NYS has plans for full blown fascism

[Eric day]

This is the beginning of the end in NY @haidut

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

This is the beginning of the end in NY @haidut

Well this isn't good. I am troubled by the word "forced" when the word "mandated" has been the usual.

 

[tankasnowgod]

This is the beginning of the end in NY @haidut

Did you actually read any of those bills?

Most of them obviously have to do with regulating "benefits and privileges," like school bills and work requirements.

I would think you would want to read the underlined ones. They may want you to think that some of those things apply to men and women, but probably don't.

Also, bills still have to pass the legislature. Just having something proposed doesn't mean it will pass, or even get voted upon.

Although, I don't think this is the "beginning" of the end for New York. We are already two years into the steep decline at this point.

 

[Eric day]

Did you actually read any of those bills?

Most of them obviously have to do with regulating "benefits and privileges," like school bills and work requirements.

I would think you would want to read the underlined ones. They may want you to think that some of those things apply to men and women, but probably don't.

Also, bills still have to pass the legislature. Just having something proposed doesn't mean it will pass, or even get voted upon.

Although, I don't think this is the "beginning" of the end for New York. We are already two years into the steep decline at this point.

I do agree that we are in a steep decline but, it isn’t looking good, it might be a good time to get out while we still can

 

[Eric day]

I do agree that we are in a steep decline but, it isn’t looking good, it might be a good time to get out while we still can

The most troubling part was what georgi and Danny previously talked about, “The governor can imprison without trial anyone she sees a medical liability”

 

[tankasnowgod]

The most troubling part was what georgi and Danny previously talked about, “The governor can imprison without trial anyone she sees a medical liability”

No Governor has this authority.

This is why I suggest to read the bill. My guess is that they will use the word "persons" or "individuals" which does not refer to living men and women, but instead, corporations or the straw man. It's a deceptive trick, as everyone has been issued an individual identity (your all caps name, JOHN DOE vs. John Doe), but the all caps name isn't you.

Regardless, it's most important to read the actual language if there is a bill you are concerned about.

At the same time, yes, I would think you should Escape from New York. I've thought that anyone there should have been doing and/or planning that for the past year and a half, though.

 

[haidut]

This is the beginning of the end in NY @haidut

Simply abomination.
Let's hope none of those pass. FWIW, some of those are already laws, and worse so, in other states. DC already passed a law, deliberately during a lockdown back in 2020, that all children 11 and older can consent to vaccination without parental consent. The law also mandates that insurance companies and school staff actively conceal vaccination status/documentation from the parents and lie to them when approached. The parts about STD vaccination without consent or age restriction is just scary, as many of those STD vaccines are very dangerous. The other proposed bills are basically what amounts to the transfer of the expired Patriot Act provision from the federal level to the state level, for whichever state are ready to embrace this fascist piece of legislation at the local level and codify its provision as state law(s).

 

[tankasnowgod]

Simply abomination.
Let's hope none of those pass. FWIW, some of those are already laws, and worse so, in other states. DC already passed a law, deliberately during a lockdown back in 2020, that all children 11 and older can consent to vaccination without parental consent. The law also mandates that insurance companies and school staff actively conceal vaccination status/documentation from the parents and lie to them when approached. The parts about STD vaccination without consent or age restriction is just scary, as many of those STD vaccines are very dangerous. The other proposed bills are basically what amounts to the transfer of the expired Patriot Act provision from the federal level to the state level, for whichever state are ready to embrace this fascist piece of legislation at the local level and codify its provision as state law(s).

Some of these issues run very deep, and have been brewing for quite a long time.

Yusef El recently posted this essay (written by Virgil Cooper) on some of the things that happen when you get a marriage license from the state. It states upfront, that you were "tricked" into signing over your children-


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wc3CYUGfLBU

 

[haidut]

Some of these issues run very deep, and have been brewing for quite a long time.

Yusef El recently posted this essay (written by Virgil Cooper) on some of the things that happen when you get a marriage license from the state. It states upfront, that you were "tricked" into signing over your children-


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wc3CYUGfLBU

Thanks. Wow, scary indeed.
I always thought it was very weird to get a "license" from the state to get married. Like, what does the state care, and why should anybody ask a govt for permission to get married? If marriage is arguably the epitome or personal choice/freedom, what business does the state have in not only regulating it but even deciding whether to allow/disallow it at all?? I mean, the state is arguably even less justified in getting involved in marriages than in abortions as you can make the argument that the former is truly a body-sharing choice between 2 consenting adults, while the latter may involve the life of a person who doesn't/can't choose yet and is in a completely dependent/vulnerable position deserving outside protection. Not arguing against abortions, just saying if abortion currently does not require a license then for marriage to require a license is absolutely ridiculous/absurd.
I guess the part about state control over children explains most of that "interventionism".

 

[Jinju]

My understanding about "license" requirement is for purposes of wills, next-of-kin, sometimes taxes etc. I have not viewed it as 'permission' but more like a bureaucratic procedure which provides a document for administrative purposes. It is totally arguable about whether the state should even be involved.
Historically, 'banns' was to verify if the person was already married because many states decree bigamy/polyandry to be illegal.

 

[haidut]

My understanding about "license" requirement is for purposes of wills, next-of-kin, sometimes taxes etc. I have not viewed it as 'permission' but more like a bureaucratic procedure which provides a document for administrative purposes. It is totally arguable about whether the state should even be involved.
Historically, 'banns' was to verify if the person was already married because many states decree bigamy/polyandry to be illegal.

It is a very much a license. That's why first you apply for a license and IF it is granted then you have official marriage and are issued a certificate. If it was only about wills, taxes, etc the certificate would be enough and that is the case in most countries - i.e. you get legally married without need to apply for license. Since it is an application for a license, a state can refuse to grant one and in that case you cannot get legally married. It happens all the time btw and recently it even happened because of a pandemic lockdown. So, if you apply for something that is required for marriage and that something can be denied, you are very much asking for permission to marry. Some of those reasons are legit (e.g. mental retardation) but some of them are frankly ridiculous (e.g. race, poor financial prospects on bride/groom, physical illness, even religious denomination). If you read up on the history of marriage licenses and the countries where they are still being used, you will see it is a remnant of the times when people were property of the state/king. The fact that it is still a requirement is maybe a reminder to the plebs of who's really in charge...

Marriage license - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"...A marriage license (or marriage licence in Commonwealth spelling) is a document issued, either by a religious organization or state authority, authorizing a couple to marry. The procedure for obtaining a license varies between jurisdictions, and has changed over time. Marriage licenses began to be issued in the Middle Ages, to permit a marriage which would otherwise be illegal (for instance, if the necessary period of notice for the marriage had not been given)."

Interracial couple denied marriage license

A Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have.

www.nbcnews.com

3 couples are suing Virginia after being denied marriage licenses because they refused to disclose their race | CNN

Three couples are suing the state of Virginia to overturn a law that requires marriage applicants to disclose their race in order to get a marriage license.

www.cnn.com

A License to Wed: Can You Be Denied a Marriage License? | JD Supra

In October of 2013, the Illinois couple of Colette Purifoy and John Morris were denied a marriage license because of John’s inability to consent. In...

www.jdsupra.com

DC Couple Denied Marriage License Because of Government Shutdown

A D.C. couple is starting the New Year on their honeymoon, though technically they still aren’t married.

www.nbcwashington.com

 

[Jinju]

It is a very much a license. That's why first you apply for a license and IF it is granted then you have official marriage and are issued a certificate.

Right! I confused license with certificate..... or rather use the words interchangeably.