• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Are ANY lefties/progressives really in favor of this?

Max_mang

Muse
M
Joined
Jul 19, 2010
Messages
526
https://www.dailywire.com/news/biol...juvenile-detention-after-identifying-as-woman

TLDR: James Tubbs molested a 10 year old girl in a horrifying act just prior to Tubbs' 18th birthday. DNA evidence did not convict Tubbs until recently. Tubbs also plead guilty. He is now 26. According to this article, the DA decided to try Tubbs as a minor since Tubbs was 17 at the time of the crime, so the maximum sentence is 2 years. Also, Tubbs has declared (since being in custody, not before) that Tubbs now identifies as a woman and is now Hannah Tubbs. The DA has decided that Tubbs should be JAILED WITH FEMALE JUVENILES, even though Tubbs is a biological male and is 26 years old. (sorry for the scare caps but that is the main point of the article).

I became aware of the article because a friend (who used to consider themselves liberal but are now generally disgusted/fearful of what they feel is the current state of liberalism in the US) sent it to me. I feel the subtext is "SEE??", since I still consider myself a very left-leaning person.

The dailywire is a self-proclaimed conservative news source.

I've done some googling and cannot seem to find any center or left-leaning news sources reporting on this.

The DA is described in the article as "far-left". I feel strongly that I am a "far-left" person. I believe in levels of humans rights and freedom of speech that make lots of folks uncomfortable. I believe in tolerance for all types of people, no matter how weird or quirky. I care about marginalized people and trying to get them considered more mainstream.

That said, I am strongly opposed to anything the DA is doing in this case (as reported in the article and others I read, it could all be complete lies). I draw the line at people who hurt people, especially those that hurt children, and at people who try to game a system that is trying to be tolerant and progressive.

My right-leaning friend says - since I disagree strongly with the DA on this - I am an anomaly on the left, or perhaps I'm not what the left is anymore.

My question is, is that true? I know there are lots of lefties on this forum. Does ANYONE agree with what the DA is doing as it is reported in this article?
Is anyone else annoyed that this is what casual folks/fence sitters are told liberalism is?
 
I don't understand the objection to trial as a minor? If someone was mentally handicapped at the time of committing a crime, but then got flowered for algernoned, it seems that it would still be a trial of a mentally handicapped perpetrator.


Separately, why is there even questions about this? This is not the first time something happened like this. What is the normal process?
 
//personal opinion//

The incarceration of transgender people has been discussed in length in multiple threads, most notably the currently ongoing one, here on this board. It would be better to present this as a real world example in that thread than as a contextless new thread which will only serve as a place to reset everyone's arguments back to zero.
 
My question is not about the case, it's about how liberalism is defined/viewed/represented/ etc. Please read the entire post.
 
Max_mang said:
My question is not about the case, it's about how liberalism is defined/viewed/represented/ etc. Please read the entire post.
Click to expand...

Do conservatives normally try a crime committed by a. juvenile captured years later as an adult?
 
I feel a max sentence of two years is too lenient for the crime. Minors get tried as adults often for crimes. In my opinion (which means nothing), this is one of those cases, given how close to 18 he was at the time.

The bigger issue to me is jailing Tubbs with female juveniles in the present since Tubbs is a biological male and 26 years old.

My biggest issue (and what I was hoping to actually discuss) is that doing so somehow represents what liberalism is now.
 
Last edited:
Max_mang said:
I feel a max sentence of two years is too lenient for the crime. Minors get tried as adults often for crimes. In my opinion (which means nothing), this is one of those cases, given how close to 18 he was at the time.

The bigger issue to me is jailing Tubbs with female juveniles in the present since Tubbs is a biological male and 26 years old.

My biggest issue is that doing so somehow represents what liberalism is now.
Click to expand...

Do you have evidence other groups do it differently?
 
This isn't an us/them thing, but I appreciate you trying. And also skipping the major details to cherry pick. Clever arguers arguing cleverly and all that. Bravo.
 
JoeMorgue said:
//personal opinion//

The incarceration of transgender people has been discussed in length in multiple threads, most notably the currently ongoing one, here on this board. It would be better to present this as a real world example in that thread than as a contextless new thread which will only serve as a place to reset everyone's arguments back to zero.
Click to expand...

The heart of the issue is a juvenile/adult incarceration issue. The trans angle seems largely incidental.

We have a person that committed a crime while a minor and evaded arrest for several years until they are in their mid-twenties. Should that make their juvenile crime a matter for adult court? Maybe, maybe not.
 
Last edited:
Max_mang said:
This isn't an us/them thing, but I appreciate you trying. And also skipping the major details to cherry pick. Clever arguers arguing cleverly and all that. Bravo.
Click to expand...

We can't even begin to tackle the question if it is a progressive action without even establishing what the range of activity is.

What do other parties do?
 
Max_mang said:
I know you can't. Please don't project to others.
Click to expand...

The answer to your questions do not exist in a vacuum. For one, being any sort of political persuasion doesn't mean they have a specific answer to an edge case ready to go.
 
Last edited:
Per the dailywire, fox news and other conservative news sources, the DA is putting a 26 year old biological male with a history of molesting young girls in a female juvenile detention center because Tubbs committed the crime before their 18th birthday AND has recently declared they are female (after arrest, not before).

The conservative news sources are implying this is because the DA is "far-left".

There are no center or left leaning news sources I can find reporting on this.

Is this truly a representation of what "the far-left" wants or is it just this DA?

As a far-left person, this is not something I agree with. I'm curious how others feel and hoping for some real discussion instead of the normal jive on this forum.
 
Max_mang said:
Per the dailywire, fox news and other conservative news sources, the DA is putting a 26 year old biological male with a history of molesting young girls in a female juvenile detention center because Tubbs committed the crime before their 18th birthday AND has recently declared they are female (after arrest, not before).

The conservative news sources are implying this is because the DA is "far-left".

There are no center or left leaning news sources I can find reporting on this.

Is this truly a representation of what "the far-left" wants or is it just this DA?

As a far-left person, this is not something I agree with. I'm curious how others feel and hoping for some real discussion instead of the normal jive on this forum.
Click to expand...

Left, in the general sense, generally implies someone of a socialist/communist/anarchist variety. Historically this is what it has meant to be a "leftist". Things get a bit wishy washy at the borders, such as with social democrats and democratic socialists, but that is neither here nor there.

This DA is at best a progressive liberal. Considering how insane this country has been going with "tough on crime" type politics, someone with fairly innocuous liberal/progressive values in the DA position is indeed quite radical.

Fox News describe progressive liberals as communists or leftists is nothing new.
 
That the political spectrum isn't the Periodic Table of Elements. You can't define it this way.

A person's political leanings don't render impossible them having an opinion

Finding a Leftie who likes guns or a Rightie who loves abortions is not like finding a molecule of gold with the atomic weight that isn't 196.96657 u or a lead molecule with 147 electrons.

They are fuzzy edged groups and almost nobody in them holds every single opinion as another person who can, honestly, describe themselves as the same point on the Left-Right scale.
 
Last edited:
JoeMorgue said:
That the political spectrum isn't the Periodic Table of Elements. You can't define it this way.

A person's political leanings don't render impossible them having an opinion

Finding a Leftie who likes guns or a Rightie who loves abortions is not like finding a molecule of gold with the atomic weight that isn't 196.96657 u or a lead molecule with 147 electrons.

They are fuzzy edged groups and almost nobody in them holds every single opinion as another person who can, honestly, describe themselves as the same point on the Left-Right scale.
Click to expand...

I think there's a line to be drawn between acknowledging that definitions change over time and that the right wing in this country is intentionally lying about their opposition, namely liberals.

What they mean by "left" isn't something we have to wonder about, because they'll frequently provide context clues like "Marxist", "communist", and so on. This isn't a case of language evolving over time, it's right wing propapagana meant to smear liberals as radical communists.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
I think there's a line to be drawn between acknowledging that definitions change over time and that the right wing in this country is intentionally lying about their opposition, namely liberals.

What they mean by "left" isn't something we have to wonder about, because they'll frequently provide context clues like "Marxist", "communist", and so on. This isn't a case of language evolving over time, it's right wing propapagana meant to smear liberals as radical communists.
Click to expand...

Listen the fact the one side is now completely unhinged post-fact conspiracy theorist is the only distinction I think it's useful to acknowledge.

"Doesn't Accept That Facts as a Concept Exists" overshadows everything else, and what was traditionally called "The Right" has completely drunk that Kool Aid, nor arguments there.

My only point is I can't imagine a less meaningful use of time then picking one action by one person and going "How does this define on the Left to Right Spectrum?"
 
Thank you JM and ST, I appreciate the comments.

Do you feel these types of incidents give the "completely unhinged post-fact conspiracy theorist" (I'm in total agreement with this assessment) side something true and inarguable to help get more fence-sitters on their side?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom