Alakagom wrote:
There were sporadic violent clashes between police and people protesting at times in Romania. Same way there were few violent clashes in USA, that doesn't invalidate all the protest now does it?
In only happened one day. And a small group of people were doing it (~100 from a crowd of 150k). Those that started the violence had nothing to do with the protests. Were there either for the thrill or, most likely, payed by the party that the protests are against.
So a very tinyy minority caused few problems. That sounds eerily similar to what happened in USA as well!
But for Paul USA protest are not a way to go, but Romanian are.
Alakagom wrote:
There were sporadic violent clashes between police and people protesting at times in Romania. Same way there were few violent clashes in USA, that doesn't invalidate all the protest now does it?
In only happened one day. And a small group of people were doing it (~100 from a crowd of 150k). Those that started the violence had nothing to do with the protests. Were there either for the thrill or, most likely, payed by the party that the protests are against.
It`s everywhere.
Almost any protest movement is having a very small percentage of violent groups. It`s just not possible to avoid it completely as some idiots are everywhere.
It`s in football stadiums, political protests and any other areas. Some people will always use violence as their medium, while a peaceful protest would be so much more helpful.
Those, that use violent don`t even need to protest for the same thing. Some just use the crowds for covering themselves later on and do it for violent reasons only, which is even more stupid.
Well, the Antifa is mostly worse, because they simply don't go after Nazis, but after everyone who disagrees with them. The Antifa is more fascistic than the Nazis currently.
Nazis are already morons, but the Antifa is basically the scum of the earth, but don't take it too seriously, since I'm basically a Nazi for you as well. You still can't bring up reasons, why I should be one, but I am still, in your tiny FOV.
Just to keep track here. Antifa burns cars, storms into private housings, destroys private goods and attacks people, who are not having the exact same opinion as they do. Not the best example, to bring them up.
@Alak: The womens march was mostly non-violent. It was mostly nonsense, but that's a topic for another day.
The Airport protests were mostly fine as well. I was more focusing on the Berckley(hope I wrote that right) protests and the road blocking in several cities and on some highways.
Bikex wrote:
I love the discussions on this forum. No matter the topic it's always everyone vs. ringo.
I don't even think my views are that extreme I'm just slightly less liberal than everyone else
I share your views at least. The others here are probably trusting Buzzfeed or Vice as well.
Exactly those kind of "accusations" doesn`t make it much easier for later discussions really.
Let`s try to keep the discussion on a normal level.
Most people here can rank the media information quite well I think. And hence know where from they get proper information and where from less proper.
Those kind of "accusations"? Are you kidding me? Accusating me of being with PEGIDA or of being a Nazi is fine, but accusing people, who already linked me to Buzzfeed and Vice, that they actually read them, is bad? Seriously?
Paul23 wrote:
@Alak: The womens march was mostly non-violent. It was mostly nonsense, but that's a topic for another day.
Oh i wanna hear this
If you want to, fine.
What was the womens march protesting for? Womens rights? Please name me one right, which women don't have in the US, that men currently have. Or at least one, which is threatened by Trump. Then tell me, why they wore hijabs, the main symbol for supressed women in islamic states, who wear them, because they have to? Why was the womens march organized by Linda Sarsour, a person, who is FOR the sharia-law? Sharia law or womens rights...pick one, you can't have both.
Paul23 wrote:
@Alak: The womens march was mostly non-violent. It was mostly nonsense, but that's a topic for another day.
Oh i wanna hear this
If you want to, fine.
What was the womens march protesting for? Womens rights? Please name me one right, which women don't have in the US, that men currently have. Or at least one, which is threatened by Trump. Then tell me, why they wore hijabs, the main symbol for supressed women in islamic states, who wear them, because they have to? Why was the womens march organized by Linda Sarsour, a person, who is FOR the sharia-law? Sharia law or womens rights...pick one, you can't have both.
Abortion is not a woman's right? And they should just accept Trump saying "breastfeeding is disgusting", "grab them by the pussy" and "she was bleeding out of her whatever"?
Bikex wrote:
I love the discussions on this forum. No matter the topic it's always everyone vs. ringo.
I don't even think my views are that extreme I'm just slightly less liberal than everyone else
I share your views at least. The others here are probably trusting Buzzfeed or Vice as well.
Exactly those kind of "accusations" doesn`t make it much easier for later discussions really.
Let`s try to keep the discussion on a normal level.
Most people here can rank the media information quite well I think. And hence know where from they get proper information and where from less proper.
Those kind of "accusations"? Are you kidding me? Accusating me of being with PEGIDA or of being a Nazi is fine, but accusing people, who already linked me to Buzzfeed and Vice, that they actually read them, is bad? Seriously?
Even though I often disagree with your opinion here, I surely never linked you to anything of those.
Well to start, Linda Sarsour wasn't the insitagtor of the movement. That would be Teresa Shook, Evvie Harmon, Fontaine Pearson, Bob Bland, Breanne Butler and several others who all began forming local protrest groups and events via Facebook. Harmon, Pearson and Butler combined their efforts to form the official Womens March on Washington. As the event quickly gathered traction various others were brought onboard, including Sarsour, Carmen Perez and Tamika Mallory.
So the event was not organized or created solely by a pro-Sharia female. It was a collaboration effort between various individuals and groups. That was done to provide as much equal coverage and inclusion as possible.
The March was also not solely about "Womens Rights". It was about a combination of things: Reproductive rights, Immigration reform, religious and racial discrimmination, LGBTQ rights and various other policy points.
So as to why some protesters wore hijabs, as a sign of acceptance towards people of different faiths. A hijab more specifically because of Trumps anti-Islam stance and the hijab being probably the most recognisable Islamic dress.
As for what specific rights relating to Women. He wants to completely ban abortion, and made the move to bring back the "Gag Rule" which prohibits any US NGO from getting government support if it associates with assisting a service that provides abortions. The gag rule means that US NGO's cannot get involved with any family planning assistance, such as health checks and condom provision, if that support would be the same sevice that provided abortions. Trump in fact expanded the gag rule to include all health funding, not just family planning.
Trump further wants to remove Family/Pregnancy/Maternity/Paternity Leave support. Although, thanks to his Daughter, this one might actually be strengthened. We'll wait and see, depends which historical comment of Trumps will be the accurate one.
Trump has ignored any real stance on the Gender Pay Gap, and seems like he won't move to put pressure on business or law to help close said gap. Not an actively hurtful position at the moment, but it's contrary to most other western world positions.
Then there's his whole LGBTQ stance. Could write a fair bit on this. But to simplify it's not a good position if you're LGBTQ. And this was a strong part of the Womens March support.
Hope that helps. A lot of clear information about it all is available on the internet. All you've got to do is look a read a little.
@Ollfardh: Not sure, if killing an unborn is a right for anyone. Trump never said, that breastfeeding is disgusting. He was talking about a woman, which "milked" herself, so to say, pumped the milk out of her, to feed her almost school-aged child.
He was saying "grab them by the pussy" in 2005 and "she was bleeding out of her whatever" is just a statement. If that actually would've been, what the march was about, I can only laugh.
@TMM: Linda Sarsour wasn't the only organizer. I never said that. But she was one of the persons at the top.
"So as to why some protesters wore hijabs, as a sign of acceptance towards people of different faiths. A hijab more specifically because of Trumps anti-Islam stance and the hijab being probably the most recognisable Islamic dress."
Well, then that's a really stupid thing to do. Do I go out and wear a slave outfit, to show support to the black people, whose ancestors were slaves? No, because that's stupid.
I am probably on a different standpoint as you on the abortion thing then. I would allow it, when a woman got raped.
"Trump has ignored any real stance on the Gender Pay Gap, and seems like he won't move to put pressure on business or law to help close said gap."
There is no gender pay gap. To be accurate, it's around 3-7% and it only occurs, because men negotiate their contracts better. The main problem is, that women work in jobs, which are not well paid itself, whilst more men work in well paid jobs.
Also women work less time in average, because they take time to raise children.
"Then there's his whole LGBTQ stance."
I'm conservative on that point as well. Let me say it in a small poem:
"Roses are red,
Violets are blue,
how many genders?
only two!"
I am NOT talking about homosexuality, don't get me wrong, but the 70+ genders, that some want to believe, that exists, I can't bear. People have too much free time, to think about ways to feel special, so they make up genders already and then they shout at you, when you call them male or female, when they are "clearly" and Aquarigender today. (and yes, someone in our university feels like that. that's why I had to google it back then, because she was running besides me, that I "harrass" her, because I called her "she", when defending her against some moron.)
Looking at the homosexuality, because that's not retardness, Trump said, that he might not like the homosexual marriage, but that he will not do anything against it. So gays and lesbians won't have trouble there.
Also, it's "LGBTQIA" now. Better watch what you say, you ignorant person. *irony off*
Paul23 wrote:
@TMM: Linda Sarsour wasn't the only organizer. I never said that. But she was one of the persons at the top.
And that devalues the entire basis of the march? So i could take certain views from a member of the Trump administration, or of the right-wing, and use that to devalue the entire thing?
Well, then that's a really stupid thing to do. Do I go out and wear a slave outfit, to show support to the black people, whose ancestors were slaves? No, because that's stupid.
Mostly because slavery is illegal and unverally decried by the vast majority of people, whereas racism against people from the Middle East and discrimmination based on religion is still rife and being pursued by the people in power.
I am probably on a different standpoint as you on the abortion thing then. I would allow it, when a woman got raped.
You're one step better than Trump then. As he wants to ban it outright completely, and has already made an Executive Order based on this stance, using it as part of a basis for a protest seems perfectly reasonable.
There is no gender pay gap. To be accurate, it's around 3-7% and it only occurs, because men negotiate their contracts better. The main problem is, that women work in jobs, which are not well paid itself, whilst more men work in well paid jobs.
Also women work less time in average, because they take time to raise children.
I also addressed his stance on maternity leave which can give rise to various concerns which ties nicely into this.
But it is true there is a gap in pay based upon gender. No it's not entirely due to pure discrimination. And there is a lot of variation and discussion about what that gap is and what causes it. That's a whole other argument.
As relation to the point of Womens March, it was a part of their reasoning and wider into general discrimination. On that point the BBC today released a, admitedly small study, showing that people with a Muslim name are less likely to get invite to an interview than people with 'normal' names. It's this genearl discrimmination that is a focus, not the small details which are still debated.
"Then there's his whole LGBTQ stance."
Gonna be honest, i don't get your response here or what it has to do with the Womens March as was the discussion.
And please don't confuse Gender with Sex. Gender being a social construct, Sex being the genetic and physical genitalia. There are lots of Genders and there are more than two Sexes. Heck, by having more than two Sexes there must be an equal number of Genders at least. Some people (tumblr ) go overboard on the Gender issue, i agree, but it's a small minorty.
Paul23 wrote:
@Alak: The womens march was mostly non-violent. It was mostly nonsense, but that's a topic for another day.
Oh i wanna hear this
If you want to, fine.
What was the womens march protesting for? Womens rights? Please name me one right, which women don't have in the US, that men currently have. Or at least one, which is threatened by Trump. Then tell me, why they wore hijabs, the main symbol for supressed women in islamic states, who wear them, because they have to? Why was the womens march organized by Linda Sarsour, a person, who is FOR the sharia-law? Sharia law or womens rights...pick one, you can't have both.
Abortion is not a woman's right? And they should just accept Trump saying "breastfeeding is disgusting", "grab them by the pussy" and "she was bleeding out of her whatever"?
Have to agree here. I feel like they were protesting because of the way TRUMP treats woman, not necessarily the rights they have.
PCM.Daily NFL Fantasy Football Champion: 2012 PCM.Daily NHL Prediction Game Champion: 2013 PCM.Daily NFL Prediction Game Champion: 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2021
TheManxMissile wrote:
Probably because Trump is a xenophobic racist, and Obama isn't. Actions will be responded to differently based upon their reasoning and cause. Trumps base reasoning is highly questionable, hence the reaction is so strong and outspoken. It's not helped by his administrations reactions to the reactions, which is somewhere between laughable and downright socipathic.
Agreed.
Although if the whole of America reacts to everything Trump does like they have done up until now it's going to be a very long 4/5 years. At some point they just need to calm down and stop protesting every single policy.
So what should they do? Stand aside while their country is being destroyed?
No, but there is a balance. Constantly protesting every decision will be just as destructive as not protesting at all.
At the end of the day there was a democratic election and, electoral system flaws aside, one side won and one side lost. You can't have a democratic system in place and then riot whenever you lose a vote. There comes a time when you have to accept the result and move on.
I agree here. When you protest everything rather than specific things, it takes the substance away from what really matters. Take the Senate confirmations for instance. The Democrats repeatedly say they will filibuster every pick for the Supreme Court, when Gorsuch is perhaps the best they could of hoped for (an originalist rather than a interventionist conservative). Then they filibuster DeVos, who has literally no right to be Secretary of Education. They should definitely push against her, but by doing the same to Gorsuch they take the meaning out of it and it seems like nothing but baseless pandering.
The same can be said for protests in my opinion. I am all for peaceful protest, but you need to pick and choose battles or the battles are meaningless.
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy
I'm just slightly less liberal than everyone else 
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
