In the US parties are large coalitions of a lot of different groups an interests and not all of them mesh well together. This is true of the Republican Party and the Democrat Party. To write off the divergence as being explained by upset, uneducated young males who spend a lot of time online seems naive. The population of such males is small and they are an even smaller percentage of the electorate. They might make the difference in a tight election but they do not explain the significant divergence in party association between males and females. Plus the divergence on gender between left and right is not limited to the United States. It is a phenomenon found in many other countries. So there's a lot more to it than a small demographic in a single nation.
Do you have evidence of a conspiracy to revoke womens' right to vote?
That doesn't explain gender divergence.
It would be restoration by proxy. I once had a friend who stole money. He did not know the person and could never find him again. To make restoration he gave an equal amount plus reasonable interest to a charity, anonymously. The charity was a proxy for the man from whom he stole.
I read about 50 books per year, one a week. Nothing sticks out as one leading a public debate on this question. Most published books aren't read by more than a few hundred people. Is there one you are thinking of that I missed?
That's a good argument for increasing the threshold of guilt for capital crimes. But of those legitimately and obviously guilty, do they owe a debt equal to their own life for murdering someone else?
If it is a public debate it'll be in the news. Private debates are like this. They may show up somewhere on the internet but nobody cares and it isn't represented in the public consciousness.
The Alliance Defending Freedom video tapes a sermon by a preacher specifically violating the rule and send it to the IRS, trying to bait them into applying the rule because they are confident SCOTUS will declare the rule unconstitutional. The IRS never takes the bait. They'd rather have the appearance of a rule than no rule at all. As it is it is mostly self-enforcing on most congregations.
The Alliance Defending Freedom video tapes a sermon by a preacher specifically violating the rule and send it to the IRS, trying to bait them into applying the rule because they are confident SCOTUS will declare the rule unconstitutional. The IRS never takes the bait. They'd rather have the appearance of a rule than no rule at all. As it is it is mostly self-enforcing on most congregations.
Instructions unclear: Joined the Trump campaign.
Some bars are private establishments. Those bars require memberships. The rest are public non-governmental establishments. These are open to the general public. Lewd behavior does not belong in any public establishment. If you want that type of environment, make it a membership only establishment.