Perhaps that is a good example of SC overreach, which can then be discussed during negotiations. As to whether a publicly funded event (versus private) can be gender-segregated - well that's a slippery slope and another discussion entirely. Your contention that "there is insufficient basis for the claim that passing the override law will…
Perhaps that is a good example of SC overreach, which can then be discussed during negotiations. As to whether a publicly funded event (versus private) can be gender-segregated - well that's a slippery slope and another discussion entirely.
Your contention that "there is insufficient basis for the claim that passing the override law will lead to tyranny" is your opinion and obviously not one shared by the majority of citizens. As you have no worries you are welcome to keep your money invested within the country, just as those concerned about the future of civil liberties are well within their rights to withdraw their funds.
We've played this out, but I'll just mention in closing that you keep referring to rights as if someone's arguing for freezing people's accounts (as was actually done before the Likud came to power) or shutting them up. We've been talking about what people should do, not what they can do. Oh, and I seriously doubt that many of the people who are sure we're headed for tyranny are actually taking their money out of the country or buying gold and stocking their bomb shelters, as one would expect if they believed their own posters.
Perhaps that is a good example of SC overreach, which can then be discussed during negotiations. As to whether a publicly funded event (versus private) can be gender-segregated - well that's a slippery slope and another discussion entirely.
Your contention that "there is insufficient basis for the claim that passing the override law will lead to tyranny" is your opinion and obviously not one shared by the majority of citizens. As you have no worries you are welcome to keep your money invested within the country, just as those concerned about the future of civil liberties are well within their rights to withdraw their funds.
We've played this out, but I'll just mention in closing that you keep referring to rights as if someone's arguing for freezing people's accounts (as was actually done before the Likud came to power) or shutting them up. We've been talking about what people should do, not what they can do. Oh, and I seriously doubt that many of the people who are sure we're headed for tyranny are actually taking their money out of the country or buying gold and stocking their bomb shelters, as one would expect if they believed their own posters.