Online Dating Rights. Mail Order Brides
PragueVietnamMoscowGuatemala

FOUR REASONS American men seek romance abroad: Prague, Ha Long Bay, Red Square, small villages in Latin America. Somehow meeting a Czech, Vietnamese, Russian or Peruvian/Colombian/Brazilian woman for a date at one of these exotic places is incomparably more exciting than meeting a hometown girl at the local coffeeshop. Opponents of a man's right to meet foreign women online never stop to consider how enjoyable it is to travel/work/live abroad and learn new cultures and languages while seeking a marriage partner.
Online Dating Rights
November 23, 2017, 03:19:19 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Why IMBRA is ultra-Liberal, and the Shame of "Conservatives" who support it  (Read 4568 times)
Delphi_Programmer
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 613




Ignore
« on: August 23, 2007, 05:59:05 PM »

Here is why IMBRA is ultra-liberal, and why it is ridiculous and shameful that conservatives Republicans support it.

Below I outline four liberal principles that epitomize IMBRA, and provide non-IMBRA examples of each, along with details and examples of rants by the same conservatives who are silent about or supportive of IMBRA.

Liberal Principle #1
Punishing legitimate, legal businesses because some of their customers abuse their services.  Therefore, it must be the fault of the business ("trafficking" in women and girls), and not that of the actual abusers.  Using Anti-Capitalist politics.

Non-IMBRA example:  Suing the tobacco companies because people were too stupid to know that smoking causes cancer, and when they got sick it was the manufacturer's fault, not their own.  Every conservative host and pundit ranted and raved about this during the entire tobacco litigation.

Liberal Principle #2
Maintaining a criminal justice status quo that doesn't punish real criminals, and therefore creating laws that punish the multitude of honest, law-abiding citizens for the heinous and irresponsible acts of the few.

Non-IMBRA example:  Our revolving door criminal justice system, and laws that sanction everything from the use of public park property to how you are allowed to start your car in the morning (some places actually ban leaving your car running while you go inside because it might get stolen.  It is your fault the car was stolen, not the criminal's).  Many conservative and moderate hosts complain about these things.

Liberal Principle #3
Presuming that the government has the right to monitor and control the personal, private, social and family lives of individual citizens.  Creating "Big Brother" government

Non-IMBRA example:  Laws that sanction everything from the car you drive, the way you heat and cool your house, and where you can purchase land and build a house; in the name of "saving the environment" and controlling "global warming".  If you want to hear a rant about this, listen to the Mark Levin show, or any of Rush's environmental updates.

Liberal Principle #4
Using sensational stories, tear-jerking rhetoric and appeals to the emotions as the impetus to actions whether or not they adhere to the Constitution.  Finding loopholes and ways to change or "get around" the Constitution in order to pass an agenda because "Failing to do so may cost the life of one more poor, helpless victim".  Using "Poster Child" politics

Non-IMBRA example:  Run away gun control legislation after the tragedies at Columbine and other schools.  People like Rush, Sean Hannity and Tony Snow complain about this incessantly.

Illustrating the absurd by being absurd:
Imagine sanctioning Seven Eleven because their customers tend to be more "criminal"-like.  They hang around at night and abuse the alcohol, tobacco and over-the-counter drugs they buy there. Seven Eleven must therefore be "trafficking" in harmful substances to delinquents.  Your neighborhood grocery store, which sells the same products but doesn't "specialize" in them or sell to the same type of customer, is exempt.
Logged

Get government out of the Personals Ads and out of our personal lives.
VeteransAbroad
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1204


This is a subway in Russia. Poor country?


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #1 on: August 24, 2007, 01:11:06 AM »

Imagine regulating the dating behavior of African American men who use liquor stores in Harlem. Studies (however dated) can prove that the men in Harlem do or did, in fact, abuse alcohol, drugs and their wives more than the national average.

If you can regulate men who use dating sites, you must also regulate any other subset of Americans that can be identified as being more abusive to women than normal.

And you must not stop there: Studies have shown that gay men are more likely to have Aids so they must be stopped from saying hello at www.gay.com and bus stations and bars to unsuspecting naive young gay males arriving in the big city from thousands of miles away without friends and family as "support structures".

Another big problem is that IMBRA violates liberal principles like crazy as well.

Remember that the essence of why EC lost their challenge is because of the principle (from US vs Carolene Products 1937) that Congress can regulate commerce as long as it can be shown that they were behaving rationally, regardless of whether they were acting on correct information or not.

You have proven that the Republican politicians in Congress were acting irrationally because they were going against everything they have ever believed in (and what they said in 2003 to reject the same law).

But we can also prove that the Democrats were acting irrationally because IMBRA contradicts many of their most cherished positions:


Quote
Liberal Principle #1
Punishing legitimate, legal businesses because some of their customers abuse their services.  Therefore, it must be the fault of the business ("trafficking" in women and girls), and not that of the actual abusers.  Using Anti-Capitalist politics.

Non-IMBRA example:  Suing the tobacco companies because people were too stupid to know that smoking causes cancer, and when they got sick it was the manufacturer's fault, not their own.  Every conservative host and pundit ranted and raved about this during the entire tobacco litigation.

The Democrats are otherwise fighting tooth and nail to maintain anonymity on the Internet and they are fighting tooth and nail to stop background checks for men who use American domestic dating sites.
In addition, the Democrats (especially the hypocrite Judge Clarence Cooper) are fighting tooth and nail to maintain the rights of jailed convicts to have MySpace accounts and for registered sex offenders to use bus stops near schools (kids have to wait for the bus too).

Judge Clarence Cooper struck down the law against sex offenders using school bus stops.

Quote
Liberal Principle #2
Maintaining a criminal justice status quo that doesn't punish real criminals, and therefore creating laws that punish the multitude of honest, law-abiding citizens for the heinous and irresponsible acts of the few.

Non-IMBRA example:  Our revolving door criminal justice system, and laws that sanction everything from the use of public park property to how you are allowed to start your car in the morning (some places actually ban leaving your car running while you go inside because it might get stolen.  It is your fault the car was stolen, not the criminal's).  Many conservative and moderate hosts complain about these things.


Admittedly, the liberals are into punishing the masses and letting the actual criminals get a pass should they break through the barriers put up for everybody.

Quote
Liberal Principle #3
Presuming that the government has the right to monitor and control the personal, private, social and family lives of individual citizens.  Creating "Big Brother" government

Non-IMBRA example:  Laws that sanction everything from the car you drive, the way you heat and cool your house, and where you can purchase land and build a house; in the name of "saving the environment" and controlling "global warming".  If you want to hear a rant about this, listen to the Mark Levin show, or any of Rush's environmental updates.

Again...because this is a typical Democrat "posítivist law" attitude, we cannot say they were being irrational voting for IMBRA on this account.

Democrats believe that a democracy can take away anyone rights as long as the majority agrees...and since the US is not a democracy but a Republic...it follows that our Republic can allow Democrats like John Conyers to slip an outrageous law into the back of VAWA at the last second and get Congress to vote on it without reading it.

Quote
Liberal Principle #4
Using sensational stories, tear-jerking rhetoric and appeals to the emotions as the impetus to actions whether or not they adhere to the Constitution.  Finding loopholes and ways to change or "get around" the Constitution in order to pass an agenda because "Failing to do so may cost the life of one more poor, helpless victim".  Using "Poster Child" politics

Non-IMBRA example:  Run away gun control legislation after the tragedies at Columbine and other schools.  People like Rush, Sean Hannity and Tony Snow complain about this incessantly.

Columbine may be a bad example here because it highlighted a real problem, unlike IMBRA. Columbine was IMHO an advertisement to arm a few teachers at each school.

Here again, it is normal for Democrats to use "failing to make a new law will cost a life".

I guess you are correct that it was more irrational for Republicans to vote for IMBRA than for Democrats to do so...based on the examples you gave.

But I can come up with some more reasons why the Democrats completely violated some more important principles of their faith:

IMBRA makes it illegal to cheat on your wife. It is the first federal law against marial infidelity.

IMBRA almost makes it illegal to lie to another human being socially. The reason I say "almost" is because IMBRA makes a point of making it not a crime if a man lies on the dating site IMBRA forms about who he is and what states he has lived in and whether he has any arrests or convictions.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2007, 01:28:20 AM by VeteransAbroad » Logged

Honest journalists will see the Tahirih Justice Center as a front for the NOW that appeals to conservative "Security Moms". Match.com and Yahoo and MySpace are actually working for total Internet regulation because they don't want clients to be anonymous and they want small dating sites/forums dead.
VeteransAbroad
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1204


This is a subway in Russia. Poor country?


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2007, 01:31:53 AM »

One cannot rationally go through life believing "more people will die if we don't pass this new law and that new law".
Logged

Honest journalists will see the Tahirih Justice Center as a front for the NOW that appeals to conservative "Security Moms". Match.com and Yahoo and MySpace are actually working for total Internet regulation because they don't want clients to be anonymous and they want small dating sites/forums dead.
khankrumthebulgar
Guest

« Reply #3 on: October 02, 2007, 05:02:06 PM »

Conservatives who voted to reauthorize VAWA and IMBRA lost in their reelection bids. And I will not vote for any Conservative who panders to the Feminists. I will stay home and not vote before I will do that. I plan to leave the US upon retirement anyway. As I am sick of how the US treats Men. They obviously don't want us here. My attitudes towards Women have changed, based on how I have been treated. And How I have seen Men treated in this country.
« Last Edit: October 02, 2007, 07:38:02 PM by tristan » Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!


Google visited last this page August 15, 2017, 04:09:45 AM

MKPortal ©2003-2006 mkportal.it