this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2023
236 points (98.4% liked)

politics

18073 readers
3061 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FuglyDuck 98 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Ladies and gentlemen: I give you the party of "small governemt".... who apparently feel we're all so incapable of managing our affairs that we need a court appointed magistrate to weigh in on if we should get life-saving medical care... (* golfclap *)

[–] TheJims 12 points 6 months ago

Government small enough to fit in a woman’s uterus.

[–] [email protected] 57 points 6 months ago
[–] [email protected] 46 points 6 months ago (2 children)

The answer to this is people can’t move because they’re tied to their fucking job living paycheck to paycheck.

How can you move out when you have a mortgage and you need to sell your house to move? What about your family? Does anyone realize how difficult it is to move your entire family somewhere else?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago

A real states rights person would support an initiative where every ten years there's a jubilee where you can get reimbursed to move to a better state. That would finally start to allow the "vote with your feet" thing to give the "laboratories of democracy" the feedback they need.

[–] chitak166 0 points 6 months ago

That means it's impossible.

[–] billiam0202 46 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

The fun part about these cases challenging abortion is, if the courts delay them long enough they can dismiss them for lack of standing.

The cruelty is the point.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I can't fathom how my relatives under 50 still remain in texas.

They basically hate women, and want to push vindictive bullshit - even if this woman is afforded agency over her own body, Paxton has said he'll sue the docs nurses and medical center.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/dec/08/ken-paxton-texas-abortion-kate-cox?fbclid=IwAR2Api0ssTqcPh9G-I1FxVEFA17zwK4AK9Yya_xOIKa8mkOa1o57GtED0gM

They took books about slavery out of the plantation gift shop. https://lemm.ee/post/17334830

I remember Ann Richards, what the fuck, Texas.... what the actual fuck.

[–] CaptainSpaceman 10 points 6 months ago

Gerrymandering is cool, aint it?

[–] [email protected] 34 points 6 months ago

running out the clock, denying this woman justice and forcing her to suffer just for suffering's sake. remember this in november. they'll try to pretend they've softened their position, they'll talk about reasonable exceptions, they'll pretend they're just here to defend a little life but at the end of the day the republican party platform is to identify people they consider substandard and cause them as much pain and suffering a possible. it's the common thread behind everything they try to do.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 6 months ago

Never underestimate the cruelty, misogyny, arrogance, of the GOP.

[–] ObviouslyNotBanana 24 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

What a reasonable government you have over there on the other side of the Atlantic.

/s

[–] [email protected] 14 points 6 months ago (4 children)

We're not all idiots.

A month ago, Ohio voters added reproductive rights to our constitution. Now, abortion is guaranteed to the point of fetal viability. Beyond that point, you just need the medical opinion of a single doctor that the abortion would improve the health of the mother (including her mental health) to secure an abortion.

If this woman gets on a plane to Cleveland this morning, she can be back in Texas tonight, minus a doomed fetus.

[–] ObviouslyNotBanana 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Oh I would never say that everyone is an idiot. Just that your system of governance is badly constructed.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago (2 children)

It's a beta that went to production.

[–] FlyingSquid 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

And the biggest bugs aren't being patched.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The code went live and we have upgrades and patches ready to go, but first we need product manager approval from 50 stadiums full of competing tribes of angry baboons.

[–] FlyingSquid 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

And the weirdest part is that people vote for the baboons to go into the stadiums to approve the patches!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

Well, the baboons made the rules so we have to vote for them

[–] Restaldt 1 points 6 months ago

It was a temporary solution thats now the foundation

[–] automattable 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Didn’t Texas make it illegal to go out of state to get around their bans?

[–] Boddhisatva 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yes, it is S.B 8. It is a completely messed up bill that allows anyone to sue someone for $10,000, plus court and attorney fees, for performing an abortion or aiding or abetting in an abortion. In other words, if someone gets an abortion, anyone can sue them, their doctor, the nurses, the Uber driver who took them to the clinic, their husband who agreed with their decision, or anyone else who could be said to have helped them get an abortion.

One bit of good news is that, in one case, a judge decided that you need to have standing to sue. That means that in order to sue someone under the law, you need to be personally affected by the abortion.

San Antonio judge Aaron Hass dismissed Gomez’ case Thursday, and that dismissal pointed to a central problem with S.B. 8: it has the potential to allow the wrong people to wage abortion lawsuits. Hass announced the dismissal of Gomez’s case from the bench and explained that plaintiffs like Gomez, who have no connection to the prohibited abortion and have not been harmed by it, do not have standing suit under the statute.

More good news is that the law has been challenge before the Texas supreme court. They have heard the case in in coming weeks or months they will make a decision.

[–] automattable 5 points 6 months ago

Ok so not illegal— just too expensive for the poors. Sounds just right for the GOP.

Thanks for the detailed reply!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Aren't Ohio reps fighting the new constitutional amendment and it's not officially in the Constitution even though it should be?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yes, they are fighting it; no, they have not been able to block it from being added to the constitution. It became effective as of Thursday, December 7th.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Nice! Glad they couldn't block it from being added after 30 days. Hopefully people keep up the fight and get rid of these anti-democracy assholes.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

What about a financially poor 14 year old who was raped? She couldn't do that on her own. This woman is challenging the system for others.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

In Ohio, she could. No need to even notify her parents let alone gain their consent. That's my point: we aren't all monsters on this side of the Atlantic, even in bright red states like Ohio.

Kansas protected reproductive rights through constitutional referendum. It doesn't get much redder than Kansas.

I don't even think this is Texas or Texans. I think this is Ken Paxton.

[–] Nurse_Robot 20 points 6 months ago

We're all fucked

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 months ago

Another stunning example of personal freedom from The Greatest Country on Earth (Trade mark. Not to be used in comparison to any other nation)

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

Shit states gonna shit state.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I would love to know her voting history.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

I just want to know how Sue’s gonna vote now. If she’s changed, it better be for the better.