Breakdown In Civil Order

[Jarhyn]

To again perhaps oversimplify for discussion’s sake, Liberals tend to mostly blame systemic inequalities: Homelessness is the fault of a hyper-competitive capitalist system, income disparity, pervasive racism, lack of affordable housing, underfunded (or non-existent) mental health resources.
Conservatives tend to mostly blame personal failings: Homelessness is the fault of irresponsible life choices, lack of personal responsibility or financial planning, self-inflicted drug and alcohol addiction, overly “woke” or permissive Blue cities that tolerate these outcasts.

The thing is, I think, that neither side is either fully right or fully wrong. I think, very generally, that Liberals want to address “the system” while looking past the individual responsibility component, and Conservatives want to address “the homeless” (themselves, and their irresponsible personal behavior) while looking past the system.

Exactly, but add to this that the Conservatives feel that tough love approaches are the right answer. Make them work or starve, they think they'll shape up.

I'm reminded of a case I read about out of England. Teenager spent months in a locked anorexia ward when the real problem turned out to be partial gastroparesis. She didn't want to eat because she truly was full and trying to cram more in was horrible.

Never mind that for the VAST majority of primate existence, eating what you found was easy enough and few people ever actually participated in acquiring that food.

Most people spent the vast majority of their life as the homeless do today, and we think for some bizarre reason that means they are the wrong shape...

Expecting more or different from humans seems to be the irresponsible and unreasonable position here,. especially in light of the fact that most people are JUST as lazy and irresponsible as the homeless, they just find better ways of hiding it, mostly to do with having access to money.

As I've said before, my mother in law was a horrendous drunk who rambled like a homeless person, and what was worse you couldn't just walk away from her: she had a phone and knew your number.

Literally the only thing separating her from the average "problematic homeless person" was not the "problematic" part, but simply the fact that this particular indigent has a home and a job, and only because she's the daughter of a c-suite executive.

I'd say very few are to save the mother.

Why would you say that?
Ectopic pregnancies are fairly common.
Mrs E had 3.
I’d be okay with restrictions on abortion that don’t KILL PEOPLE.
But letting people bleed out to satisfy the superstitions of religious types is not good. And as long as laws cause healthcare professionals to suffer the fear of prosecution, preventing the administration of healthcare, I think these laws are an abomination.

Again I ask - WHO BENEFITS FROM ABORTION RESTRICTIONS AND BANS?

Wealthy people who don't want more families "climbing the ladder": the same ones who benefit from persecuting gay people.

If it was entirely up to them, there would be no ladder, but they take the best they can get by making the ladder as tricky and as rickety as possible.

 

[Elixir]

I'd say very few are to save the mother.

Why would you say that?
Ectopic pregnancies are fairly common.
Mrs E had 3.
I’d be okay with restrictions on abortion that don’t KILL PEOPLE.
But letting people bleed out to satisfy the superstitions of religious types is not good. And as long as laws cause healthcare professionals to suffer the fear of prosecution, preventing the administration of healthcare, I think these laws are an abomination.

Again I ask - WHO BENEFITS FROM ABORTION RESTRICTIONS AND BANS?

Context!!

I was talking about abortions past viability, not all abortions.

Context: This is not a problem you have ever had to face nor will you ever have to face it. Your opinion about anyone else’s health care and decisions is none of your business.

Not only that, “context” is irrelevant.
WHO BENEFITS FROM ABORTION RESTRICTIONS AND BANS?
Including those virtually nonexistent medically unnecessary 9th month ones.

 

[Jarhyn]

Speaking of public order issues, my husband and I just got back from the grocery store, having bought groceries for our first week or two here and I feel absolutely betrayed by America: our bin cost us ~50 bucks, which in the US would be closer to 70 or even 90 in the US.

Some things were more expensive, but most things were much cheaper. Some American goods simply don't exist here (like maple syrup ._.)

I mean shit, you look around on American media, and it would seem like Europeans are taking new mortgages for groceries, but I guess feeling the squeeze at the grocery store is a lot like comparing politics... Yes, Europe is getting more conservative, but even the conservatives here are left of the US's moderates.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Speaking of public order issues, my husband and I just got back from the grocery store, having bought groceries for our first week or two here and I feel absolutely betrayed by America: our bin cost us ~50 bucks, which in the US would be closer to 70 or even 90 in the US.

Some things were more expensive, but most things were much cheaper. Some American goods simply don't exist here (like maple syrup ._.)

I mean shit, you look around on American media, and it would seem like Europeans are taking new mortgages for groceries, but I guess feeling the squeeze at the grocery store is a lot like comparing politics... Yes, Europe is getting more conservative, but even the conservatives here are left of the US's moderates.

40 years of Reaganomics, and the people seem to be getting tired of how it operates. I'm working on a local job to switch a neighborhood from Septic to city sewer... Federally funded... because we can't fucking afford a septic switch on the local dollar anymore. But hey... our state taxes are lower than they were 25 years ago... like our population.

 

[Emily Lake]

You seem to have an expectation that anyone who disagrees with just letting homeless people pop a squat and pop a tent wherever they feel like while being exempted from laws regarding public use of alcohol or drugs, expectations of sanitation, etc. should only be allowed to hold those positions if they provide you with an itemized outline of exactly how to fix everything

So, nobody is buying “get rid of them” as a sufficient plan.
Nor does saying “other suggestions have been made” fix anything (especially when you’re unable to iterate said suggestions).
So we are left with “get rid of them” if we rely on you.

Please stop inventing things about me. Your "interpretations" are malicious and false.

I really like the “while being exempted from laws” part, from a partisan who PRESUMABLY* would elect a career criminal who has been convicted of 34 felonies, has 88 open indictments against him and has never spent a night in jail.

* based on constant criticism of the Enemies of Apricot, plus complete and utter lack of expressed concern about his intent to end democracy.

That also is entirely invented by you and maliciously attributed to me.

You know that you just making shit up about other people and typing it out over and over doesn't make it true, don't you? Seriously, don't you get tired of trying to imagineer evil shit into existence and smear it onto other people get tiring?

 

[Emily Lake]

I’m still waiting for the list of people (non-lawyers) who benefit from abortion laws.
The question has not been addressed, nor has the idea of personhood from conception been asserted.

Until there is some cogent response to the question, I would decline her advice on what constitutes just law.

Who are you talking to? Are you in the right thread?

“while being exempted from laws”

And this is why I say that you are disingenous and that you maliciously invent shit. This is the most dishonest snipping of a comment I've seen in a while. For fuck's holy fucking sake, what I actually said was:

while being exempted from laws regarding public use of alcohol or drugs

Seriously, what is wrong with you that you think this kind of blatantly mischaracterization is acceptable?

 

[Emily Lake]

I’m still waiting for the list of people (non-lawyers) who benefit from abortion laws.
The question has not been addressed, nor has the idea of personhood from conception been asserted.

Until there is some cogent response to the question, I would decline her advice on what constitutes just law.

Who are you talking to? Are you in the right thread?

“while being exempted from laws”

The question remains.
Tom

The question in which I am interested is how can civil order exist or be maintained while members of the supposedly civil society consider people who HAVE NO CHOICE about where to sleep, eat or shit, to be flouting "the law" while lauding "the law" that kills people.
Every single one of those people who conservatives (other than Emily apparently) tell us they want to "get rid of", is IMO more valuable than the sum total of every blatocyst, embryo and fetus that never took a breath, as is every woman who dies while waiting for care as she approaches death closely enough to be considered in need of care.
The fact that the imposed priorities of non-sentient blobs of protoplasm are raised above the humanity of people who have nowhere to shit, is simply despicable.
IMHO of course.
YMMV.
Does that connect the dots for you Tom?
Maybe I'm just tired of dishonest brokers in conversation.

What the actual fuck are you even talking about? These two topics are completely unrelated.

 

[Emily Lake]

Smells faintly like gas chambers.

Widely held opinion: There are a whole lot of homeless people here, it's a serious problem. It's unsafe, unclean, and we need to do something about it. Just ignoring it all and letting people camp wherever they want isn't a viable solution.

Elixir & Jarhyn & Politesse: OMG, you want to murderfy the poor homeless people, you horrible evil nazi, you want to stuff them into gas chambers!!!111!111eleventyone!!!

I didn't actually say that. It's pretty obvious that the Republican "solution" to homelessness is mass incarceration, not execution.

Slavery isn't any better than execution... And let's be real, when Nazi Germany ran out of slave labor positions, they started shoveling everyone else into the gas chambers.

I'm not seeing much difference in the long run, especially since the path to the smokestacks often runs through a work camp or two.

WTH is wrong with you? Nobody has suggested slavery for the homeless either. Please stop pulling made up bullshit out of your ass.

Kinda sounds like you are maybe in favor of incarceration to solve homelessness. Prisoners are often used as labor paid in what can only be recognized as slave wages, if at all.

Maybe I’m misinterpreting what you are proposing?

You're dramatically misinterpreting, because there is nothing at all that I have written that even comes close to that.

Are you perhaps reading the absolute and utter bullshit that Elixir has written and just assuming that he has accurately divined my thoughts? If so, I'd suggest you don't do that.

 

[Emily Lake]

Solving the very broad issue of unhoused people is not likely to be a single one size fits all solution unless we want to simply incarcerate people for the crime of having nowhere to go.

Oh FFS, for like the fifteenth time spread across multiple threads:

1) Fund residential mental health facilities for those with severe mental health disorders, particularly those presenting with hallucination and/or delusion. These are people that are unable to care for themselves, unable to hold down a job. They need care in a place that keeps them safe as well as safeguarding the rest of society from them.

2) Involuntary rehab for drug abusers who are unable or unwilling to maintain a job while abstaining from substance abuse and undergoing effective outpatient therapy. I don't lump all drugs together, but the reality is that meth heads and a substantial number of opioid/opiate users cannot stop on their own.

3) Subsidized safe housing for those who do not have severe mental health or substance abuse disorders. I think it might be reasonable to provide separate housing for single adults than for families with children. This should include education and job training and a program to get them employed and into their own housing, not be a permanent dumping ground where nothing else is done except shelter. The objective should be independence.

4) Substantial investment in young childhood education, and an emphasis throughout primary and secondary school on the skills and knowledge needed to be an independent contributor to society.

I have given this same run down multiple times in multiple threads, and I'm sick to fucking death of people with an axe to grind and a complete lack of integrity repeatedly turning around and pretending like none of it exists and then proceeding to pull bullshit out of their asses and pretend like I want to throw everyone in jail or see them die. It's malicious, it's evil, and it's dishonest.

 

[Emily Lake]

Kinda sounds like you are maybe in favor of incarceration to solve homelessness.

It certainly does. Good thing we gots laws against it, right? And damn those people flouting The Law!!

No one I recall has admitted to holding that view about blastocysts, etc (bolded in your text)

Fixed for accuracy. Yet the arguments I've seen to support laws that kill people and benefit exactly nobody, certainly imply such views.
I am disinclined to accept the arguments based on homeless people's "lawlessness" for the same reason: the laws Emily would use to "get rid of them" are just as draconian and harmful as the ones she supports banning abortions.

IIRC, Emily supports the terms of abortion as per Roe V. Wade. As do I, and most sensible, reasonable people. Its just late term abortions (past viability) that she has problems with (not including health of mother issues, etc). Just take her word for it, and don't assume she is hiding some secret views about it.

Sure sure. But the devil is in the details.

The details of Roe V. Wade as it was for most of my adult life, yeah, sure, those devils.

 

[Emily Lake]

Isn’t it for Emily to elaborate? At least that was my point.

I already have, a few times, in fairly great detail.

 

[Emily Lake]

If memory serves, Emily Lake supports reproductive rights, but not Roe v Wade or at least the path of Roe v Wade to get there.

Your memory does not serve. I absolutely support the basic structure of Roe v Wade, and the way it functioned for most of my adult life. I dislike that it got overturned, but I can't actually fault the reasoning applied. I would absolutely 100% support every state measure to enshrine that approach in law, and I would fully back congressing creating an actual federal law to that end.

 

[Emily Lake]

I'm not Trump, TSwizzle isn't Trump, not a single fucking poster here on IIDB is Trump. So if you want to criticize TRUMP then be fucking explicit about it, and stop aiming your ejaculated hatred at other posters.

"Ejaculated"? Emulating Edgar Allen Poe are we?

Nah, it's a pretty straightforward insinuation that he gets off on being an asshole to people that he hates, that he gets aroused by bullying people that he thinks are bad.

 

[Emily Lake]

Ya sure Emily. You got a plan; GET RID OF “THEM”.

This is a blatant falsehood that you are spewing.

 

[Emily Lake]

Never mind that for the VAST majority of primate existence, eating what you found was easy enough and few people ever actually participated in acquiring that food.

Seriously, bro, if you want to go back to a prehistoric existence, livingi n a cave and just hoping you don't get dysentery or starve to death, go find a mountainside to live on. There are plenty of spaces in the US that are untamed and you can live out your noble savage fantasy to your heart's content.

But don't think that you should be entitled to live your lotus-eater life while expecting other people to put in the hard work to keep you alive.

 

[Politesse]

Never mind that for the VAST majority of primate existence, eating what you found was easy enough and few people ever actually participated in acquiring that food.

Seriously, bro, if you want to go back to a prehistoric existence, livingi n a cave and just hoping you don't get dysentery or starve to death, go find a mountainside to live on. There are plenty of spaces in the US that are untamed and you can live out your noble savage fantasy to your heart's content.

But don't think that you should be entitled to live your lotus-eater life while expecting other people to put in the hard work to keep you alive.

Ah, liberals. All heart, they are.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Yeah... a major reason why US states are starting to outlaw gay deconversion camps isn't because of the pseudoscience as such, but because some of the "therapies" widely used in those camps are just targeted child abuse. Denial of food, denial of sleep, gaslighting.

Is there any part of the troubled teen industry that's not evil?

Why is being a teen and not straight/cis equivalent to being troubled?

Anyone who gets sent to a gay deconversion camp is believed by their parents to be troubled. Doesn't mean they really are.

 

[Elixir]

Ya sure Emily. You got a plan; GET RID OF “THEM”.

This is a blatant falsehood that you are spewing.

What’s the plan Emily? Show me that I am mistaken. You already mentioned incarceration. And what purpose does it serve? Why, it gets rid of “them”.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Solving the very broad issue of unhoused people is not likely to be a single one size fits all solution unless we want to simply incarcerate people for the crime of having nowhere to go.

Oh FFS, for like the fifteenth time spread across multiple threads:

1) Fund residential mental health facilities for those with severe mental health disorders, particularly those presenting with hallucination and/or delusion. These are people that are unable to care for themselves, unable to hold down a job. They need care in a place that keeps them safe as well as safeguarding the rest of society from them.

2) Involuntary rehab for drug abusers who are unable or unwilling to maintain a job while abstaining from substance abuse and undergoing effective outpatient therapy. I don't lump all drugs together, but the reality is that meth heads and a substantial number of opioid/opiate users cannot stop on their own.

And neither of these work.

Involuntary mental health treatment is useless. Involuntary rehab is useless.

I do agree with trying to help those that are homeless for economic reasons, but those aren't the ones causing the problems.

 

[Politesse]

Solving the very broad issue of unhoused people is not likely to be a single one size fits all solution unless we want to simply incarcerate people for the crime of having nowhere to go.

Oh FFS, for like the fifteenth time spread across multiple threads:

1) Fund residential mental health facilities for those with severe mental health disorders, particularly those presenting with hallucination and/or delusion. These are people that are unable to care for themselves, unable to hold down a job. They need care in a place that keeps them safe as well as safeguarding the rest of society from them.

2) Involuntary rehab for drug abusers who are unable or unwilling to maintain a job while abstaining from substance abuse and undergoing effective outpatient therapy. I don't lump all drugs together, but the reality is that meth heads and a substantial number of opioid/opiate users cannot stop on their own.

3) Subsidized safe housing for those who do not have severe mental health or substance abuse disorders. I think it might be reasonable to provide separate housing for single adults than for families with children. This should include education and job training and a program to get them employed and into their own housing, not be a permanent dumping ground where nothing else is done except shelter. The objective should be independence.

4) Substantial investment in young childhood education, and an emphasis throughout primary and secondary school on the skills and knowledge needed to be an independent contributor to society.

I have given this same run down multiple times in multiple threads, and I'm sick to fucking death of people with an axe to grind and a complete lack of integrity repeatedly turning around and pretending like none of it exists and then proceeding to pull bullshit out of their asses and pretend like I want to throw everyone in jail or see them die. It's malicious, it's evil, and it's dishonest.

And you believe that the Republican party supports these policies?

Nor do I think much of your solutions, even on their own merits. What exactly is "involuntary rehab"? Do you point a gun at someone and force them to say the twelve steps, or what? How can a rehabilitation process possibly be involuntary? Rehab is less than fully effective when the sufferer is trying their best to cooperate.