111–120 of 220 posts
They can unwind it regardless of any contractual obligations. State can simply pass a law and dissolve any contract with stroke of a pen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes — I believe in democratic societies where if a majority feels something is dangerous, they have a right to make policy around that issue. I also believe in constitutional republics where we have overriding laws which protect minorities — but that doesn’t apply in this case, as there isn’t an inherent right to discuss sex with other people’s young children.
>I believe in democratic societies where if a majority feels something is dangerous, they have a right to make policy around that issue. So it would be acceptable for those same religious people to stop females from getting the same sort of education males receive? The damage done to others by such actions has to be taken into account.
I addressed that already.
> The damage done to others by such actions has to be taken into account.
This is something said but not done: look at how the male minority is treated in education, where the female majority speaks about equality while engaging in institutional sexism against the minority.
If Democrats want me to believe they are genuine in those principles, they should apply them consistently.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s not exactly it. Disney publicly criticized the new Florida “Don’t say gay” bill. And then said they’d no longer donate to FL legislature. They’d made a 50k donation to governor DeSantis in the past so it’s more about them NOT making donations. This act by Disney had to be public or it wouldn’t have had any weight. Making those donations privately probably would defeat the purpose of showing support to the legi…
And just to make sure this is clear: they aren't making donations to anyone in Florida, Republicans or Democrats alike. The Republican response to this was to punish Disney. We can't know what the Democratic response would have been since Democrats aren't in charge of anything in Florida. "Keep donating or we'll punish you" is an interesting stance.
So taxes but for entities you can't put in a cage or screw over at will?
The only reason it's not formalized with all sorts of rules and process like taxes is because "entities you can't put in a cage of screw over at will" is a short enough list to be handled on a case by case basis.
I don’t think the elimination of the Reedy Creek district is meant to ever actually occur. The point is twofold. To send a message that dissent from the business community will not be tolerated. And, to keep stoking the fires of the culture wars. When they get their people denouncing the opposition as “groomers”, they are achieving their objective.
>The point is twofold. To send a message that dissent from the business community will not be tolerated. And, to keep stoking the fires of the culture wars. I think the purpose was a lot more narrow: to position Ron DeSantis for the 2024 Republican Presidential primaries. Relatively small numbers of Republicans vote in the primaries, and they tend to be the angrier, more extreme wing. Donald Trump was nominated in 20…
That strategy doesn't work as well if you get ranked choice voting or anything other than first-past-the-post.
https://reason.com/2022/04/28/florida-tennessee-ban-ranked-c...
...oh
I don’t think the elimination of the Reedy Creek district is meant to ever actually occur. The point is twofold. To send a message that dissent from the business community will not be tolerated. And, to keep stoking the fires of the culture wars. When they get their people denouncing the opposition as “groomers”, they are achieving their objective.
It's slimy and dishonest to pretend that only republicans are fighting a culture war when the bulk of the progressive platform is explicitly about changing US culture. It's like calling Ukraine the aggressor for defending against the Russian invasion.
They can unwind it regardless of any contractual obligations. State can simply pass a law and dissolve any contract with stroke of a pen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Teaching happens in every interaction a child has in life. If the purpose of schools is to undo the instillment of parents' values (or lack of them), we should at least be honest about it. That's the assumption behind most debates of this type. If the purpose of schools is to teach specialized skills that most parents don't have, then we should cut the crap so that kids can learn them. If the purpose of schools is to…
>Teaching happens in every interaction a child has in life. Which means that having a law that says teaching human sexuality can't happen is impossible to do without turning the teachers into uncaring robot like beings. They could have banned the teaching of sexually explicate material but they chose not to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Willing to bet you didn't read what the actual bill says or does. Ah, yes, the new talking point that I’ve seen a lot of lately: “I’ll bet you haven’t even read it. Here, let me…” Yeah, save your patronizing, I read it just fine. And my take-away was, “don’t say gay” is about as accurate a summary as one is likely to get. Sure, those are exact words aren’t in there, but man, is that ever a weak rebuttal.
I've read the bill as well and I think the clear take-away is Florida doesn't want teachers talking to five-year-olds about sex, period. No sexual preferences are specified in the bill, whatsoever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I believe in democratic societies where if a majority feels something is dangerous, they have a right to make policy around that issue. So it would be acceptable for those same religious people to stop females from getting the same sort of education males receive? The damage done to others by such actions has to be taken into account.
> I also believe in constitutional republics where we have overriding laws which protect minorities I addressed that already. > The damage done to others by such actions has to be taken into account. This is something said but not done: look at how the male minority is treated in education, where the female majority speaks about equality while engaging in institutional sexism against the minority. If Democrats want m…
>I addressed that already.
Females are slightly more than 50% of the population.
I can't help but see the irony that DeSantis is being described as an autocrat for trying to break up what is effectively a autonomous state that Walt Disney created to bypass most laws and oversight. > Walt Disney knew that his plans for the land would be easier to carry out with more independence. Among his ideas for his Florida project was his proposed EPCOT, the Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow, which…
I actually find it ironic that Republicans are supporting this. It is an example where by and large a private company has done a better job providing various public services than the government would. Revoking Reedy Creek will put a greater tax burden on the relevant counties. It seems like a lose/lose to me, and also an example of stupid "culture wars" taking precedence over the politics of the real issue at hand.