I said trans, and I don’t think the founders would have any issue with the Save act, nor banning trans women from sports against biological women. Most republicans I know about gay marriage.
Oklahoma makes teaching the Bible mandatory in all schools
- Thread starter IACub
- Start date
Who's responsibility is it to regulate competitive sports competition? It sure as hell shouldn't be the government, but the GOP feels like it's their cross to bear and it's a laughable joke. There's no official Democratic DNC stance on trans sports competition, it's just all made up bullshit, a fable invented by the GOP. "The Dems want men to compete against women, boo hoo!"
No, we don't.
Menstruating men? - Period!
If a man discovers blood in his urine, he doesn’t usually think he’s on his period. But that’s exactly what happened to a 37-year-old British businessman.
Man Shocked to Discover He Has a Fully Functioning Womb
Doctors tell the 37-year-old man it appears he could even get pregnant and give birth.
This WILL happen. If I have to post them in Iowa I will either make it the smallest font possible, or in a foreign language, OR post other religions’ tenets.
SMH... I stand corrected. Joe gets his period everybody.Menstruating men? - Period!
If a man discovers blood in his urine, he doesn’t usually think he’s on his period. But that’s exactly what happened to a 37-year-old British businessman.www.period.media
Man Shocked to Discover He Has a Fully Functioning Womb
Doctors tell the 37-year-old man it appears he could even get pregnant and give birth.www.cosmopolitan.com
Which one? The one where government should stick to the responsibilities they are intended to control or the fact that the Democratic party has no official plank or position on trans sports competition (nor should they), because I'll gladly die on both of those hills because their each factual and reasonable.
The taking a stand on trans women in sport. At least stop the pushback against the laws that states have.
Someone might have addressed this nonsense already, but just in case:
Key Points from the Everson v. Board of Education (1947)
- Establishment Clause Interpretation:
- The Court affirmed that the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause means the government cannot set up a church, aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another.
- Quote: “The ‘establishment of religion’ clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another.”
- Separation of Church and State:
- The decision famously reiterated Thomas Jefferson’s phrase about building "a wall of separation between church and state."
- The Court emphasized that the First Amendment's purpose was to keep the government out of religious affairs and vice versa.
- Aid to Religion:
- The ruling allowed for some forms of indirect aid to religion (like transportation subsidies) as long as the aid was provided to all students regardless of religion and did not promote religious activities.
- Quote: "The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach."
Significance
- Precedent: The decision set a precedent for how the Establishment Clause would be interpreted, balancing non-preferential aid to religious entities while maintaining a clear boundary to prevent government endorsement of religion.
- Interpretation: It underscored the Court’s commitment to a strict interpretation of the Establishment Clause, establishing guidelines for evaluating government actions involving religion.
Sources
- Oyez - Everson v. Board of Education
- Legal Information Institute - Everson v. Board of Education
- National Constitution Center - Everson v. Board of Education
4o
This was bordering on some Kamala Harris type stuff... Oklahoma is a state, next to Texas, in the United States of America. Oklahoma shares its border with other states in the United States of America
The first amendment is talking about congress. Oklahoma legislature did this. If the schools didn’t receive any federal funding, it would stand legally. As is, it will be found unconstitutional.
You seem to be suggesting that as long there isn't federal funding involved, that the legislatures of states are allowed to enact laws that seek to promote the establishment of religion. Am I misinterpreting your stance, and if so, could you clarify?
I don’t think it would stand either way, but the wording of th establishment clause is specific to the Federal government, is it not?
Have no fear. The current court of "originalists" will eventually conclude that Thomas Jefferson had no idea what the Founding Fathers intended.
But that doesn't mean that state governments can violate it anymore than they can violate other parts of the Constitution. They are bound to abide by the First Amendment just as they are the others.
I’m not disagreeing, I’m telling you where they are going to try and find a loophole
We had a teacher who had a great Harry Potter themed room. One crazy parent complained and pulled her child from the class because “”I’m scared she will be teaching my son witchcraft.”
There is no loophole. The Supremacy Clause dictatesm that the states must follow the Constitution. It has nothing to do with Federal funding.
Whew. I thought you were taking that stance based on really faulty reasoning. But I too, would not be surprised to see still more very faulty reasoning employed by this court to justify a decision.
Again, I'm not aware of any Democratic organization taking an official stance on that issue, and they shouldn't. It certainly hasn't stopped the Republicans from taking up the mantle on an issue they should stay the hell out of though. Why get government involved in this? It's not their role or responsibility and it's obvious to me why they do it, to further divide and antagonize people by being hateful towards others, it's red meat for the rubes to feast on.
Let the sports organizations and their respective governing bodies sort this out themselves, I can't believe this has become such a tireless subject of discussion, a veritable tempest in a teapot. A giant nothing burger.
I don't disagree with you on that, only on the point of who should be clarifying the rules and standards. Why should I be surprised that it's this kind of crap that the imbeciles in the various Statehouses think is a legislative priority.
That’s just it, it should pass with no pushback, case closed. Nothing to throw against the Dems.
I think you continue to miss my point, it's not a government's role at all. But the Republicans can't quit it, they're obsessed.
It is the state governments role. There were what? 4 state champions on the East coast that were trans? Complete borseshit and a slap in the face to the girls bumped down a spot.
Two separate issues being discussed. I think the Oklahoma school deal will be ruled unconstitutional. I think State government has the right to protect real women in sports in their state.
You know that dude can't read more than a headline right?
East coast state’s don’t have athletic associations to govern and oversee amateur athletic competition? I find that hard to believe.
Careful. They are making lists. You seem to need a little refresher course in a work camp.
Lord knows you come on here enough to gripe and moan like you are flowing.
I don't know that's a precedent you want to set, similar to the topic at hand, let's say the state government comes down and does what you say. That's great.... until you fast forward and a group with the opposite mindset gets into power, they'll reverse it and may take it another step further. Now you're ****ed.
At this point I'd much rather this be handled by the state and municipal athletic governing bodies. You have way more of a chance influencing those folks then you do at the state level.
Most of this stuff for me is about not setting precedent at the big government levels if it doesn't need to be. In the vein of this thread, if OK gets this passed, now that wall has been broken down. Fast forward again and let's say Christians aren't in control anymore, now this regime wants to push their religion. Same thing, now the people who pushed for it are on the opposite end, and completely ****ed because precedent has been set.
People are all for big government when it aligns with them, but I think they fail to see the forest through the trees on these topics.
The trans athlete deal is just not big enough to be a state issue to me. You may disagree, and that's fine.. but I think we're potentially doing more harm then good down the line by pushing this to the state or federal level. And that's a very conservative stance philosophically.
You’re reasonable. I’m not for the Bible being taught in school. I am for a course that teaches the origins and basic beliefs, since so much world conflict centers around Islam….ok, religion. The trans issue just keeps growing because some People think it doesn’t matter.
