View Poll Results: Was confiscating feminine hygrene products acceptable in this case?

Voters
51. You may not vote on this poll
  • I am a liberal and I thini it is ok

    3 5.88%
  • I am a liberal and I think it was wrong

    9 17.65%
  • I am a conservative and I think it is acceptable

    10 19.61%
  • I am a conservative and think it is wrong

    3 5.88%
  • I am other and think it is ok

    9 17.65%
  • I am other and think it was wrong

    12 23.53%
  • Other/Do not know.

    5 9.80%
Page 18 of 21 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 207

Thread: Was This Acceptable? [W:110]

  1. #171
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:10 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,422

    Re: Was This Acceptable?

    Throwing anything at another person... excepting things like baseballs and footballs in sporting contests... is battery if it hits. It is assault if it doesn't and/or the intent is conveyed.

    Having said that, the simple possession of a tampon by a woman in no way suggests, by solely by its mere presence, it is intended to be used in such a manner.

    Assault and Battery legal definition of Assault and Battery. Assault and Battery synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

  2. #172
    Professor
    Monserrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    04-29-14 @ 11:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Was This Acceptable?

    Quote Originally Posted by nota bene View Post
    I haven't voted in this poll. Do I think the state troopers should have made a different decision about the tampons? Yes. Their concern was with projectiles. Women did complain, and the DPS reversed its decision to confiscate tampons.

    But the larger issue isn't even the possibility that urine and feces or whatever would be thrown, even though this is assault. It's the attempt to thwart the work of the Texas Senate, the hope of preventing the vote, that's so terribly over the line. The Senate being prevented on June 25th in the last minutes of the regular session from voting created the need for a special session. That is ridiculous.

    And also pointless as it turned out.
    But the topic of this thread is about feminine hygiene products being confiscated and whether or not that that was wrong, I'm glad to see a couple more voted it wrong today. The fact that they decided to take away tampons and pads doesn't help improve the opinion that many women have of conservatives and the republican party in particular.

    And they wonder why they lose the single woman vote? They do stupid **** like this, put up absolutely no effort to connect to women and then cry about why they lose their vote come election time which is followed by a period where they blame women and call them stupid for thinking the Republican party doesn't care about women's issues.
    I believe half of the things I say and say half of the things I believe.

  3. #173
    Sage
    Moot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    27,472

    Re: Was This Acceptable?

    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    So you throw a pie and ruin someone's dry cleaning, costing them money and that is supposed to be no harm?

    Any object that strikes another person who was not willing to have that object strike them is an assault in my eyes, plain and simple....

    I don't give a **** if it doesn't make them bleed, they become a victim and that isn't the type of civil society we live in.

    Protesters like to talk about "Civil Disobedience" launching objects at people is not CIVIL no more than a small child's temper tantrum.

    Is that what you agree with? Protesters throwing childish temper tantrums?
    I don't think you're supposed to like it if you're on the recieving end of the protest. But it's amusing that a Libertarian would be against the first amendment right to free expression.

    Freedom of Speech (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

  4. #174
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: Was This Acceptable?

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    I don't think you're supposed to like it if you're on the recieving end of the protest. But it's amusing that a Libertarian would be against the first amendment right to free expression.

    Freedom of Speech (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
    Its not a first amendment right to throw **** at someone.

    If so, please point out to me where in the 1st amendment it says, "The right of the people to throw objects at others with the intent to strike others for the purpose of addressing their greivences will not be infringed"

    Thanks in advance.

    By the way... nowhere in your link do I see anything about throwing **** at people.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  5. #175
    Sage
    Moot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    27,472

    Re: Was This Acceptable?

    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    Its not a first amendment right to throw **** at someone.

    If so, please point out to me where in the 1st amendment it says, "The right of the people to throw objects at others with the intent to strike others for the purpose of addressing their greivences will not be infringed"

    Thanks in advance.

    By the way... nowhere in your link do I see anything about throwing **** at people.
    The beauty of the constitution is in it's simplicity and if it listed every known and unknown medium of free expression then it wouldn't be so simple now would it? So if you're looking for specifics you won't find it but you might find it in precedent, court rulings and writings of the fore father's intent.


    NTL, I'd love to see some of those conservative bullies say they were assaulted by a tampon. lol

  6. #176
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: Was This Acceptable? [W:110]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    So, the story is going around, you probably have heard about it. Big abortion debate/vote in Texas yesterday, and on fears that some protesters might throw them into the assembly, tampons and pads where being confiscated before people could enter the viewing area.

    Attachment 67150283

    Supposedly the Texas legislature heard from somewhere that they might be possibly used to disrupt the proceedings. So my question is, do you find this action justifiable?
    I think I don't want to meet the woman who uses CLIF bars as pads.

  7. #177
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,702

    Was This Acceptable? [W:110]

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Guns are okay, but tampons aren't....interesting.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/09/us...anted=all&_r=0



    Imo, throwing the tampons would have been expression of free speech and the only way I would object is if the tampons had been used. I'm glad the optics of conservative men armed to the hilt confiscating tampons from unarmed women went viral. I don't think it will be forgotten in 2014.
    That's why your opinion wouldn't matter in the real world. They rightly took away those that screamed and made a scene during the session, and they would have rightly arrested those who would throw the objects on the floor.

    Order must be secured.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  8. #178
    Sage
    Moot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    27,472

    Re: Was This Acceptable? [W:110]

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    That's why your opinion wouldn't matter in the real world. They rightly took away those that screamed and made a scene during the session, and they would have rightly arrested those who would throw the objects on the floor.

    Order must be secured.
    Thats the thing about freedom and/or civil disobedience is that it doesn't require permission.

  9. #179
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,702

    Was This Acceptable? [W:110]

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Thats the thing about freedom and/or civil disobedience is that it doesn't require permission.
    It does when you are on the legislative floor.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  10. #180
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,917

    Re: Was This Acceptable?

    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    Its not a first amendment right to throw **** at someone.

    If so, please point out to me where in the 1st amendment it says, "The right of the people to throw objects at others with the intent to strike others for the purpose of addressing their greivences will not be infringed"

    Thanks in advance.
    No, throwing stuff at others isn't a First Amendment right. And the subject line of this thread is deceptive--it suggests that what this was about was feminine hygiene products when it wasn't. It was about the state police following a tip and searching protesters' bags for anything that could be used as a projectile.

    I don't the DPS was thinking about what those products are used for; they were focused on preventing the senators or others from being assaulted. When women complained to Dem leader Kirk Watson and he then complained to the DPS, it reversed its decision. Oddly, this seems to be forgotten in the fauxrage over "tampon-gate."

Page 18 of 21 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •