Bay 12 Games Forum

*presents remarkably inappropriate Shovel of Excessive Appreciation to vec*

... seriously though, while the name doesn't immediately ring a bell, checking the wiki entry suggests I've probably heard and appreciated her music before, so... have fun? Just don't go exhuming anything to give hugs.

Unless there's a different Nina Simone that's still alive that you're actually talking about, in which case, uh. Nevermind? Is there more than one of significant note? Beyond the spell on you singer et al?

Sometimes you did, actually

... I'm not the only one that remembers shareware (in particular, though not exclusively) and its prompts to mail order requests to the dev/publisher, right? Sometimes they got creative and asked for a poem or something weird like that, too.

Abortion can be legal, because there are situations (however few) which warrant it.  But 99.9% (for however many 9s you think are appropriate) are performed for convenience or because of social stigma or some other emotionally-charged reason.

Last I noticed it's closer to .9 or 9 than 99%, much less higher. Most of them aren't for convenience (unless you're wildly misusing the term, anyway) or social stigma or that kinda' stuff, it's due to major issues with carrying to term, either material or medical. It's damn rare it's anything but a last resort for the vast majority of the people that have them.

Quote from: Frumple on May 17, 2021, 09:53:52 pm

Though yeah, consider that's basically already happened and abuse of other sorts of horseshit has already packed the courts. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, and if that's what it takes to get a SCOTUS galley that's not majority crank what's overtly hostile to the majority of the country's citizens and slates of minorities on the side, well. You play the hand you're dealt, if you're able, y'know?

This sort of argument, which I have heard a few times before, is complete bullshit. It is not "packing the courts" for the duly elected Executive and Legislature to appoint judges as they deem appropriate, no matter whether you like their choices or not.

If it's not packing the court to wildly abuse the standard functioning of SCOTUS appointments to get who you want in there, then it's not packing the court to expand the thing, either. The number of judges is about as much calvinball as how quickly Congress considers a judge or how fast they shove the appointment of one through, and the GOP decided to play jackass with that, so hey. Fuck with one, it's okay to fuck with the other. That's fairness.

Can we respect bodily autonomy and not respect bodily autonomy at the same time? Basically no? Pretty much no. The no, there, is pretty straightforward. If you want to limit abortion, limit the conditions that incentivize abortion and stay the hell away from telling someone what they can or can't do with their own body. Shit's honestly fairly simple on that front. And ninja'd, but eh.

There's pretty much nothing else we treat like it, even when there's similar or functionally identical concerns. So either we need to treat abortion like we do everything else (i.e. no coercion involved), or it's mandatory blood giving and organ donation and being drafted to aid with caregiving the invalid (or violent, or etc. -- remember we're talking about forcing someone to do something that's life threatening and can cause permanent health damage, so the scope ranges pretty wide!) and so on. Coercion for everyone!

"We don't like the results of the current rules, so we're going to change the rules so we can get the results we want."

Or put more simply "when we have enough power, we'll change the rules to make it the way we want." Essentially the removal of all checks and balances against the majority making the rules at the expense of the minority.

Though yeah, consider that's basically already happened and abuse of other sorts of horseshit has already packed the courts. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, and if that's what it takes to get a SCOTUS galley that's not majority crank what's overtly hostile to the majority of the country's citizens and slates of minorities on the side, well. You play the hand you're dealt, if you're able, y'know?

Court could honestly stand to be expanded regardless, just like the House and the general Judiciary, among other things. There's a fair amount of shit in the US federal system that hasn't really expanded as much as it should have as our population grew.

What's onions got to do with it? Folks that can stand the taste of the nasty things put them in hash browns sometimes, but it's far from necessary or even default and they're generally not involved with home fries at all.

fake e: wait, shit, I see the problem now, there's at least two different things called home fries and I wasn't thinking about the one that does tend to have onions in it. The other's just well seasoned french fries/potato logs, and usually is just that and naught else.

... though tend is still not necessarily. Home fries sans onion are fine, too. Better to me 'cause onions are the metaphorical devil's asshole, but still. Either sort's better than hashbrowns tend to be when onions aren't involved.

Saying that Israel is genociding Palestinians is retarded and shows you have no clue about what is going on there except from listening to anti-Isreal media.

Yes, I can agree that (at least part of) Israel's politics looks like apartheid. And I do not support that. But genocide? Really? Fuck off.

I mean, it is apartheid, plus explict ethnic cleansing, and regular mass murder and terrorism. It's maybe not outright genocide, but only because it's slow and the IDF tends to only slaughter a few dozen/hundred in one go every few years. Hamas is remarkably shit but Israel has really not covered themselves in glory in how they've been handling the Palestine issue over the course of the last long while. If it's not active genocide it's either pretty damn close to it, or something adjacent but not identical. Fucking terrible situation, regardless.