this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2024
306 points (97.2% liked)

politics

19125 readers
2307 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://beehaw.org/post/17202407

Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) introduced a bill this week to legally erase transgender people, entitled the “Defining Male and Female Act of 2024.” He claimed that the bill will stop what he called the Biden administration’s attempt to “replace biological sex with dangerous radical gender ideology.”

The bill is a long list of terms and definitions, where words like “father” and “girl” are defined with the words “male” and “female.” Those two words are then defined as “an individual who naturally has, had, will have, or would have, but for a congenital anomaly or intentional or unintentional disruption, the reproductive system that at some point produces, transports and utilizes [sperm or eggs for male or female, respectively] for fertilization.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 8 points 12 hours ago

He claimed that the bill will stop what he called the Biden administration’s attempt to “replace biological sex with dangerous radical gender ideology.”

bill attempts to stop something that was never occuring

Holy shit, it worked and it hasn't even been signed yet.

I don't know about y'all but I don't remember Kamala or Biden directly spreading information in favor of lgbtq+ values. That's mostly been Hollywood. There might be some lobbying going on and some shoulder rubbing, but... I mean, I have yet to even hear Biden say the word trans in any real context unless I'm wrong, here. Their stance is less a stance and more of a "you're human, you're cool too".

But the scene does seem to be that the Republican party can just claim they stopped Kaijus and Holy wars and their fanbases will eat it up, so...

"Hey, my podcast said you didn't exist yesterday."

...sorry to disappoint you.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Imagine if we had a senate that was focused on real political and social issues instead of who has the "right" to go to the bathroom. Fucking nonsense.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 hours ago

I mean they had the chance during 4 years didn't they

[–] [email protected] 7 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

No-one is "replacing biological sex" silly.

Gender is different from sex. It's related, but separate.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Sex and gender are also both very nuanced and complicated terms

[–] [email protected] 3 points 12 hours ago

Idk about the terms, but the concepts and definitions are, yeah.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 17 hours ago

“As a physician who has delivered over 5,000 babies, I can confidently say that politicizing children’s gender to use them as pawns in their radical woke agenda is not only wrong, it is extremely dangerous" has got to be the most unaware sentence I've ever seen.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 14 hours ago

Ya know, this "guy" goes by the name Roger and wears a suit and tie - why I bet he uses the "mens" bathroom... but how do we even know he's "male"? No seriously, how do we know he's not secretly just using the "mens" to try to assault/molest/peep on other alleged "men"?

I mean, if he's defining "male" then what follows, clearly, are inspections. He should not be exempt from them but, if he truly has nothing to hide, should be willing to be first in line.

wHaT ArE yOu HiDiNg "Roger"?

[–] [email protected] 26 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

They're not even replacing anything, they're just adding to it. Why do ya'll even care. Life is already so fucking miserable, even worse when you feel like you're not even in the right body. Fucking help people. Why is it that seemingly every politician just hates people? Why go out of your wait to be a representative just to make people miserable.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 14 hours ago

Because picking on ever smaller societal minority classes makes them look hard on the issues. Torturing people that otherwise don't effect you is easy political points for heartless monsters representing imbeciles.

Exploiting hatred instead of trying to resolve hatred really.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Someone should establish a Department of Senate Efficiency to look into whether that is an efficient use of the senates time.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (11 children)

If centrists wanted to be upset about bigotry against trans people, they could have started when they were blaming trans people for Harris losing. They could have started when their candidates were parroting Republican "boys in girls' sports" bigotry in their own ads.

The indignation here rings hollow because like all the pretended morals of centrism, it is hollow.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] [email protected] -5 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

Not stating anything in the article isn't true, but wouldn't it be better to post a less biased source? That website has a very obvious bias. The other day, someone used motherjones as a source. I know Lemmy is extremely left leaning, but left wing rags shouldn't be used as legitimate sources.

The headline alone should be enough to avoid that website. No one is trying to erase them. That's hyperbole.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 12 hours ago

Legally erase. It's not hyperbolic, it's literally what the bill is about.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 13 hours ago

I knew a man who got legally erased once. He was never the same after that.

load more comments
view more: next ›