|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:gently caress
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:32 |
|
|
Coming soon to an america near you! RIOTS!
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 21:52
|
|
|
redneck nazgul posted:http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2017/01/sources-report-trump-executive-order-lgbtq-community-coming-soon/ Oh god. I know people who are probably going to die because of this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
Burt posted:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38795998 Also, this is possibly the best possible response: https://twitter.com/glcarlstrom/status/826130868657913857
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
LtCol J. Krusinski posted:I gotta get a link for this. Robot Hobo fucked around with this message at 22:04 on Jan 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:Oh god. I know people who are probably going to die because of this. How so?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:05
|
|
|
joat mon posted:How so? Seriously?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
joat mon posted:How so? When you remove the legal repercussions for discrimination, bigots are emboldened in their actions. Violence always follows.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:08
|
|
|
EVA BRAUN BLOWJOBS posted:When you remove the legal repercussions for discrimination, bigots are emboldened in their actions. Violence always follows. Especially if the EO has language un-personing trans people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
The country is enough of a powder keg right now that his EO doesn't even need to actually legalize those actions. Even saying kinds words about it is going to rile up the deplorables and put a big, fat target on someone to get dragged behind a truck.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:Especially if the EO has language un-personing trans people. That's fair, but TBH I also read that as "the EO itself will directly kill people I know" which would only make sense if it were denying life-saving services? Which it very well could of course.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
/\ /\ /\ What they said. Nostalgia4Infinity posted:Especially if the EO has language un-personing trans people. Bigotry thrives in a conducive climate, EO or not. I get that. I was wondering if there was something specific in the guesses about what the EO will say that was life threatening.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
State Dept dissent memo regarding travel ban PDF Document Cloud version with link to WP article
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
joat mon posted:I was wondering if there was something specific in the guesses about what the EO will say that was life threatening. Hypothetical: gay veteran is injured, goes to VA hospital. Let's say the person is a minor celebrity and their sexual preference is publicly well known. Federal employees at the hospital refuse to serve this person because of religious objections and they die.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
EVA BRAUN BLOWJOBS posted:Hypothetical: gay veteran is injured, goes to VA hospital. Let's say the person is a minor celebrity and their sexual preference is publicly well known. Federal employees at the hospital refuse to serve this person because of religious objections and they die. If that's in the EO it's going to be stayed and later, that part of the EO will likely be held unconstitutional.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
EVA BRAUN BLOWJOBS posted:Hypothetical: gay veteran is injured, goes to VA hospital. Let's say the person is a minor celebrity and their sexual preference is publicly well known. Federal employees at the hospital refuse to serve this person because of religious objections and they die. What about the Hippocratic Oath?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
Again without seeing the language of the EO but considering the care and thought put into the previous ones it could theoretically lead to an ER doc or EMT refusing to provide lifesaving medical treatment to an LGBT person due to ~*~strong religious convictions~*~. What's more likely to occur is some shithead landlords kicking them queers out of their rental unit. Or refuse to rent to them in the first place which is a thing that LGBT couples have to think about constantly (speaking from experience). Or enable lovely Kim Davis wannabes to go off on power trips and refuse basic governmental services to LGBT people. Edit: gently caress I bet Kim Davis is either at or mentioned during any hypothetical EO signing
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
joat mon posted:I was wondering if there was something specific in the guesses about what the EO will say that was life threatening. It's Mike friggin' Pence. The dude who advocates electroshocking the gay out of people. I'm entirely expecting him to make it legal to refuse life saving treatment to anyone who identifies anything other than cis and straight on "religious grounds". Frosted Flake posted:What about the Hippocratic Oath? The kind of people with hate-filled religious convictions against LGBT people aren't likely to consider them people to treat anyways.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
I predict the EO is going to be one of two things: A: The NC bathroom bill, with "North Carolina" CTRL-R'd with "United States of America". B: A laughably quick slapped together thing that ends up being horribly unclear and unenforceable by anything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:24
|
|
|
Big Senate parliamentary news. https://twitter.com/Phil_Mattingly/status/826177794455515136 The Senate operates on a concept called Unanimous Consent, where basically business can be done outside of rigid Senate rules if and only if EVERYONE agrees to continue. If you deny unanimous consent, you basically have to stick to the pre-established rules (meetings only allowed between X and X, for instance). It is a monumental pain in the rear end to work around restrictions like those, which is why unanimous consent is always a given. It isn't anymore. drat near everything could grind to a halt now with Democrats forcing time-eating votes for drat near everything, including cabinet picks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:29
|
|
|
By all accounts it seems to be a blank check for people to discriminate based on religious conviction.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:29
|
|
|
facialimpediment posted:Big Senate parliamentary news. I know little about the US parliamentary process but does this basically mean the Dems could attempt to stonewall everything done outside of a certain daily time period and clog up the tubes so to speak?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
Sergg posted:By all accounts it seems to be a blank check for people to discriminate based on religious conviction. It absolutely is because gay people will realistically be the only people turned away or denied service. It's a crock of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:31
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:I know little about the US parliamentary process but does this basically mean the Dems could attempt to stonewall everything done outside of a certain daily time period and clog up the tubes so to speak? Yep, exactly right. A filibuster is a hard stop that never can get crossed without a full vote (currently 60) and if it doesn't pass, the bill can't advance. This stuff is just a pure time-eater and doesn't actually refer to bills. Since Democrats can't block cabinet votes (they're filibuster-immune), all they can do is just drag them out and drag them out. Which is a huge pain in the rear end for Republicans.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
The Senate is goddamn legendary for parliamentary logjams. Any Senator, for instance, can introduce an amendment to a bill, and request that the amendment be read aloud on the floor of the Senate. If a legislator is dedicated and knows their poo poo, they can delay legislation for months on end.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:Again without seeing the language of the EO but considering the care and thought put into the previous ones it could theoretically lead to an ER doc or EMT refusing to provide lifesaving medical treatment to an LGBT person due to ~*~strong religious convictions~*~. EOs can't trump (we need a new word) the Constitution. Nor can/has Congress. Federal ER docs or federal EMTs that refuse treatment are going to get charged criminally. (Or maybe not. Maybe Liberty University's Law school class of '17 are all going to be appointed as US Attorneys) Federal housing discrimination is unfortunately another matter. Most isn't federal, but section 8 housing could be effected by an EO. lovely Federal Kim Davis wannabees are going to have similar problems to the federal ER docs and Federal EMTs, though they might get more deference than folks that hold life and death in their hands. On the other hand, the constitutional law cases that govern free expression cases like the ER/EMT/Davis hypotheticals is pretty well settled. They'll lose. The downside is that this area of the law hasn't developed much since the 1980s, before the religious right so successfully invaded the public sphere. I don't see Hobby Lobby getting extended to the federal (or any state) government, though. And yes, a federal EO would signal to the states that the administration isn't going to serve as a LGBT rights backstop. VVVVVV You've hit the nail on the head. joat mon fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Jan 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
facialimpediment posted:All government conspiracies are fundamentally flawed at three levels. From a few pages back, but I think this is pretty much the case. The Executive branch is currently being run by people who straight up don't know how it works, and the result is they're doing whatever they want without regard for its legality. Donnie's looking to make money, his crew of flunkies are looking to ramrod through all the monstrous bullshit they've been dreaming about, and all of them are looking to snatch as much power and prestige as they can. There's no grand scheme or master plan, it's nothing more than a smash-and-grab of the federal government. The bad news is that their greed and incompetence will pretty much end up having the same effects as a coup.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:47
|
|
stuff. Freakout about CBP defying court orders. Don't freakout about Steve Bannon being the most brilliant strategist on earth because lol no.
|
Time to join the Church of Satan and discriminate against heterosexuals.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:48
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:The Senate is goddamn legendary for parliamentary logjams. Any Senator, for instance, can introduce an amendment to a bill, and request that the amendment be read aloud on the floor of the Senate. If a legislator is dedicated and knows their poo poo, they can delay legislation for months on end. I'm reminded of the episode of the Simpsons where federal assistance to Springfield is about to be granted for something and a senator tacks on a buttload of funding for something no one wants as a rider and the bill immediately fails.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:51
|
|
|
joat mon posted:EOs can't trump (we need a new word) the Constitution. Nor can/has Congress. Federal ER docs or federal EMTs that refuse treatment are going to get charged criminally. (Or maybe not. Maybe Liberty University's Law school class of '17 are all going to be appointed as US Attorneys) Is there any Constitutional basis for banning LGBT discrimination? I thought a lot of the protections being in place currently were implemented via EO in the first place, Trump has the authority to rip that right out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
So are these executive order's Trump's only viable means of asserting his power? Does he know he can't get poo poo passed in congress or would have a very difficult time?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
Can't imagine how hosed trans folks are gonna be in the next 4/8 years (or 20+ depending on how stacked SCOTUS is gonna be) I mean, they've had a decade of smooth sailing, amirite 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:56
|
|
Kazinsal posted:I'm reminded of the episode of the Simpsons where federal assistance to Springfield is about to be granted for something and a senator tacks on a buttload of funding for something no one wants as a rider and the bill immediately fails. This is how people are able to say Obama rejects a bill to fund the VA and doesn't care about our troops, but they conveniently leave out that the bill would also cut funding for planned parenthood or something.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:I'm reminded of the episode of the Simpsons where federal assistance to Springfield is about to be granted for something and a senator tacks on a buttload of funding for something no one wants as a rider and the bill immediately fails. Mike-o posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5LeYDW2LsM
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:So are these executive order's Trump's only viable means of asserting his power? Does he know he can't get poo poo passed in congress or would have a very difficult time? He doesn't have patience for actual legislation, he wants results now and doesn't actually understand how government works. Plus Bannon is the ultimate hypocrite, called out Obama on using EOs, but knows he can do the same thing with near impunity as long as he ignores the consequences.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 23:02
|
|
|
Remember how the far-right backed off discrimination of black folks in favor of THE GAYS, then slowly backed off THE GAYS in favor of HBwhatever that bathroom bill was. Think they're now slowly going back that exact route? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 23:04
|
|
|
Still blowing my mind that pointing out how the ban doesn't cover any country who's people have actually killed Americans stateside still isn't enough to get trump fans against it. The common retort seems to be a reminder of obamas travel ban. Extra hilarious when people are using 9/11 to justify the ban.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 23:05
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:So are these executive order's Trump's only viable means of asserting his power? Does he know he can't get poo poo passed in congress or would have a very difficult time? Trump is very much in line with Republicans on certain issues, he's just impatient, wants all the credit for everything, and is an idiot. Republicans LOVE the concept of his immigration/travel/muslim ban. The problem is Donnie went way too fast, the EO writer was a moron, and the net ensnared way too many people and will get bogged down legally forever. Sickest burn I've seen along these lines came from a WSJ guy, of all places: https://twitter.com/StephensWSJ/status/826177570223722496
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 23:05
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:So are these executive order's Trump's only viable means of asserting his power? Does he know he can't get poo poo passed in congress or would have a very difficult time? Realistically he'd need 8 democratic senators to defect to overcome the filibuster.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 23:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:32 |
|
|
Kazinsal posted:I'm reminded of the episode of the Simpsons where federal assistance to Springfield is about to be granted for something and a senator tacks on a buttload of funding for something no one wants as a rider and the bill immediately fails. Funding for the perverted arts iirc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 23:07
|
|
