|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is so silly on so many levels...even if you take feminazi doctrine literally. If this "man" is one of the new sensitive variety who sits down to piss, what threat is he to the feminazis? There are also probably butch lesbians with three tits who would not pass hormone doping guidelines at the olympics who...I suppose...would get accepted without a blink of an eye.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sadly, this issue is not so silly:
Here in glorious England, Mr Tony Blair's government used women only short-lists to select candidates between 1993/7 before the party fell foul of a legal challenge.
The High Court declared Labour's action illegal! Their use produced 35 of the 65 women elected to stand for the first time. NOW, we have 35 illegal female Members of Parliament in the House of Commons.
Furtively, the government has since 'rushed' a new Bill through the House introducing on 17th October 2001 the Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Bill. It went through all its madatory readings in less than a month and has since been passed into law.
Thus, it took only 28 days to to deprive Britain's 30 million men and boys of their absolute right to be parliamentary candidates on reaching the age of majority, a right they have had for 118 years since the reform Act of 1885.
Now, it is planned to have all-women short list in a least half of the seats at the next General Election:
They have 'not' said they will have all men short-lists in the other half ! ! !
Even now, laws are being enacted that can send men to prison, merely on the word, and without any evidence, of women ?
Ergo, if a woman alleges you attacked her . . . then off to prison you go.
This rigged equality has forcibly prevented the electorate from choosing a candidate of either
sex.
Because things were done so quickly and furtively, 99% of men are probably unaware they have now lost the unconditional right to be parliamentary candidates which they have held for over a 118 years.
I urge 'all men' to ensure that where there is a women only short-list the candidate is not voted for . . . MEN it is down to you.
Also, if any women out there truly believe in equality . . . then please assist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:27 PM June 11th, 2004 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
So...,
Your GULAG or mine?
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
A member of the outlaw gender.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
He's taking it to the US Supreme Court. It will be a critical decision to the future of democracy. Will they uphold selective discrimination based on sex? If so, it is the end of democracy as far as I'm concerned.
In any case, we owe guys like this a debt of gratitude for pursuing the case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They may uphold this based on the First Amendment right to freedom of association. Political parties may (conveniently) deemed to be private organizations, and the courts may simply say that they are entitled to make their own rules.
I might argue that the two main parties, Republican and Democrat, are a defacto arm of the government because they place such a significant filter on the electoral process, based on their over-arching influence, their financial resources, and their control over legislation in the forum of interest, be it local, state, or national.
But then, I'm and engineer, not a lawyer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They may uphold this based on the First Amendment right to freedom of association. Political parties may (conveniently) deemed to be private organizations, and the courts may simply say that they are entitled to make their own rules.
But they aren't making their own rules! If you read carefully you will see it was a state law that was being challenged, not the decision of the county Republican party. The law should be set aside by the SC precisely because it infringes on Freedom of Association!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RCW 29.42.030
At its organization meeting, the county central committee shall elect a chair and vice-chair who must be of opposite sexes; it shall also elect a state committeeman and a state committeewoman.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:30 PM June 11th, 2004 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
In order for there to be equality of the sexes, the "patriarchy" must be toppled and replaced by a gynarchy. (????)
Appearantly that IS the goal.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
A member of the outlaw gender.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
