712
Cruz introduces bill to limit using preferred names, pronouns; critics note he uses a preferred name
(www.expressnews.com)
this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2023
712 points (98.6% liked)
politics
18966 readers
8 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
conservatives pick the weirdest most inconsequential hills to shit their pants on
Step 1: Pick an issue that is divisive*
Step 2: Boost it with stories about how bad the people on the wrong side are: won't someone think of the children?
Step 3: Watch the outrage donations roll on in
It's a playbook as old as time.
*Some people might call it divisive because one side is like "let's all become crabs and live in the ocean" vs the other side that's like "no let's continue using our opposable thumbs". But who am I to label whether one side is right and the other wrong?
Look, we don't get to choose if we want to be crab people, nature has just forced crab evolution on us
Oh great, the crab-apologists have showed up
Don't be so crabby
Crabs are the most perfect form in evolution. You will soon join us once you mold and reveal your exoskeleton, then you will know the perfection that are crabs.
chanting crab people crab people chanting
Crab people! Crab people!
crabification, dude
Carcinisation (American English: carcinization)
If you're going to correct someone, do it right.
You have it wrong, It's Gods will that we become crab people - it was ordained from the start of time
Look, I don't care what you do in the privacy of your own bathtub, but other people have to use the ocean and I don't want you putting any funny ideas in my kid's head about being a crab. His chitinous exoskeleton and claw are just a phase.
Your kid will be fine once he molts.
Step 3 is missing the part "and ignore actual issues that affect us all but solutions would make rich people less rich so it's better to distract them"
I think it is due to it not really being any loss for them if they fail to get something like that passed. It serves the purpose of the cheap "pops" of "sticking it to them libs", and if it passes then that is just a bonus. The whole point is like so many really stupid laws that "look/feel" like something was done but actually just wasted time or makes things just more annoying. So they are "seen" to be "fighting" the other team. Where as if they were to actually push something that requires real functional effort or could lead to massive loss of seats. They would then be seen as big losers and seen as the ego trippers that they really are. It is honestly shit that should just lead to them being put against a wall for all the intentional fucking around they are doing.