this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
251 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19126 readers
2229 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 108 points 1 week ago (9 children)

Trump’s policy agenda includes a Congressional bill to define government-recognized genders strictly as male and female, as assigned at birth.

I have to wonder what is going to happen when the law runs headlong into science here. Because sure, this might primarily affect trans-folk, but they aren't the only ones who defy strict binary gender.

[–] Carnelian@lemmy.world 85 points 1 week ago

I believe their official stance is simply that any “expert who thinks they know better than the duly elected president” will be fired or ignored

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 65 points 1 week ago

Just have to look at climate science for an example of science taking a backseat to political will.

[–] draneceusrex@lemmy.world 41 points 1 week ago

Intersex and the rest will be ignored and marginalized, just like always.

[–] TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org 36 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I have to wonder what is going to happen when the law runs headlong into science here.

They'll double down even harder like the failed war on drugs, despite the damage it's causing. As long as conservatives "feel" like something is the correct solution, it's the right way to go, all evidence, studies, and science be damned.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Bookmeat@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Science?? Have you seen the abortion debate? There are vegetables classified as fruit and other horrors on the law books. Science got nothing to do with it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Why do you think that science has any place in the Trump administration?

[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I don't, but when you get to a courtroom, where there are standards of evidence, a judge is going to have to make interpretations that don't match up with the law.

Hell what happens when there is a typo on a birth certificate? If I'm assigned female at birth and am not genetically nor biologically female, what then? I just have to wait five times as long in bathroom lines? Does the government get to track my menstruation?

All of Trumpists' dreams of simplicity are defeated by asking just the most obvious questions. Imagine if I were smart enough to ask good questions.

Well, Trump replaced a bunch of federal judges with sycophants. And, fascists really don't care about the rule of law or logic.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] PortoPeople@lemm.ee 52 points 1 week ago

Just like a good little Nazi.

[–] DegenerateSupreme@lemmy.zip 35 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I was naive to think they'd try easing into this stuff, but — perhaps fortunately for public outrage and taking action — they are being loud and clear about it. Really just no subtlety whatsoever to the fascist horror.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Why be subtle? A majority voted for him, he has all 3 branches of government, and any opposition he has is too concerned about decorum to do anything to stop him. Thanks, non-voters in swing states!

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 22 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Misleading headline. Nowhere does the article mention anything about banning such care for adults.

It's still wholly and completely shit, but the headline and the first paragraph are (as of right now) incorrect.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 45 points 1 week ago (7 children)

It will be kind of hard for adults to get gender-affirming care, though, when the government enforces that your gender is fixed at birth.

load more comments (7 replies)

He also proposed excluding hospitals and healthcare providers who offer these services from Medicaid and Medicare

[–] MataVatnik@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

Repealing Roe V Wade was only about stopping late term abortions. It's not that hard to read the room with this orange dipshit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cultsuperstar@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

This is the man who said "you send your kid to school as a boy, and they change his sex and send him home a girl." He told his rally goers that schools do sex changes and they believed him.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

Hair plugs are gender affirming care for men. Those banned too?

[–] littlewonder@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Sucks that breast augmentation will be banned for girls under 18. And I assume likewise for guys regarding treatment for gynecomastia.

The party of rAtIOnAliTY aNd lOgiC would know that those are also gender affirming, right?

load more comments
view more: next ›