Pelosi, Who Pushed Through 'Non-Gendered Language' Calls Herself Wife, Mother, Grandmother, Daughter

If the marriage law was, marriage is between a man and a woman, a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, would that be a problem?

 

That's the impression I got. She felt the guy was a total sleaze, but
a - she wasn't interested in his private morals, or lack thereof
b - she was more offended at the policies of the hard left and the anarchists.

 

You have a riot. Some 'feel the pain' of the rioters, regardless of what their grievance might
be. And usually, if you address their grievance, they will find another grievance.
I don't 'feel the pain' of everyone who riots (and that includes those on Capitol Hill)

 

What about a man and his dog, or a woman and her car, of a weekend marriage between
a man and two pubescent girls?

 

Gee. It really takes a principled woman to vote for Trump even while being convinced that he is a vicious rapist! Being convinced of that is much more of a thing on the left. Who knows, maybe she has voted Democrat all her life, but has had a change of heart. She may well feel the same way about Biden! Biden is also a vicious rapists according to the left's standards!

 

Well, we certainly WERE talking about Charlottesville, but it seemed that you moved onto the subject of the 'far right wing' more generally. Anyway, on Charlottesville, -- there WAS violence on both sides! As reported by the media!

So you're saying that the far left aren't at all bad! I think that you've shown who you really are!

 

Oh sorry! You're talking about feeling the pain of the rioters! You originally said, "someone who "felt the pain" of those burning cities." So I thought that you meant someone feeling the pain of all of those people affected by the destruction which took place in various cities. To be fair to Biden, I haven't heard him saying that he feels for the rioters. Plenty of his colleagues have pretty much said that though.

 

Well yeah, all of that is next on the agenda!

 

How can I do research on YOUR opinion? Why do you think that it was it necessary to REPLACE the existing gendered language?

You know perfectly well that many shops were totally burned down!

It was "all rather nothing" to you even BEFORE the Capitol riot! You clearly don't give a damn. You made yourself perfectly clear when you said that the far left isn't bad, after I gave you the opportunity to say that the far left AND the far right were bad! And you just couldn't do it!

Oh right, because ZERO cops were injured in the BLM riots!

Oh right, because ZERO shots were fired at the Capitol!

"Defund" means "prevent from continuing to receive funds!"

The Mayor of DC ordered that police change their procedures after the BLM protests! Remember the calls to "DE-ESCALATE?" That's why they were not as good at their job during the Capitol riot! Blame that useless piece of crap Mayor!

Now you know why the cops were so useless that day.

 

Oh, a vaguely on-topic post

There would be potential problems, however unlikely, given that there are some people who don't identify as either man or woman. It's also unnecessarily wordy. Would there be a problem with it reading "marriage is between two people" instead?

 

It's not the end of the world, but I can't see why the gendered language should not remain. As far as I know, the same sex marriage law in the US just means that states have to allow same sex couple to marry, regardless of their definition of marriage written in law. However, I'm sure that "people who don't identify as either man or woman" have gotten married under the marriage law which is gender specific, even the requirement to allow same SEX couple's to marry. Sex = man or woman. Nothing else. The left is probably going after that next.

 

You said, "Donald supported his nazi's." Who are are you referring if not his supporters?

There has to be an actual MARCH? Surely you can't be serious! EVERY SINGLE GOP politician thoroughly condemned the Capitol riot! However, MANY Democrats were SILENT during the summers riots.

Here:

 

What does using gendered language have to do with "casual modern norms and values?"

 

could just say a marriage is between two consenting adults, no need to add in gender

 

Well my own sensationalised commentary was merely inspired by the reporting that I had read. Perhaps I went a little too far!

Okay, so keep the gendered language, and add the alternatives. Simple.

Yes, that's why I said "IF."

I don't understand how you are unable to see that this:

"However, I acknowledge that as it turns out, it just replaced some gendered language in a rule, which is JUST AS ridiculous if it had been a ban on using gendered language."

...means that "as it turns out" it wasn't anything to do with a rule to do with using non-gendered language in the House.

 

You could. No need to remove gender either.

 

so no one can give even one example of a law that should be gendered?

 

no need to remove it, but going forward no need to include it in new laws, justice should be blind as to race and gender, laws should apply to all Americans equally

 

Then is there not actually a need to remove it from pre-existing laws such as marriage?

 

Who is this to?

 

never said there was, nor did she, she said gong forward, laws should be gender-neutral, changing all the old laws would be a massive undertaking and not possible imo

 

you can take a stab at it, it's to anyone, I am asking if anyone can think of any example of a law that needs to include genders

I can't think of any, so I ask as maybe I am missing something

 

Abortion law?

 

"SHE?"

 

why would that need to have genders, could say any person having an abortion - that covers it

if down the line men are able to have babies, it would cover them too, no new laws needed