|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On March 06 2018 05:14 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2018 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:On March 06 2018 05:07 LegalLord wrote:On March 06 2018 04:57 Mohdoo wrote:
Perhaps this is my not so normal upbringing speaking, but if I may take a few steps back:
Let's say you have a family member who you agree with on basically nothing. It's just that their genetics are kinda similar to yours. An uncle or something.
What is the value add of this individual? You see them at thanksgiving. They are your mom's brother. He lives across the country. Why in the world are people holding on to these meaningless people? The ways people approach "family" is really stupid. I firmly believe family is not determined by genetics. This sob story about "HOW CAN YOU JUST WRITE OFF YOUR UNCLE FOR SOMETHING AS MINOR AS CHEERING FOR GENOCIDE??", I ask myself what this bozo was doing to begin with. Who cares? Family is what you make of it. Your attitude on this point is lamentable, but given your previous posts on anything related to family matters, expected. I do not think you would be convinced by anything that could be said if the bolded is your attitude towards family members. It is my attitude towards family members that don't have actually personal value. If your uncle is asking what you do for a living, the relationship doesn't matter. They may as well be a dude on a bus. I suppose the simple answer is that some of us don't feel that way. Plenty of family members (or close friends) who I consider close who for one reason or another I haven't talked to in up to a decade - but it doesn't mean they don't matter. I guess if your attitude towards family is that "more distant uncles are expendable" then a "well fuck them anyways" attitude is more appropriate. Sounds like a pathetic way to live, though.
Hypothetical. Let's say you are gay. Let's say you have a family member who literally thinks gay people should be killed, and hurls abuse at you the second they see you.
This is only a hypothetical because I don't think you're gay and don't have a family member who feels that way, but a lot of gay people DO have family members who feel that way.
Who is it that has the problem here? Is the gay person letting politics run their lives by disengaging from the family member who treats them with open contempt?
|
On March 06 2018 06:38 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2018 06:35 Plansix wrote:On March 06 2018 06:27 Saryph wrote:
I mean he just said he thinks Mueller has something on Trump from the campaign, that Trump Jr. Told his dad about the meeting with the Russians, that people in the campaign were colluding. Is he high? Surely his lawyer has quit since he went on tv. He is an idiot and doesn’t understand what is happening? Trump employs some real morons who have literally no idea how serious this stuff is. A lot of them could go to jail for a very long time. Either Nunberg is incredibly stupid or is incredibly fucked and really wants a plea deal. It might be both.
It is one thing to resist a subpoena. That can be totally normal. But you don’t go on TV saying “arrest me” because the FBI is going to call that bluff.
|
Who is it that has the problem here? Is the gay person letting politics run their lives by disengaging from the family member who treats them with open contempt?
To be fair, this isn't a political problem, but a religious one. That being said, it's kinda weird that we actually need to go into ELI5 because some people pretend to be too dumb to understand.
|
On March 06 2018 05:48 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2018 05:36 Danglars wrote:On March 06 2018 04:57 Mohdoo wrote:
Perhaps this is my not so normal upbringing speaking, but if I may take a few steps back:
Let's say you have a family member who you agree with on basically nothing. It's just that their genetics are kinda similar to yours. An uncle or something.
What is the value add of this individual? You see them at thanksgiving. They are your mom's brother. He lives across the country. Why in the world are people holding on to these meaningless people? The ways people approach "family" is really stupid. I firmly believe family is not determined by genetics. This sob story about "HOW CAN YOU JUST WRITE OFF YOUR UNCLE FOR SOMETHING AS MINOR AS CHEERING FOR GENOCIDE??", I ask myself what this bozo was doing to begin with. Who cares? Family is what you make of it. I see LL already touched on what's eyebrow-raising here, so I'll be short.. I don't think recent discussions about how politics have ruined family relationships like with mom and brother is comparable to an uncle located across the country. It's almost like people feel guilty about letting politics corrupt the family bond, so suddenly they transfer near interpersonal relationships to distant relatives. If you can't keep politics and religion separate from the closeness of a family unit ... stick with the family instead of the country. You're probably just going to make things worse. With "actual" family members, I strictly don't discuss political issues we disagree on. Abortion, GMOs and any "alternative medicine" stuff is strictly off limits for me and my mom. It just doesn't matter. Here views on GMOs simply don't matter to me. She won't be the reason the world is worse. I don't mind that her views are anti-science because she simply has no reach. If she has no reach, I have no incentive to change her mind. There are plenty of other things in the world to discuss. There is no shortage of topics. Discussing contentious political issues with "actual" family members is a horribly terrible idea.
Sane perspective.
On March 06 2018 05:50 LightSpectra wrote:
"So what if they're literally advocating for you to be murdered? Don't be so divisive as to let politics ruin a good, healthy family relationship. If you just put away your opinions at Thanksgiving, it shouldn't be such a big deal that they are literally promoting your death."
Hold on now. I thought we were talking about political discussions not some fringe extremist saying somebody should kill your ass. I don't really think you need to sink to some far-right straw men to actually make a point here. Maybe you are that kind of dude, but seriously man, reconsider.
>>My mom watches FOX news and it has literally torn my family apart!
...
>>They're literally advocating for me to be murdered!
Seriously man, reconsider. I don't want to imagine your mom coming in here and saying her son had political disagreements with her, then suddenly starting talking about family advocating his murder like some crazy person.
|
|
|
On March 06 2018 06:41 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2018 05:14 LegalLord wrote:On March 06 2018 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:On March 06 2018 05:07 LegalLord wrote:On March 06 2018 04:57 Mohdoo wrote:
Perhaps this is my not so normal upbringing speaking, but if I may take a few steps back:
Let's say you have a family member who you agree with on basically nothing. It's just that their genetics are kinda similar to yours. An uncle or something.
What is the value add of this individual? You see them at thanksgiving. They are your mom's brother. He lives across the country. Why in the world are people holding on to these meaningless people? The ways people approach "family" is really stupid. I firmly believe family is not determined by genetics. This sob story about "HOW CAN YOU JUST WRITE OFF YOUR UNCLE FOR SOMETHING AS MINOR AS CHEERING FOR GENOCIDE??", I ask myself what this bozo was doing to begin with. Who cares? Family is what you make of it. Your attitude on this point is lamentable, but given your previous posts on anything related to family matters, expected. I do not think you would be convinced by anything that could be said if the bolded is your attitude towards family members. It is my attitude towards family members that don't have actually personal value. If your uncle is asking what you do for a living, the relationship doesn't matter. They may as well be a dude on a bus. I suppose the simple answer is that some of us don't feel that way. Plenty of family members (or close friends) who I consider close who for one reason or another I haven't talked to in up to a decade - but it doesn't mean they don't matter. I guess if your attitude towards family is that "more distant uncles are expendable" then a "well fuck them anyways" attitude is more appropriate. Sounds like a pathetic way to live, though. Hypothetical. Let's say you are gay. Let's say you have a family member who literally thinks gay people should be killed, and hurls abuse at you the second they see you. This is only a hypothetical because I don't think you're gay and don't have a family member who feels that way, but a lot of gay people DO have family members who feel that way. Who is it that has the problem here? Is the gay person letting politics run their lives by disengaging from the family member who treats them with open contempt?
I actually do know of a similar case in my own family (no specifics, but it does involve close family members and severe disagreements on something not dissimilar to that), and I know well how it does breed resentment and animosity. In such a case perhaps it could lead to that but as it happened there were enough people willing to play peacemaker (often in a more aggressive fashion) to resolve it. Thankfully.
What if it weren't the case, where the "gays should be killed" individual wouldn't ever stop and no one would make them? That does fall under one of the cases where you might see an exception. However, if you read back a bit further, I'm not saying such exceptions don't exist - just that they are claimed far more often than they actually exist. Despite the scare stories I've read about gays being exiled from the family, in reality I've seen that more often than not it's something that people come to terms with without having to resort to that.
There's always a "what if" to which the answer is that you have to distance yourself. The problem is that too often the reality is more akin to being quick to judge and slow to seek to understand. A lot of the examples that have actually been given of real circumstances are not of the type where cutting contact is reasonable.
|
|
|
I had a long conversation with my remarkably still alive grandfather about Trump and The Wall. He was super excited about The Wall and how it would turn things around. I showed him pictures of the Rio Grande and how a wall being placed there would cut off our access to the river. Then I discussed net negative migration from Mexico. Then I discussed how we have actual fortified walls where they make sense (check out any borders in cities in Texas). Then I discussed the futility of walling off the Sonoma Desert in light of nobody actually making the desert run anymore because the Arizona housing boom is over. I could have discussed Visas and Greencards and the immigration system we actually have but we didn't get to that. All kinds of empirical liberal facts.
My grandfather then made it clear it was about the brown tide. I wish I could remember exactly the words he used but it was super clear. I respect my grandfather's willingness to openly grapple with what Trumpism is really about without resorting to sorry 'no no no but uuuu' responses.
|
On March 06 2018 06:52 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2018 06:41 iamthedave wrote:On March 06 2018 05:14 LegalLord wrote:On March 06 2018 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:On March 06 2018 05:07 LegalLord wrote:On March 06 2018 04:57 Mohdoo wrote:
Perhaps this is my not so normal upbringing speaking, but if I may take a few steps back:
Let's say you have a family member who you agree with on basically nothing. It's just that their genetics are kinda similar to yours. An uncle or something.
What is the value add of this individual? You see them at thanksgiving. They are your mom's brother. He lives across the country. Why in the world are people holding on to these meaningless people? The ways people approach "family" is really stupid. I firmly believe family is not determined by genetics. This sob story about "HOW CAN YOU JUST WRITE OFF YOUR UNCLE FOR SOMETHING AS MINOR AS CHEERING FOR GENOCIDE??", I ask myself what this bozo was doing to begin with. Who cares? Family is what you make of it. Your attitude on this point is lamentable, but given your previous posts on anything related to family matters, expected. I do not think you would be convinced by anything that could be said if the bolded is your attitude towards family members. It is my attitude towards family members that don't have actually personal value. If your uncle is asking what you do for a living, the relationship doesn't matter. They may as well be a dude on a bus. I suppose the simple answer is that some of us don't feel that way. Plenty of family members (or close friends) who I consider close who for one reason or another I haven't talked to in up to a decade - but it doesn't mean they don't matter. I guess if your attitude towards family is that "more distant uncles are expendable" then a "well fuck them anyways" attitude is more appropriate. Sounds like a pathetic way to live, though. Hypothetical. Let's say you are gay. Let's say you have a family member who literally thinks gay people should be killed, and hurls abuse at you the second they see you. This is only a hypothetical because I don't think you're gay and don't have a family member who feels that way, but a lot of gay people DO have family members who feel that way. Who is it that has the problem here? Is the gay person letting politics run their lives by disengaging from the family member who treats them with open contempt? I actually do know of a similar case in my own family (no specifics, but it does involve close family members and severe disagreements on something not dissimilar to that), and I know well how it does breed resentment and animosity. In such a case perhaps it could lead to that but as it happened there were enough people willing to play peacemaker (often in a more aggressive fashion) to resolve it. Thankfully. What if it weren't the case, where the "gays should be killed" individual wouldn't ever stop and no one would make them? That does fall under one of the cases where you might see an exception. However, if you read back a bit further, I'm not saying such exceptions don't exist - just that they are claimed far more often than they actually exist. Despite the scare stories I've read about gays being exiled from the family, in reality I've seen that more often than not it's something that people come to terms with without having to resort to that. There's always a "what if" to which the answer is that you have to distance yourself. The problem is that too often the reality is more akin to being quick to judge and slow to seek to understand. A lot of the examples that have actually been given of real circumstances are not of the type where cutting contact is reasonable.
But how is the person on the receiving end of whatever treatment to know if they should take it seriously?
I've known a lot of LGBT people in my life, and a lot of them have very fraught relationships with at least someone in their family. But a common thread also emerges; that the family who essentially drove them away later regretted it and tried (usually unsuccessfully, as it would be years later and the resentment from the original treatment had become ingrained) to mend fences, or driving them away caused secondary problems in the family.
I find it hard to put the onus on the person who's getting abused, rather than on the abuser. In an ideal world we might all be Gandhi-like beacons of wisdom (though that might be YMMV issue as I know some find Gandhi controversial), but in reality when someone you've loved rejects you for attempting to just be yourself - as most LGBT people consider the coming out process to be that exact thing - the natural reaction is to be extremely upset, and if that pattern continues for even a few weeks, let alone months or a year, why wouldn't you cut them out?
To tie it into things in this thread; I can't imagine a Jew is going to respond favourably to discovering their brother has become a neo-Nazi. That's more than a 'agree to disagree' kind of issue, isn't it?
|
On March 06 2018 06:38 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2018 06:35 Plansix wrote:On March 06 2018 06:27 Saryph wrote:
I mean he just said he thinks Mueller has something on Trump from the campaign, that Trump Jr. Told his dad about the meeting with the Russians, that people in the campaign were colluding. Is he high? Surely his lawyer has quit since he went on tv. He is an idiot and doesn’t understand what is happening? Trump employs some real morons who have literally no idea how serious this stuff is. A lot of them could go to jail for a very long time. Either Nunberg is incredibly stupid or is incredibly fucked and really wants a plea deal. It might be both.
Further update: the man is an attorney in NY, so they need to look at their BAR test because it didn’t make how a subpoena works clear enough.
|
On March 06 2018 07:09 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2018 06:52 LegalLord wrote:On March 06 2018 06:41 iamthedave wrote:On March 06 2018 05:14 LegalLord wrote:On March 06 2018 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:On March 06 2018 05:07 LegalLord wrote:On March 06 2018 04:57 Mohdoo wrote:
Perhaps this is my not so normal upbringing speaking, but if I may take a few steps back:
Let's say you have a family member who you agree with on basically nothing. It's just that their genetics are kinda similar to yours. An uncle or something.
What is the value add of this individual? You see them at thanksgiving. They are your mom's brother. He lives across the country. Why in the world are people holding on to these meaningless people? The ways people approach "family" is really stupid. I firmly believe family is not determined by genetics. This sob story about "HOW CAN YOU JUST WRITE OFF YOUR UNCLE FOR SOMETHING AS MINOR AS CHEERING FOR GENOCIDE??", I ask myself what this bozo was doing to begin with. Who cares? Family is what you make of it. Your attitude on this point is lamentable, but given your previous posts on anything related to family matters, expected. I do not think you would be convinced by anything that could be said if the bolded is your attitude towards family members. It is my attitude towards family members that don't have actually personal value. If your uncle is asking what you do for a living, the relationship doesn't matter. They may as well be a dude on a bus. I suppose the simple answer is that some of us don't feel that way. Plenty of family members (or close friends) who I consider close who for one reason or another I haven't talked to in up to a decade - but it doesn't mean they don't matter. I guess if your attitude towards family is that "more distant uncles are expendable" then a "well fuck them anyways" attitude is more appropriate. Sounds like a pathetic way to live, though. Hypothetical. Let's say you are gay. Let's say you have a family member who literally thinks gay people should be killed, and hurls abuse at you the second they see you. This is only a hypothetical because I don't think you're gay and don't have a family member who feels that way, but a lot of gay people DO have family members who feel that way. Who is it that has the problem here? Is the gay person letting politics run their lives by disengaging from the family member who treats them with open contempt? I actually do know of a similar case in my own family (no specifics, but it does involve close family members and severe disagreements on something not dissimilar to that), and I know well how it does breed resentment and animosity. In such a case perhaps it could lead to that but as it happened there were enough people willing to play peacemaker (often in a more aggressive fashion) to resolve it. Thankfully. What if it weren't the case, where the "gays should be killed" individual wouldn't ever stop and no one would make them? That does fall under one of the cases where you might see an exception. However, if you read back a bit further, I'm not saying such exceptions don't exist - just that they are claimed far more often than they actually exist. Despite the scare stories I've read about gays being exiled from the family, in reality I've seen that more often than not it's something that people come to terms with without having to resort to that. There's always a "what if" to which the answer is that you have to distance yourself. The problem is that too often the reality is more akin to being quick to judge and slow to seek to understand. A lot of the examples that have actually been given of real circumstances are not of the type where cutting contact is reasonable. But how is the person on the receiving end of whatever treatment to know if they should take it seriously? I've known a lot of LGBT people in my life, and a lot of them have very fraught relationships with at least someone in their family. But a common thread also emerges; that the family who essentially drove them away later regretted it and tried (usually unsuccessfully, as it would be years later and the resentment from the original treatment had become ingrained) to mend fences, or driving them away caused secondary problems in the family. I find it hard to put the onus on the person who's getting abused, rather than on the abuser. In an ideal world we might all be Gandhi-like beacons of wisdom (though that might be YMMV issue as I know some find Gandhi controversial), but in reality when someone you've loved rejects you for attempting to just be yourself - as most LGBT people consider the coming out process to be that exact thing - the natural reaction is to be extremely upset, and if that pattern continues for even a few weeks, let alone months or a year, why wouldn't you cut them out? To tie it into things in this thread; I can't imagine a Jew is going to respond favourably to discovering their brother has become a neo-Nazi. That's more than a 'agree to disagree' kind of issue, isn't it?
I mean it’s never perfect, but those who never even try to mend relationships with family and take a “cross them out forever” approach is doing themselves a disservice (it’s never about never getting into fights, it’s about working through it), especially if it’s for reasons like political disagreements. And by the way, actively telling someone that they should be stoned for being gay goes well beyond political disagreement, that’s more like harassment. I don’t exactly think the two are comparable.
LightSpectra is being hysterical and hyperbolic almost certainly. I don’t think taking the “my brother is supporting neo-Nazis” is correct because he shows every indication of being the type of person who would jump to conclusions for the purpose of moral clarity rather than seek to understand what’s actually being said. If Fox is claimed to be fascist then perhaps what’s being supported in Charlottesville is being exaggerated.
|
On March 06 2018 07:10 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2018 06:38 ticklishmusic wrote:On March 06 2018 06:35 Plansix wrote:On March 06 2018 06:27 Saryph wrote:
I mean he just said he thinks Mueller has something on Trump from the campaign, that Trump Jr. Told his dad about the meeting with the Russians, that people in the campaign were colluding. Is he high? Surely his lawyer has quit since he went on tv. He is an idiot and doesn’t understand what is happening? Trump employs some real morons who have literally no idea how serious this stuff is. A lot of them could go to jail for a very long time. Either Nunberg is incredibly stupid or is incredibly fucked and really wants a plea deal. It might be both. Further update: the man is an attorney in NY, so they need to look at their BAR test because it didn’t make how a subpoena works clear enough.
AFAIK bar exams focus more on legal concepts vs procedure
For example, the MA bar:
http://www.mass.gov/courts/docs/bbe/mabbe-july2015essay.pdf
|
On March 06 2018 07:27 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2018 07:10 Plansix wrote:On March 06 2018 06:38 ticklishmusic wrote:On March 06 2018 06:35 Plansix wrote:On March 06 2018 06:27 Saryph wrote:
I mean he just said he thinks Mueller has something on Trump from the campaign, that Trump Jr. Told his dad about the meeting with the Russians, that people in the campaign were colluding. Is he high? Surely his lawyer has quit since he went on tv. He is an idiot and doesn’t understand what is happening? Trump employs some real morons who have literally no idea how serious this stuff is. A lot of them could go to jail for a very long time. Either Nunberg is incredibly stupid or is incredibly fucked and really wants a plea deal. It might be both. Further update: the man is an attorney in NY, so they need to look at their BAR test because it didn’t make how a subpoena works clear enough. AFAIK bar exams focus more on legal concepts vs procedure For example, the MA bar: http://www.mass.gov/courts/docs/bbe/mabbe-july2015essay.pdf
Are you telling me that passing the BAR had nothing to do with basic practice of law? /s
|
I mean, I'm not a lawyer. I just thought the Game of Thrones references in that bar exam were funny.
|
how hard are the bar exams?
I've always wondered how difficult it is to get a passing grade on them (however their scoring works).
|
You accidently stumbled onto law firm humor and I was playing along.
The joke basically goes:
Passing the LSAT teaches you law school
Passing law school doesn’t really prepare you to pass the BAR.
Passing the BAR doesn’t teach you shit about being an attorney.
And it is totally like the MA bar to put some GoT references in the BAR. They don’t call us Passachusetts for nothing.
On March 06 2018 07:42 zlefin wrote:
how hard are the bar exams?
I've always wondered how difficult it is to get a passing grade on them (however their scoring works).
Depends on the state and there is a lot of variance. It mostly revolves around how many attorneys that state wants.
|
The bar exam is like 98% memorization of substantive law. It really has nothing to do with practical applications of legal skill. Many states pretend to have a practical component by having the examinees do something like draft a cause of action for a complaint, but it's so basic as to be worthless.
EDIT: And the bar exam isn't hard. It just requires diligence in preparation. States with low bar passage rates (like California) simply have tons of unqualified people taking the exam who graduated from unaccredited law schools.
The LSAT is hard.
|
|
|
That man is going to jail
|
I just wish the MA BAR just had a list of things you can’t ask the court to do, which include faxing a documents and emailing anything. It would save me a lot of time when we hire fresh attorneys.
Edit: So many people tweeting that interview and you pick Louise Mensch?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
