483]

5 minutes ago, NSG said:

Here let's say this for the 3rd time in as many hours and see if anything changes or whether our fiery friends will continue to go after each other for all the world to see

 

nah let em continue 

[Arce 755]

What it will mainly do is create unnecessary travel to the closest state that allows it. Getting something like this done is expensive enough on it's own, now they are expecting people to tack on travel expenses on top of it. And the people who cannot afford to do so will look for the more dangerous, route out of desperation.

 

Pro Choice does NOT mean Pro Abortion and I have not been able to stress this enough to some people I have discussed about this. My wife and I have two children of our own, we personally would not abort a pregnancy. But we both support someone's RIGHT to do so 110%. Birth control (condoms, the pill, IUD etc.) is NOT 100%. There is still a small percentage you can get pregnant and have an unwanted or unsustainable pregnancy on your hands. You're telling me as a teenager, or even an adult you should be chastised because you got caught up in a moment and had unprotected sex once and that led to this? That should define your life? I am sorry but I can't wrap my head around that. Also what is not talked about enough, what about people in an abusive relationship who are not allowed to have birth control and they have to birth children with an abusive piece of shit? This happens so much more often than people realize until they can get out of that relationship. We have seen time, and time again it is not easy to get out of these sort of things. It does not hurt you, it does not impact your life why do you give a single fuck? You would never know. We clearly do not give a shit about these children once they are here either. Look at the state of our foster system, our children in poverty, the school shootings where ELEMENTARY SCHOOL kids are getting killed, and the formula shortage that has not been declared a national emergency. If you claim you are doing this because you actually give a shit about children's lives, fucking do something to actually show it.

Edited June 27, 2022 by Arce

[Motzaburger 1,590]

[8Ovechkin8 262]

On 6/25/2022 at 7:46 PM, Jack Johnson said:

Ok. Took it another way. Still though. I support it if the baby will be born dead. Miscarrages etc.

Im a lot more moderate than others. An abortion on demand with no reason should be restricted

Are you fucking 14 years old? 

[NSG 498]

1 hour ago, 8Ovechkin8 said:

Are you fucking 14 years old? 

13 but close

[Mr_Hatter 1,608]

3 hours ago, Baozi said:

 

This already goes beyond his current comments anyways which you may have not noticed or have background to I suppose. He is persona non grata already so saying is a member of the community at this point is really only a technicality as I mentioned before.

 

I don't actually believe an eye for an eye since that phrase is often used out of context. This is more comparable unrestricted warfare against an enemy combatant.

 

If you feel you really want to lawyer it out this part of the clause more or less covers it.

 

 

 

Please take a step back and consider your position in the community and the kind of speech that you are implicitly allowing. 

You know that I have as much reason to dislike jRuutu as just about anyone, and I agree with your position on this issue in pretty much every possible way. 

 

But if you are resorting to the point at which your crass joke is considered "unrestricted warfare against an enemy combatant" then why is he just not banned already. I understand that you are trying to protect members of this community who are feeling deeply vulnerable, scared, and otherwise in a bad place right now with regards to the ruling, and I agree that it is my duty and the duty of any and all allies of marginalized people to stand up now, but literally making a "your mom wishes she could have aborted you" retort is making light of a decision that is deeply personal and incredibly sensitive.

 

Abortion, miscarriages, and any adjacent discussions are not something to joke about. It's very fucking serious. If you are going to call him out, then attack his direct comment, tell him he's a piece of shit, say anything directly at him. But don't make a joke about abortion. If you care about protecting community members, what about protecting potential members who have had to make the difficult decision to have/not to have an abortion? Because your comment is directly violent against them. 

For the record, fuck jRuutu for deciding that this is the right time for a "lol Americans kill babies" bit, and fuck the illegitimate Supreme Court that flies in the face of democratic values, and most importantly fuck the fact that my entire adult life has been spent watching my country and people I care about continuously slide back into regressive policies that look like they belong more to 1922 then 2022. But please be more cognizant of all implications of your comments when you are discussing a subject like this. 

[Beketov 9,041]

I’m gonna go ahead and lock this, at least for now. I get that it’s a very heated subject with people having very heated views on the matter and it was always going to be a bit of a risk but letting it get out of hand doesn’t help anyone. I will consider re-opening the matter once people have a chance to cool off.