Justice Department sues Georgia for voting laws that target black voters

[Toni]

Of course there are ways to ensure that! Church and non-partisan civics groups such as League of Women Voters, etc.

Churches are usually EXTREMELY partisan.
I mean the sitting pastor of a Baptist church in Atlanta is also a sitting US senator from the Democratic party.

As a whole, churches tend to lean conservative. In Georgia, the largest denomination is Southern Baptist, which is very conservative. Lankford R) from OK is (or was) also a Southern Baptist minister as I believe is Warnock from GA. There have been/are a number of Senators and Congress people for whom their faith was/is a centerpiece of their public identity and campaign. Almost always conservative.

I realize that to you, any Democrat is a lefty but that's hardly the case and particularly not the case when you are talking about southern Democrats.

 

[Metaphor]

Of course there are ways to ensure that! Church and non-partisan civics groups such as League of Women Voters, etc.

Churches are usually EXTREMELY partisan.
I mean the sitting pastor of a Baptist church in Atlanta is also a sitting US senator from the Democratic party.

As a whole, churches tend to lean conservative. In Georgia, the largest denomination is Southern Baptist, which is very conservative. Lankford R) from OK is (or was) also a Southern Baptist minister as I believe is Warnock from GA. There have been/are a number of Senators and Congress people for whom their faith was/is a centerpiece of their public identity and campaign. Almost always conservative.

I realize that to you, any Democrat is a lefty but that's hardly the case and particularly not the case when you are talking about southern Democrats.

Derec didn't even call this Democrat a leftie; all he said was churches are partisan. You seem to be reinforcing his point.

 

[Toni]

As a whole, churches tend to lean conservative. In Georgia, the largest denomination is Southern Baptist, which is very conservative. Lankford R) from OK is (or was) also a Southern Baptist minister as I believe is Warnock from GA. There have been/are a number of Senators and Congress people for whom their faith was/is a centerpiece of their public identity and campaign. Almost always conservative.

I realize that to you, any Democrat is a lefty but that's hardly the case and particularly not the case when you are talking about southern Democrats.

Derec didn't even call this Democrat a leftie; all he said was churches are partisan. You seem to be reinforcing his point.

How so?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

As a whole, churches tend to lean conservative. In Georgia, the largest denomination is Southern Baptist, which is very conservative. Lankford R) from OK is (or was) also a Southern Baptist minister as I believe is Warnock from GA. There have been/are a number of Senators and Congress people for whom their faith was/is a centerpiece of their public identity and campaign. Almost always conservative.

I realize that to you, any Democrat is a lefty but that's hardly the case and particularly not the case when you are talking about southern Democrats.

Derec didn't even call this Democrat a leftie; all he said was churches are partisan. You seem to be reinforcing his point.

He said they were partisan and then brought up the Pastor who is a Senator in Georgia is a Democrat. Did you miss that part?

 

[laughing dog]

Of course there are ways to ensure that! Church and non-partisan civics groups such as League of Women Voters, etc.

Churches are usually EXTREMELY partisan.
I mean the sitting pastor of a Baptist church in Atlanta is also a sitting US senator from the Democratic party.

How does that make the Baptist church partisan?

But there is no doubt that churches in the USA can be very partisan. Both parties get support from different segments of Judeo-Christian religions.

 

[laughing dog]

Yes: observing someone handing over water is exactly as subjective as determining the motives of the person doing the handing over.

The motives do not matter. What matters is if the persons handing out water are promoting a candidate/party/issue up for vote. Such promotion would be indicated by campaign buttons, t-shirts, other paraphernalia associated with the campaign, speaking in favor of a candidate or issue, or attempting to hand out campaign literature or anything else associated with the campaign/cause being supported by the person handing out water.

As long as they say nothing, wear nothing, do nothing to attempt to influence you to do anything other that cast your vote, it doesn't really matter what is in their heart or mind.

And I'm sure polling officials are the best-placed to police the 'say nothing, wear nothing, do nothing' guidelines, and will enforce everything fairly and evenly, and all disputes will be dealt with swiftly and fairly.

Here's the deal. Unlike you, I don't automatically assume everything a right-wing person does or thinks is engineered to be as cruel as humanly possible to humans for no reasons, other than sadism or grasping of power.

OF course not - that is your tribe. You automatically assume everything a "left-wing" person does or thinks is engineered to be a stupid or as cruel as humanly possible to humns for no reasons, other than sadism, stupidity or grasping of power.

 

[laughing dog]

Yes: observing someone handing over water is exactly as subjective as determining the motives of the person doing the handing over.

Really this is not rocket science. You observe what is actually happening. If someone wearing a VOTE FOR _____, or is talking about a candidate, etc.., then it is a violation. If someone who is dressed like a regular person and says nothing but hands a bottle of water, then it is fine.

How do you know what two people are talking about? I often see people talking without hearing them.

Well, you can read lips or get closer or simply not care. Are you under the impression that every law is perfectly enforced? Officials make judgment calls all the time.

Why aren't you worried about how this law will be enforced? After all, anyone could slip someone water in a non-conventional container. Or block the view of the official while someone else hands water.

The trade-off here is politicking vs humane treatment. The GA GOP and the defenders of this particular section of the law prefer to think it is better to prohibit the perceived problem of undue influence while letting some people suffer even though there is no evidence of a problem of that undue influence. This clearly reveals the true values of the GA GOP and its defenders on this issue.

 

[thebeave]

Which provisions of the law specifically target black voters?
I am not asking whether the provisions are a good idea or not. I am also not asking whether some provisions have a differential impact on different groups of people - after all, most laws will somehow affect one group more than some other group.
I am asking what specific provisions of the Georgia (and Arizona, for that matter) law are alleged by the DOJ to target black voters.

Well, pretty much anything you can think of these days has been labeled racist. Even math. It's really getting quite tiresome, and what's worse is that when there is something that is truly racist, people will just yawn and say, "Here we go again". "The Boy Who Cried Wolf", and all that.

What's amusing is the reasons that people give for why things like this are racist are actually quite racist themselves (the soft bigotry of low expectations).

 

[Metaphor]

As a whole, churches tend to lean conservative. In Georgia, the largest denomination is Southern Baptist, which is very conservative. Lankford R) from OK is (or was) also a Southern Baptist minister as I believe is Warnock from GA. There have been/are a number of Senators and Congress people for whom their faith was/is a centerpiece of their public identity and campaign. Almost always conservative.

I realize that to you, any Democrat is a lefty but that's hardly the case and particularly not the case when you are talking about southern Democrats.

Derec didn't even call this Democrat a leftie; all he said was churches are partisan. You seem to be reinforcing his point.

How so?

Because you talked about how conservative most churches are, reinforcing that they would be partisan. Unless you mean to say churches are conservative, but that doesn't influence which party they vote for?

 

[Metaphor]

Well, you can read lips or get closer or simply not care. Are you under the impression that every law is perfectly enforced?

No.

Officials make judgment calls all the time.

Why aren't you worried about how this law will be enforced? After all, anyone could slip someone water in a non-conventional container. Or block the view of the official while someone else hands water.

Apparently not any of the entire legislation seems to have enforcement provisions. If that is so, Biden calling this 'Jim Crow on steroids' is, um. You know, I don't want to say something negative, but some people might call that 'hyperbole'.

The trade-off here is politicking vs humane treatment. The GA GOP and the defenders of this particular section of the law prefer to think it is better to prohibit the perceived problem of undue influence while letting some people suffer even though there is no evidence of a problem of that undue influence. This clearly reveals the true values of the GA GOP and its defenders on this issue.

It seems to me that it could well be the other way around: the idea that voters are suffering from a thirst epidemic whilst voting in Georgia doesn't have much evidence as far as I can see.

 

[Metaphor]

And I'm sure polling officials are the best-placed to police the 'say nothing, wear nothing, do nothing' guidelines, and will enforce everything fairly and evenly, and all disputes will be dealt with swiftly and fairly.

Here's the deal. Unlike you, I don't automatically assume everything a right-wing person does or thinks is engineered to be as cruel as humanly possible to humans for no reasons, other than sadism or grasping of power.

OF course not - that is your tribe. You automatically assume everything a "left-wing" person does or thinks is engineered to be a stupid or as cruel as humanly possible to humns for no reasons, other than sadism, stupidity or grasping of power.

No, I don't. Most of my friends are left wing and I don't think their thinking is sadistic or stupid or power-grasping.

 

[Toni]

How so?

Because you talked about how conservative most churches are, reinforcing that they would be partisan. Unless you mean to say churches are conservative, but that doesn't influence which party they vote for?

Two different views of partisanship of churches:

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...-know-the-political-leanings-of-their-clergy/

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/a...erica-s-churches-are-more-polarized-than-ever

 

[Metaphor]

As a whole, churches tend to lean conservative. In Georgia, the largest denomination is Southern Baptist, which is very conservative. Lankford R) from OK is (or was) also a Southern Baptist minister as I believe is Warnock from GA. There have been/are a number of Senators and Congress people for whom their faith was/is a centerpiece of their public identity and campaign. Almost always conservative.

I realize that to you, any Democrat is a lefty but that's hardly the case and particularly not the case when you are talking about southern Democrats.

Derec didn't even call this Democrat a leftie; all he said was churches are partisan. You seem to be reinforcing his point.

He said they were partisan and then brought up the Pastor who is a Senator in Georgia is a Democrat. Did you miss that part?

Derec didn't call that Democrat a leftie, he said churches were partisan. Pointing out that the pastor of a church is a senator of a particular party is pretty good evidence that that church is partisan.

Toni then came in to, I guess, make some kind of point that churches tend to be conservative, which only reinforces Derec's point that churches are partisan.

 

[laughing dog]

And I'm sure polling officials are the best-placed to police the 'say nothing, wear nothing, do nothing' guidelines, and will enforce everything fairly and evenly, and all disputes will be dealt with swiftly and fairly.

Here's the deal. Unlike you, I don't automatically assume everything a right-wing person does or thinks is engineered to be as cruel as humanly possible to humans for no reasons, other than sadism or grasping of power.

OF course not - that is your tribe. You automatically assume everything a "left-wing" person does or thinks is engineered to be a stupid or as cruel as humanly possible to humns for no reasons, other than sadism, stupidity or grasping of power.

No, I don't. Most of my friends are left wing and I don't think their thinking is sadistic or stupid or power-grasping.

I see, you just appear that way in your posts here.

 

[Metaphor]

No, I don't. Most of my friends are left wing and I don't think their thinking is sadistic or stupid or power-grasping.

I see, you just appear that way in your posts here.

If you think I am sadistic or stupid or power-grasping, I don't know what to tell you. I cannot imagine anybody in my life would imagine that of me.

 

[laughing dog]

Apparently not any of the entire legislation seems to have enforcement provisions. If that is so, Biden calling this 'Jim Crow on steroids' is, um. You know, I don't want to say something negative, but some people might call that 'hyperbole'.

It is the usual partisan bs.

The lack of an enforcement mechanism is important, but the law will lead to people obeying it because people tend to comply with laws at first. Compliance tends to be higher with laws people view as fair and reasonable. So, it will be interesting to see if there are problems with compliance with this GA law.

It seems to me that it could well be the other way around: the idea that voters are suffering from a thirst epidemic whilst voting in Georgia doesn't have much evidence as far as I can see.

I can understand that it would be hard to see from Australia. But clearly the GA GOP think it is a sufficiently large issue to enact a law prohibiting the passing out of water to those standing in line to vote.

 

[laughing dog]

No, I don't. Most of my friends are left wing and I don't think their thinking is sadistic or stupid or power-grasping.

I see, you just appear that way in your posts here.

If you think I am sadistic or stupid or power-grasping, I don't know what to tell you. I cannot imagine anybody in my life would imagine that of me.

I didn't say that. Instead of using your imagination when reading posts, try just reading them with comprehension.

 

[Toni]

He said they were partisan and then brought up the Pastor who is a Senator in Georgia is a Democrat. Did you miss that part?

Derec didn't call that Democrat a leftie, he said churches were partisan. Pointing out that the pastor of a church is a senator of a particular party is pretty good evidence that that church is partisan.

Toni then came in to, I guess, make some kind of point that churches tend to be conservative, which only reinforces Derec's point that churches are partisan.

Actually, whether or not a pastor from a church runs for political office does not indicate that the church is partisan. It is an indication that that particular individual is politically active.

Derec was obviously referring to Raphael Warnock, a minister at a Southern Baptist Church in Derek's state of Georgia. I mentioned that James Lankford of Oklahoma was also a Baptist minister. Lankford is Republican and conservative. Warnock is Democrat and in Derek's opinion, probably an extreme leftist. So, here is an indication of two Baptist ministers holding national public office but for different parties and of very different political bent. Those two individuals are politically active. That does not mean that their churches are partisan.

 

[Metaphor]

He said they were partisan and then brought up the Pastor who is a Senator in Georgia is a Democrat. Did you miss that part?

Derec didn't call that Democrat a leftie, he said churches were partisan. Pointing out that the pastor of a church is a senator of a particular party is pretty good evidence that that church is partisan.

Toni then came in to, I guess, make some kind of point that churches tend to be conservative, which only reinforces Derec's point that churches are partisan.

Actually, whether or not a pastor from a church runs for political office does not indicate that the church is partisan. It is an indication that that particular individual is politically active.

Derec was obviously referring to Raphael Warnock, a minister at a Southern Baptist Church in Derek's state of Georgia. I mentioned that James Lankford of Oklahoma was also a Baptist minister. Lankford is Republican and conservative. Warnock is Democrat and in Derek's opinion, probably an extreme leftist. So, here is an indication of two Baptist ministers holding national public office but for different parties and of very different political bent. Those two individuals are politically active. That does not mean that their churches are partisan.

This is a tangent, but what would make a church partisan, if the leaders of the church holding political office within one of the two major parties is not sufficient to call it partisan?

 

[Metaphor]

If you think I am sadistic or stupid or power-grasping, I don't know what to tell you. I cannot imagine anybody in my life would imagine that of me.

I didn't say that. Instead of using your imagination when reading posts, try just reading them with comprehension.

You said I appeared that way. I told you I am not that way, nor do I appear that way to family and friends.