Notices


Worldly Talk

Civil discussion and debate on real world events and issues.


My neck of the woods: Silencing Representitives

   
My neck of the woods: Silencing Representitives

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/poli...icle-1.1096480

So, I am male but these bills recently introduced by Republicans within my state (Michigan) bother me alot. It is an anti-abortion law, one of the strictest in the nation from my understanding. Now a representative from a neighboring district was silenced when she closed her statement of her opinion of the bill with: "Finally, Mr. Speaker, I'm flattered that you're all so interested in my vagina, but 'no' means 'no.'"

Basically what I want to know is the same thing as the representative; If they are discussing what a woman can and cannot do with her vagina, why should she not be able to use that word? I dont particularly see myself what it is that is wrong with the statement but I am decidedly Left on most issues.

With all respect to the issue being debated, there, to women's health and freedom (and to the value of human life), none of that is nearly so concerning to me as the mere concept that a democratically elected representative can be 'silenced' in that legislature.
Frankly, I can't conceive of an offense that I would deem worthy of 'silencing' a representative that would not also be worthy of far greater reprimand, including, at the least, their immediate resignation followed by a by-election.

I'm with Tedronai. The law is offensive, but silencing a duly-elected representative is downright reprehensible.

Yes, needless to say I have written to the Speaker expressing my disgust. Her messsage wasnt that eloquant but that doesnt mean she should be silenced for it.

Remember the days when they acted with at least a modicum of dignity?
The statement about her vagina was nothing but inflammatory. It had no bearing on the law being debated. If she wanted to throw out childish insults and play games, I see nothing wrong with making her go sit in the corner until she wants to pretend to be a grown-up again.

I'm sure that some would view the bill she was commenting on to be inflammatory in its own right. Should that mean that all those who voted in favour of it, and most especially whomever sponsored it, be 'made to go sit in the corner', barred from performing the duties they were chosen by the public to perform?
Even more concerning is that the article implies that this was addressed in a partisan fashion: "House Republicans blocked Democratic Rep. Lisa Brown".
Is that the new low for US politics? If your opposition party gets too uppity, just bar them from speaking in the legislature?


And really, what's wrong with the word 'vagina'? Is there something offensive about the scientifically, medically, anatomically correct term for a part of the female human body? Or is it that we're just not supposed to talk about it, even when discussing legislation that affects it, and those who possess it?

Yes, the statement was inapproprate, not for the use of teh word Vagina, but for language implying that the bill was somehow tantamount to rape. that being said, it did not need to be or deserve to be silenced. silencing a represenative for this statement is like shooting someone for giving you a nasty look. The recent crop of Republocans are drunk on power and someone needs to cut them off.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tedronai View Post
I'm sure that some would view the bill she was commenting on to be inflammatory in its own right. Should that mean that all those who voted in favour of it, and most especially whomever sponsored it, be 'made to go sit in the corner', barred from performing the duties they were chosen by the public to perform?
Even more concerning is that the article implies that this was addressed in a partisan fashion: "House Republicans blocked Democratic Rep. Lisa Brown".
Sometimes people get upset about things. That doesn't mean lawmakers need to be playing childish games. You can't pretend Brown wasn't trying to cause a stir with her comments in order to get emotional reactions to a legal process. It's a common trick, especially for the left, to do whatever they can to get emotions to override reason.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tedronai View Post
Is that the new low for US politics? If your opposition party gets too uppity, just bar them from speaking in the legislature?
No, it's par for the course these days. Remember when the Obama White House blocked Fox News for not falling into lock-step with the party line? Or when Nancy Pelosi told Congress that they had to pass the Obamacare bills in order to find out what was in them? Or when the Bush Administration passed the Patriot Act? Personally, I consider blacklisting a private corporation (composed of private citizens) a far greater crime than telling a state representative to STFU. We're barely even pretending to follow the Constitution anymore. It just seems lefties only complain when it's the right doing it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tedronai View Post
And really, what's wrong with the word 'vagina'? Is there something offensive about the scientifically, medically, anatomically correct term for a part of the female human body? Or is it that we're just not supposed to talk about it, even when discussing legislation that affects it, and those who possess it?
You're not supposed to be crude and vulgar when trying to make laws. I've no objection to the word vagina, or even the use of a word in a clinical sense. I object to her trying to imply this bill is rape. Representatives may not simply say whatever they like when they violate protocol, decorum, or parliamentary procedures - that is to say, they may say whatever they wish so long as they are polite about it.
Or are you trying to say that's the sort of person you want running the government? The kind who resorts to emotion and illogical attacks in order to get what they want? Perhaps we should simply do away with the rule of reason and law altogether and reduce ourselves to a true democracy?

Quote:
Originally Posted by silveroak View Post
Yes, the statement was inapproprate, not for the use of teh word Vagina, but for language implying that the bill was somehow tantamount to rape. that being said, it did not need to be or deserve to be silenced. silencing a represenative for this statement is like shooting someone for giving you a nasty look. The recent crop of Republocans are drunk on power and someone needs to cut them off.
I was including the comparison to rape in 'the statement about her vagina'. Sorry that wasn't so clear.
But yes, it did deserve to be silenced. Not for anything else she said, just the inflammatory comments. If she would've stopped just before she tried to accuse the bill of rape, I'd be waving the torches and pitchforks along with y'all. She and her cohort, Rep. Barb Byrum, were trying to mock the procedures of lawmaking because they were incapable of bringing for a logical, reasonable argument against the laws that their fellow representatives could agree with. They were wasting the taxpayers' time and money (allow me to emphasize again, they were wasting tax dollars Michigan cannot afford), and now they have the audacity to claim they were wronged... and the voters are stupid enough to fall for it! Tells you everything you need to know about why Michigan is the way it is, really.

I stole this from somewhere but it sums up what I have to say on the "not rape" segment. the bill inquestion would require trans-vaginal ultrasounds.

Quote:
Requiring transvaginal ultrasounds would violate women by invading their bodies. Turning an ultrasound monitor toward a woman and attempting to force her to view the images even if she does not want to see them is an act of emotional and psychological violation. Both are medically unnecessary and needlessly cruel and patronizing. And neither should ever be mandated by a state’s government.
Also; Michigan passed a balanced budget under Snyder's scorched Earth cuts so "cannot afford" I have to call bollacks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solaris View Post
Remember the days when they acted with at least a modicum of dignity?
The statement about her vagina was nothing but inflammatory. It had no bearing on the law being debated. If she wanted to throw out childish insults and play games, I see nothing wrong with making her go sit in the corner until she wants to pretend to be a grown-up again.
I disagree. She was elected by the people to speak, as was everyone else in that panel. They just told the majority to shut up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solaris View Post
No, it's par for the course these days. Remember when the Obama White House blocked Fox News for not falling into lock-step with the party line? Or when Nancy Pelosi told Congress that they had to pass the Obamacare bills in order to find out what was in them? Or when the Bush Administration passed the Patriot Act? Personally, I consider blacklisting a private corporation (composed of private citizens) a far greater crime than telling a state representative to STFU. We're barely even pretending to follow the Constitution anymore. It just seems lefties only complain when it's the right doing it.
Problem was, it passed (To my dismay). There is no law saying that in a meeting you can silence a representative, that I am aware of.

I don't think it is a matter of lifties or righties anymore. To be honest, I am just tired of the BS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solaris View Post
I was including the comparison to rape in 'the statement about her vagina'. Sorry that wasn't so clear.

But yes, it did deserve to be silenced. Not for anything else she said, just the inflammatory comments. If she would've stopped just before she tried to accuse the bill of rape, I'd be waving the torches and pitchforks along with y'all. She and her cohort, Rep. Barb Byrum, were trying to mock the procedures of lawmaking because they were incapable of bringing for a logical, reasonable argument against the laws that their fellow representatives could agree with. They were wasting the taxpayers' time and money (allow me to emphasize again, they were wasting tax dollars Michigan cannot afford), and now they have the audacity to claim they were wronged... and the voters are stupid enough to fall for it! Tells you everything you need to know about why Michigan is the way it is, really.
If she as a duly elected official and as a woman feels that the bill is tantamount of rape, she needs to be able to say so without repercussions. She may have said it in a stupid way, but that doesn't grant anyone the right to remove our rights - just because of a slight misstep.

Now if she pulled out a gun and threatened to shoot people or did something violent. That would be another thing.




 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Myth-Weavers Status       Advertise with us