SCOTUS stops the election interference....cold!

How so? Some people may have that unfortunate bigoted tendency, as part of our flawed, sinful nature. But they are wrong. Forunately, our legal and moral norms aren't necessarily geared to the desires of bigots. Legally, all persons are protected by the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. And morally, that seems to be the consensus, as well, despite challenges from Neo-Nazi and KKK types.

 

That's assuming the fetus has moral standing of some sort. I find it hard to think of it having that before it has a brain or awareness. Zygotes and blastocysts don't have those characteristics. Fetuses acquire them late in the game. Concern for the fetus before then reflects knowledge of its potential, rather than its actual condition.

 

Why? After 9 months or sooner, the fetus is no longer physically connected to her. Both partners are parents, and after the birth they should have joint responsibility for raising the human being they brought into the world by choice or error.

 

What I was suggesting is that if her slightly longer period of responsibility allows her to make the most important decision in the child’s life; whether or not it gets to live, then surely she should get to make all of the lesser, subsequent decisions about how it gets raised to adulthood.

 

I have never met these neo-nazi or kkk types that I am told by our government and their mouthpieces are an all but ubiquitous threat. I’m beginning to doubt their existence, partially due to the non-appearance of all of the other things I’ve been told that were such a threat to us and our existence.

 

By the time it is ready for delivery, it presumably has the same level of cognition as a newborn baby, which isn't much but isn't chopped liver.
Newborn cognitive development: What are babies thinking and learning?
What do We Know about Neonatal Cognition?
Exploring Infant Cognition
What do We Know about Neonatal Cognition?
Presumably, it starts at a lower level as the brain and nervous system form and develop. I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt, since those who are concerned about taking the life of zygotes and blastocysts would probably be horrified that a humanoid with any level of consciousness at all would be deliberately extinguished. And because of what to me seems the arbitrary distinction between the same entity at each end of the birth canal. And because consciousness seems to be such a remarkable quality, our most immediate contact with reality. I find it more compelling than viability as a cutoff for when the fetus can be considered to have rudimentary personhood. Viability changes with technology, but consciousness persists for the most part, during the remainder of fetal development.

Of course. Humans are the ultimate arbiters of what is important and what isn't. That's one of the things that sets us apart from other animals. Xenophenes thought that if animals had our rational capabilities and were running things, the gods would look like them, but they aren't and so the gods don't.

 

...

 

Ahh, the tiki torchers. Dangerous lot, them. They were a scary bunch in their khakis and polo shirts, if I recall correctly. I think they had some evil plan to stand around somewhere and talk about whatever it is they wanted to talk about, in a country that has enshrined the right to do exactly that. I gather that they also wanted to do it while holding tiki torches for some reason. Not my cuppa, but fill yer boots. And yes, this is based on what I have heard from npr. I don’t recall hearing about them chanting “Jews will not replace us” but if you say they did, I can accept your word for it. Now, even by listening to npr, I have been able to figure out that things didn’t get violent until some other “firey but mostly peaceful” protesters showed up. If the tiki torchers are the new embodiment of “white supremacy”, then I don’t see how non-whites should have much to fear.

 

As a child of the cold war, I recall the constant “impending threat” of nuclear war resulting in either immediate annihilation or a radiated existence so miserable as to wish for the former.

I remember “the coming ice age”.

I remember “peak oil” and its inevitable civilizational collapse.

I remember the “hole in the ozone layer” that would cause the oceans to boil and death by skin lesions. At least that one killed the aerosol-induced 80s hairstyles.

Speaking skin lesions; acid rain. From what I recall, it may have killed some trees but that’s not the fear that we were sold now was it?

And then back to nuclear war: Ronnie Raygun was gonna kickoff WW3 with them there space lasers and we would still all die or wish for it.

I remember the satanist cults that were secretly operating everywhere (again, they wouldn’t invite me to their meetings) and were sacrificing animals and children in their rituals and apparently, heavy metal music was also involved somehow.

I remember Y2K and the (once again) impending civilizational collapse if every single microprocessor in the entire world was not reprogrammed to accept four digit year dates.

I remember global warming (phew, that’ll at least help with that coming ice age) that was going to drown all of the coastal cities of the world (by now) and make oranges grow in Canada (the horror).

I know there were many more that I’m leaving out but those were just off the top of the head. The point is, the sky has been falling for so long, that I don’t just not believe chicken little, chicken little’s voice has just become background noise that I, and many others I suspect, pay no attention to.

 

They were white yet afraid of the kkk? When the kkk goes to burn crosses in fields (kind of an odd pass-time don’t you think?) they also post hooded men in the road to stop traffic because why?

“Hey Joe, ya wanna have beer and throw the ball around some or just watch the game, maybe?”

“Nah. Ya know, Bill, it’s bin a dog’s age since we all got together, put on some decorated sheets, burned a cross in a field, and obstructed traffic. I really got a hankerin’ fer doin’ just that.”

“Heck, Joe, you’re right. Let’s round up the boys and swing by the gas station. My hoods already in the car. This’ll be fun. We’re really gonna show them black folks who’s boss too.”

Yeah, no. I just can’t take this shit seriously. Not just because I’ve never seen it outside of a tv show or movie, but because it makes no sense. Yes, humans do some stupid shit just to kill time it seems. But not a single white person I have ever met in my entire life has said to me, “hey, if you’re not doing anything this weekend, me and the boys are going out to a buddy’s farm to burn a cross. Is gonna be a nice time. Bring the whole family.” Bonfires, sure. Cross burnings, not a one.

 

There's no conflict when like-minded are the only ones there but when others, of an opposing opinion, show up, there's a conflict zone.
It's not the fault that they have opposing views. It's not the fault that one may have unpopular views.
It's their collective seeming inability to talk, discuss and resolve issues that is the problem and both sides in a disagreement are at fault in that regard.

It's really not possible, accurately, to judge people until you see how they treat others and react in others' presence, those others being people with a differing viewpoint.

I think it's the ability to maintain decorum/demeanour when faced with the challenge of meeting those with opposing views that shows who we really are - our true mettle.

I've never had physical or aggressive conflict with anyone who disagreed with my views (or me theirs) but I tend to put them into one of several groups - those whom I will continue to meet; those whom I will choose never to meet again; those who I may meet but won't count them as a friend, let alone one in my inner circle - that decision being influenced largely by their mental dexterity and empathy.

I think we ought to meet those we disagree with because, unless we do, we can not really know if our opinion means anything or is even relevant.
That our opinion may, in isolation, seem rational means little.
And, of course, if we mix in a clique/click where we are all of a similar mindset, we can galvanize our opinions even further, perhaps without realising that, which can take us down a rabbit hole such that we lose sight of reality, literally.

I recall speaking with friends from Texas. Originally from elsewhere in the US, they felt most at home in Tx. They were amazed with our conversations about politics and how freely I would discuss issues.
They (and I), found those chats to be very illuminating, informative and, indeed, refreshingly good but, also, they explained that they couldn't do that at home.
They said they didn't have the opportunity to do so and, even if they could, it's likely they would lose friends by meeting up with 'Dems'.

That's simple tribalism, in my opinion, and I would have hoped the US was moved way past such primitive thought processes and behaviours*.

However, it's not only the US. It's just that with the US being held up as some sort of land of milk and honey, a totem of a great life, that's now tarnished.
It really is as though the US is no better a place than other civilised countries such as those in Europe.

* Obviously many are moved away from that tribalism but the past few years have shown that a sizeable chunk hasn't.

If we look at almost all countries in conflict, that ramble of mine has equal application to each. Possible exception is Ukraine (because it's democratic rights are being suppressed), but not Israel/Gaza, or any middle east conflict I can recall in the last 50yrs.

That's my early thoughts on a Saturday morning

 

I very much liked your thoughts on an early Saturday morning. Thank you.