Remember guys, both sides are the same. We should probably vote third party or something. /S
this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2023
0 points (NaN% liked)
News
22876 readers
3799 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Biden could have prevented this by packing the court.
The outrage leads to donations.
That's an interesting precedent to set. That's your go-to retort?
Sure...and there's precedent already. The first two things Biden should have done in office was give us 15 justices and senators to DC and Puerto Rico.
However...the donations the Ds got for Roe being over turned were astronomical. It's lucrative for them to not fix problems and just bitch about them.
Remember, the lesser-evil is still evil and democrats did nothing to enshrine abortion rights in the constitution.
Democrats love this because it means they don't have to improve.
The Democrats could have passed a bill, but "enshrining it in the Constitution" would mean passing a Constitutional amendment. First, they would need a 2/3rds vote of Congress. That means that the Democrats couldn't have a slim majority - they'd need a large majority. Or they'd need to find Republicans willing to vote for a Constitutional amendment protecting abortion rights. Basically an impossibility.
Even if the Democrats managed to get the Constitutional Right To Abortion passed, they would need to have 75% of the state legislatures pass it. Democrats don't control that name state legislatures.
So perhaps the Democrats could have passed a national law, right? Except that the Republicans would inevitably filibuster this in the Senate. The Democrats could have changed the filibuster rules, but not all of them supported changing these rules. (Mainly because it would prevent them from stopping the Republicans if the Republicans regained the Senate.) Any law that was passed would inevitably have been challenged up to the conservative Supreme Court.
You could definitely criticize the Democrats for not pushing harder to pass a law guaranteeing abortion, but a Constitutional Amendment was out of reach.
So...with all that said...what should compel anyone to vote for the Democrats since they've decided they're not going to actually pursue anything to help women's rights?
Did you read what I wrote? It's not that they decided they weren't going to do anything. It's that the rules of the government limit what they can do with a small majority. They can't just unilaterally decide that they are passing a new constitutional amendment with a few vote majority in the House/Senate. They could try for a bill, but there they are limited by various other rules not to mention the conservative Supreme Court. If the Democrats had a big enough majority, they could get more bills passed.
And that being said, what's the alternative? Allow the Republicans to get into power and hope that they don't take away women's rights too much? Many Republicans have already declared that they want a national abortion ban. Others have said that they want to criminalize miscarriage and ban contraception.
Voting third party (thanks to our First Past The Post system) won't work. Sitting out the elections and not voting won't work. The best thing to do is get as many Democrats in office as possible from local positions to the highest offices. Then, put pressure on the higher up Democrats to get a women's rights bill passed.
At this point, and with our current political system, not supporting the Democratic candidate is essentially supporting the Republican one.
It’s that the rules of the government limit what they can do with a small majority
That has never stopped the R's from steamrolling their agenda through.
It's time to stop making excuses and demand some action.
Lol thank you for this. They're always trying to pull votes to 3rd party to undermine the only sensible candidate choice.
This is obviously a dumb question, but what the fuck are the legal requirements of a miscarriage? I can imagine her thinking she was glad she didn't have any more appointments or have to pay a huge hospital bill. What else was she supposed to do, and would she have known?
I once passed a kidney stone and they didn't say to do anything special with it so I threw it away. Same thing, right?
The legal requirement seems to be not to have one.
Stuff like that if people who have not a single clue about pregnancy make laws regarding pregnancy.
I grew up in Ohio.
Don't live in Ohio.
I live in Ohio and I vote.
I understand why people leave Ohio, for the same reason I understand why people leave Florida and Texas.
If you're fleeing for refuge, I'm with you. A lot of the US isn't safe for women, people of color, or trans individuals. But if you actually want to make a difference, you have to stay and vote.
Ohio just codified abortion access in our constitution and legalized recreational marijuana in a non-presidential election, by a sizable majority.
This speaks volumes. Use the voice you have. And when they stop listening, we'll burn it to the ground and start over.
This the Future Republicans want for their Daughters!