LovingHippieCat

I definitely agree they should be consistent, in other countries the drinking age is 18 like voting. Of course I think banning this shit is BS still though.

"Procedures" to them includes literally all gender affirming care. Therapy? Procedure. Puberty Blockers? Procedure. HRT? Procedure. Social Transition? Procedure. This will only ban federal support but won't actually ban gender affirming care entirely, mainly because that would take an act of congress. This is still bad and hurts all gender specialist doctors that get federal grants, which I have no idea how many of them there are.

The next step is congress banning it for everyone. They did 19 because that's them saying that even when you are old enough to vote and join the military you can't make a decision about your own body. Just a matter of time.

It would have been better for it to just have been banned and be done with it. Move on. Now, we will have the same issue we have with Twitter. People refuse to move on despite how terrible the platform is because they are addicted to it.

If it had been banned, it would have, likely, opened the door for a new social media landscape to take shape. Sure, banning isn't good, but turning into what it's becoming is, arguably, worse.

Ah I misread a bit of what you said. Thanks for the clarification.

Edit: Fixed the dates in the original post

I said almost 2000 years. It lasted from, officially, 476 BCE to 1453 CE, that's 1929 years. Which is almost 2000 years, like I said.

When it comes to the West, the empire officially was made in 27 BCE with the first Emperor. I don't think the republic really counted because all historical articles I can find say it lasted 503 years, not 1000. From 27 BCE to 476 CE.

Also, 753 BCE isn't the Roman empire. It was the founding of Rome itself, meaning the city.

Interesting, so instead of them stealing the actual Roman salute, they stole what they thought the Roman salute was. Sure the Italian fascists used it too, but the Nazis compared what they wanted, a 1000 year Reich, to what Rome had created when they had a massive empire that lasted 500 years for the western empire and almost 1500 for the Eastern years if they include the West and almost 1000 by itself. So they didnt just take it from the Italian Fascists just cause, they did it because they thought it was Roman as well, and associated it with their desire to replicate the Romans.

Thanks for the info!

Edited the years for the Roman empire after being called out for being wrong.

As social media exploded with condemnation of what some were calling a “Sieg Heil,” with some others applauding the world’s richest man’s gesture, there was also some speculation that Musk’s movement was more like that of an Imperial Roman general in the Gladiator mode.

Do people think the Nazis invented their salute? They took it from the Romans. To say it was actually a Roman salute is to also say it was a Nazi salute because they are basically one and the same.

And that was all laid out in project 2025. But people kept insisting that saying they would do that was just fear mongering. Like how saying they'd overturn Roe v Wade was. This shit is what they're planning and people need to finally fucking acknowledge that it's not fear mongering when you're talking about they're literal plan.

I once did that at Meijer for a switch pro controller, waited 30 minutes only for the person, who was supposed to have the key, just come over and rip the cardboard to get it off the locked hook. We only stayed because we had a Meijer gift card. Insane how long this kind of thing takes.

Harris wanted to raise taxes on those making 400,000 just like biden, it didn't disappear at all. She also talked about introducing an unrealized gains tax on those with gains worth more than 100 million. You can't say she didn't want to increase taxes on the rich unless you ignore her policy proposals.

There were 3 that I found but apparently, when i looked them back up for this comment, two were written by the same person on different news sites so may as well be the same article so you're right, there aren't a many articles about it, although i wouldnt be surprised if more are written over the next few days.

And if they're just copying the IMEU press release then that brings into question where are they getting that 19 million figure? Moves the issue from the news organizations to the IMEU, which is probably worse than just a news org being wrong.

I hadn't even noticed how small that sample size was. 474 is a tiny ass study. This kind of poll should have been conducted with far more participants if it wanted to be taken more seriously. At least 1000. It's an online pollster, so it's not like it'd be impossible to get that many.