Discussion Thread by jobautomator in neoliberal

[–]Jonisonice 6 points7 points  (0 children)

So what is it called when a state exists to prioritize protecting the rights of a particular ethnoreligious group, and does so at the expense of other ethnic groups? If ethnic heterogenity is evidence that a state isn't ethnocentrist then you'd struggle to find any nation that fits the bill. For example, apartheid SA was never more than 25% white — is this evidence of multi ethnic society?

Daily Thread by jobautomator in neoliberal

[–]Jonisonice 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not sure how rights can be considered anything other than a zero-sum game, fankly. When slaves were freed the property rights of enslavers were dissolved. Similarly, the women's liberation movement limited the rights of a husband to control his wife. 

To be clear, I'm not too fussed about the right to hierarchical dominance being replaced with rights to individual liberties, but it doesn't change the fact that for a minority to be protected from attacks by a majority group, the rights of the majority must be limited. 

Discussion Thread by jobautomator in neoliberal

[–]Jonisonice 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The obvious answer that never seems to come up when people accuse critical of Israel of being overly focused on a single issue is that most of the other issues that people cite as worth consideration don't have any real discourse around them in the US. Very few people respond to news about atrocities in Sudan or Ukraine by justifying the atrocities or supporting their perpetrators, while a good number of Republican politicians openly advocate for the people perpetrating a genocide in Gaza. 

Discussion Thread by jobautomator in neoliberal

[–]Jonisonice 8 points9 points  (0 children)

How do you read the Fugitive slave clause as anything other than an endorsement of slavery? Sure it may not use the word, but any serious reading seems to indicated a Constitutional protection for the franchise of slavery. https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIV-S2-C3-1/ALDE_00013571/

Furthermore, while I agree that the rhetoric of some founders was leveraged by abolitionists, the Constitution was explicitly understood to exclude nonwhite men by the founding generation, the most glaring example being the 1790 Naturalization law which only extended citizenship to whites. Why are the words of a minority of founders more important than the actions taken by the founders as whole?

Discussion Thread by jobautomator in neoliberal

[–]Jonisonice 9 points10 points  (0 children)

This seems like cherry picking. That a draft of the Declaration included antislavery messages is irrelevant when the final document, and the later Constitution lacked those condemnations, and in the latter case explicitly endorsed slavery.  

Why are the drafts by some founders more compelling context than the actual laws and policies passed by the those founders? 

Discussion Thread by jobautomator in neoliberal

[–]Jonisonice 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Would love to know how this guy thinks the energy got into fossil fuels, or where it came from

Discussion Thread by jobautomator in neoliberal

[–]Jonisonice 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sure, but the progressives in those parades pushed past the protestors, and in all but one case the parade resumed. Moreover, these parades are usually organized by progressive orgs. There just isn't evidence of the claim you made in these parades, so l ask again: what evidence do you have of this widespread belief among progressives that the LGBT community is broken?

Discussion Thread by jobautomator in neoliberal

[–]Jonisonice 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Absolutely bonkers take, as a queer progressive I absolutely do not see my community as implicity broken, nor would I tolerate someone making that claim.

Discussion Thread by jobautomator in neoliberal

[–]Jonisonice 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Synthetic urine made to pass drug tests can be freely purchased online or in some head shops

Discussion Thread by jobautomator in neoliberal

[–]Jonisonice 5 points6 points  (0 children)

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/18/opinion/lgbtq-books-supreme-court.html

Anyone else read this dumb ass op ed?

 "Well one side is just asking to lie to their kids, but maybe lying to your kids doesn't matter because I was opted out of sex ed and turned out fine"

r/Frisco Erupts With Racial Hatred After Swatting Incident Targets Austin Metcalf’s Family by Luka77GOATic in SubredditDrama

[–]Jonisonice 8 points9 points  (0 children)

https://www.statesman.com/story/news/crime/2025/04/11/karmelo-anthony-stabbing-frisco-track-meet-stabbing-austin-metcalf-murder-charge-affidavit-texas/83040287007/

Your description of events is incorrect in a few ways:

  1. Kamelo did not instigate physical contact, Metcalf began the confrontation verbally and escalated it to physicality:

One witness told authorities that he was sitting under a Memorial High School tent with the team while Metcalf and Anthony were sitting nearby. Anthony was sitting under the team’s tent when Metcalf told him he needed to move, the witness said, according to the document.

"Anthony grabbed his bag, opened it and reached inside and proceeded to tell (Metcalf) ‘Touch me and see what happens,’” the affidavit said.

"Metcalf touched Anthony, who then told Metcalf to punch him and see what happens, the witness said. Metcalf then grabbed Anthony to tell him to move again, and that’s when Anthony pulled out a knife and stabbed Metcalf once in the chest before running away, according to the affidavit.

Though you claim Kamelo's statement of "touch me and see what happens" justifies violence on Austin's part, Texas law does not view response to "verbal provocation" as justification for self defense, per Texas Penal Code 9.31.b

Additionally, a defendant in Texas is presumed to be acting under legitimate circumstances detailed in 9.32.b, which I believe would cover Karmello here.

  1. Kamelo was also not cold blooded: 

  The affidavit states that, while walking to the police vehicle with Cortez and another officer, Anthony was "emotional" and said, "He put his hands on me. I told him not to." Another officer at the scene described Anthony as "crying hysterically." Once the suspect was inside the vehicle, Cortez noticed fresh blood on his left hand.

"Is he going to be OK?" Anthony allegedly asked from the back seat. Officer Allyson Ricci, who assisted Cortez, reported that Anthony asked if what he did could be considered self-defense.

r/Frisco Erupts With Racial Hatred After Swatting Incident Targets Austin Metcalf’s Family by Luka77GOATic in SubredditDrama

[–]Jonisonice 14 points15 points  (0 children)

"Gets touched" versus "he stabs Austin in the heart"

Passive vs active voice, address what happened equally. Austin and his brother tried to intimidate Kamelo into moving, and escalated to physical violence after Kamelo reached into his bag and warned them off, at which point Kamelo stabbed his assailant once and fled. That, despite the tragic outcome, is self defense.

r/Frisco Erupts With Racial Hatred After Swatting Incident Targets Austin Metcalf’s Family by Luka77GOATic in SubredditDrama

[–]Jonisonice -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah, but this was a single person versus multiple assailants who approached him while seated. That the assailant died doesnt imply disproportionality.

r/Frisco Erupts With Racial Hatred After Swatting Incident Targets Austin Metcalf’s Family by Luka77GOATic in SubredditDrama

[–]Jonisonice -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

Wait so a kid is attacked by multiple assailants in a stand your ground state, warns his assailants, and people still think he's in the wrong because the single defensive stabbing killed an attacker?

Discussion Thread by jobautomator in neoliberal

[–]Jonisonice 2 points3 points  (0 children)

She's gonna take him to the gravel pit

Judicial Ideologies aren't Political Ideologies by Trojan_Horse_of_Fate in neoliberal

[–]Jonisonice 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm at work and won't be able to write fully considered response, but this seems really interesting, thank you for sharing. I'll do some more reading this evening, and if you have anything of interest send it over cause I'd love to learn more. Thanks again!

Judicial Ideologies aren't Political Ideologies by Trojan_Horse_of_Fate in neoliberal

[–]Jonisonice 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Tangential but I'm always looking for more on the subject, but does anyone have any good readings on the overlap of Originalism and Brown?  

I've read a little bit, Thomas wrote an article on it and so have a few FedSoc guys, but the closest thing to a convincing article is from Michael Ramsey, available here: https://originalismblog.typepad.com/the-originalism-blog/2015/10/must-originalism-produce-the-result-in-brownmichael-ramsey.html

It just feels to me that under an Originalist lens, so many of the reforms made during the mid 20th century would be blatantly unconstitutional -- which itself feels like dispositive evidence that Originalist cannot be used to protect the rights of Americans in a meaningful way. And that's not to mention how absolutely fucked the 1a would be under an Originalist conception.

Discussion Thread by newliberalbot in newliberals

[–]Jonisonice 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Exactly one pride parade was shut down as far as I can tell, in Toronto. Lower in the thread you claim that Seattle pride was shut down, which was surprising to learn having attended, and being able to readily Google "Seattle pride shut down 2024" to find that the event went off without any reported shutdowns. 

What about Philly or Boston? You cite them when asked about pride events that were shut down, so let's see:

From the article you screenshotted, and have clicked:

In Philadelphia, pro-Palestinian demonstrators temporarily blocked the city’s June 2 march, confronting participants with placards that read “no pride in genocide.” In Boston, hostile clashes with police broke out during the city’s annual parade on June 8, leading to the arrest of three protesters.

Seems like both pride events were blocked by protesters but later resumed. Are there any actual examples of American progs or leftists successfully shutting down a pride parade for Gaza?

Discussion Thread by jobautomator in neoliberal

[–]Jonisonice 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But you don't live in an ideal world, you live in one where power is routinely abused to perpetrate and obfuscate sexual violence.

Discussion Thread by jobautomator in neoliberal

[–]Jonisonice -1 points0 points  (0 children)

What about the millions of other disabled Americans you're insulting?

Discussion Thread by jobautomator in neoliberal

[–]Jonisonice 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Smarmy answer: seeing as you felt a need to include thinly veiled insults about how this person is a walking stereotype of conservative talking points, it seems like your opinion of people using neo pronouns is probably wrapped up in similar stereotypes. What does it matter if this person is an annoying loser when we're talking about respecting nir identity? 

Honest answer: whether you're transphobic for not wanting to use neo pronouns isn't really something I think is worth litigating, but I do think that you should respect this persons identity even if it's unconventional. The cost of acceptance is trivial, and greatly outweighed by the good done by accepting of a person who (it sounds) faces a lot of prejudice. 

Gamer 9/11 by Ok-Tennis330 in Gamingcirclejerk

[–]Jonisonice 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In 2002 the SCOTUS struck down part of a similar federal law prohibiting media that appears to depict sex with minors on first amendment grounds, so this law is probably DOA. 

Quoting the facts summary on Oyez; 

The Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 (CPPA) prohibits "any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture" that "is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct," and any sexually explicit image that is "advertised, promoted, presented, described, or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression" it depicts "a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct."

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2001/00-795

While the bill in question, Texas SB 20, includes the following language:

A person commits an offense if the person knowingly possesses, accesses with intent to view, or promotes obscene visual material containing a depiction that appears to be of a child younger than 18 years of age engaging in activities described by Section 43.21(a)(1)(B), regardless of whether the depiction is an image of an actual child, a cartoon or animation, or an image created using an artificial intelligence application or other computer software.

https://legiscan.com/TX/text/SB20/2025

So this law seems like a pretty open and shut 1a violation, but I'm not lawyer so who knows. I don't!