Quote:
Originally Posted by Tedronai
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
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
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
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.