this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2024
338 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19126 readers
2401 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
 

Summary

Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) confirmed her proposed resolution to ban transgender individuals from using bathrooms that don’t align with their biological sex at the U.S. Capitol is aimed at Rep.-elect Sarah McBride, the first openly transgender member of Congress.

Mace also plans broader legislation for similar bans on federal property and in federally funded schools.

McBride responded by calling for respect and kindness among lawmakers.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) stated Republicans are working on a resolution to address the unprecedented situation while ensuring dignity and respect for all members.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 108 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Mace is a Republican, so I can understand why she might assume all members of congress as sex predators. Think about the people she surrounds herself with. She must be terrified, poor thing.

Doesn't excuse bigotry at all. The bill is hatred on paper.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 5 days ago (1 children)

She's going to really hate it when masc presenting folks start using the women's room.

[–] [email protected] 57 points 5 days ago (3 children)

The goal is to make it illegal for trans folks to exist at all. Next, they'll come for the entire LGBTQ+ community. Then probably the atheists.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

They're coming for immigrants first, because they're a target with few legal protections and it will cause economic chaos to deport them. Hitler rose to power during the depression, Trump is creating those conditions.

Next they'll go after everyone left of Trump. To solidify authoritarianism.

Us trans folk and other minorities are scapegoats along the way. The scapegoats that they will make suffer so that people are scared to organize.

And yes, I'm scared shitless. But I think we're a means to an end, not the goal itself.

But that's the general agenda. This specific politician is likely operating more out of raw disgust and hatred than Machiavellianism.

[–] solsangraal 19 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Then probably the atheists.

atheists are 10000% on the list. get ready to apply (and pay) for your photo ID membership card at a state-approved church, and mandatory volunteer service to "spread the good news" (root out heathens)

btw, if you currently go to a progressive or liberal church that accepts gays, get ready to have your tax exempt status erased

edit: on thinking about this more, i think it's more likely they'll just declare evangelism (or whatthefuckever) to be the "official" religion of the united states, and force every church to adopt whatever new doctrine they want, acknowledging that trump is the head of the church, otherwise have all church leadership replaced by people who will capitulate

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

They are already talking about putting people on antidepressants and ADHD meds into work camps. Madness.

My only hope is that they're getting too excited and giddy about finally realizing the fruits of decades of preparation, and just go way too far, way too fast, to the point where anyone outside the ~30% or so who actually want fascism (not just temporarily convinced that they do) is abruptly hit with the reality of their decision and wake the fuck up.

They can (and will) silence as much dissent as possible, but if they're able to make the response so overwhelming that the ~70% or so can, for once, unite against these cancerous fucks...

Not gonna hold my breath but...

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 days ago

She must be terrified, poor thing.

I have no doubt that's literally true.

[–] [email protected] 90 points 5 days ago (1 children)

McBride is wrong. What's needed is not "respect and kindness," but instead contempt and ridicule for fascist bigots. Failing to properly ostracize them is part of how we got into this mess.

[–] [email protected] 51 points 5 days ago (10 children)

Yup, tolerant of the intolerant doesn't seem to be working.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Republican women are some of the most self-hating people in existence.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 days ago

Oh don't worry. They have enough hate for everyone.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

Some of the most Karen of the Karens.

[–] MagicShel 68 points 5 days ago (4 children)

That makes it illegal, right? You can't pass a law specifically designed to target individuals.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 5 days ago

Makes it a hate crime.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 5 days ago

That is my understanding, yes. However, I am not a lawyer, and even if I was, do laws/the Constitution even matter anymore?

[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 days ago (3 children)

It can be because of certain individuals, but it must apply equally to all.

You didn't usually see it applied to a real person, but there are countless examples of it being applied to large corporations. For example, Florida can (and has) passed laws that apply to (e.g.) all amusement parks that operate their own emergency services. It was pretty clear that it would only affect Disney World. But at least in theory, it would apply to any others that opened up.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

We're in the post-consequences part of our timeline for any elected official with R next to their name. As long as the god emperor isn't angry, legality no longer matters. Merrick Garland spent four years proving this to us. (And the election results sealed it.)

[–] tigeruppercut 66 points 5 days ago (1 children)

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) stated Republicans are working on a resolution to address the unprecedented situation while ensuring dignity and respect for all members.

From a guy whose idea of dignity includes convincing his kid to monitor his whacking off habits.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 days ago

tfw we still report what they say as if it ever mattered.

[–] [email protected] 54 points 4 days ago (2 children)

just get rid of seperate bathrooms. floor to ceiling stall doors and everyone uses the same stuff.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 4 days ago (1 children)

The GOP won’t do that. The point is to sow division.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 days ago (2 children)

yeah its just stuff like this is so stupid I want to take it out of the debate in favor of things that government should actually be doing. like. I dunno. healthcare.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 days ago

That is the whole point: to keep your mind occupied with stuff like this, so they don't notice how the ruling class is raping the planet and stealing the fruits of your labour. Culture war so you forget the class war. We must still fight this battle, but it is important to remember what they are trying to cover up with this, and attack them for it, as well.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago

Why do that when you can fight about the one person in congress with a different pee pee hole?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Even better make every bathroom a “family” bathroom. Only 1 person at a time. Mandatory changing table and tampon dispenser by the sink

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 48 points 5 days ago (1 children)

In any other job, this would be a slam dunk sexual harassment suit, right?

[–] [email protected] 20 points 5 days ago (1 children)

From my understanding, 14th amendment protections are still being battled over in the courts. Many have sided in favor or sexual orientation or gender being something that should be considered in equal protection of the laws, but some have not, so this will probably be coming to the Supreme Court, especially if the majority in charge of everything see it as an advantageous time to do so.

Agenda 47, the immediate plans for implementing Project 2025, has eliminating gender affirming care as a key priority. More money was spent on anti-trans campaigning than on many other topics combined this election cycle.

In theory, the laws of individual states protecting LGBT people would still apply, but other parts of Agenda 47 call for economically hammering states that try to go against expanded executive power, sounding similar to how the national drinking age was raised by withholding funding for highways.

I think there is a time bomb on these protections right now, and I would be hesitant to count on them for very long. I feel like writing all this makes me sound alarmist, but that is how I feel based on what they've been saying and running on these last 8+ years. My best friends are gay, but also public educators. They're Republican leaning centrists, and don't seem to be concerned, so I may be off base, but I tend to trust people when they come out in the open as bad people without shame.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 days ago (1 children)

One thing to remember about Republicans is that logical dissonance comes with the territory. They're not worried because they're "one of the good ones." Or because they're one issue voters who ignore everything else the Republicans say that they're going to do. I've seen many Republicans who live in Massachusetts and enjoy the benefits provided by the liberal politics of the state while at the same time complaining about those same politics. People complaining about Obama care despite having been on Romney care for years, that sort of thing.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 29 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Someone should propose a house rule that bans sex offenders from the bathrooms. Looking at you Matt.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 32 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Mark my words, this will pass, even if only to set the stage for what trans people will have to deal with for the next four years.

Part of me expects regular motions to have her expelled entirely. And there's a non-zero chance that they'll just drop the threshhold needed to expel a member to simple majority because fuck what the Constitution says, they have control now.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 days ago

Saying it'll just be the next 4 years is very optimistic of you.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 days ago

Sounds like rep Nancy Mace needs a few thousand volunteers to send her some urine samples

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

I'm going to need to see the long form genetic tests that prove that Mace is a biological woman as well, then. It's only fair, right?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 days ago

The cruelty is the point.

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

Hang on, doesn't that mean the law can be challenged even if it passes? You can't discriminate against individuals or specific US businesses with legislature.

It's called a Bill of Attainder.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago

They never cared about trivial things like "legality"

[–] [email protected] 25 points 4 days ago

This is going to get complicated. The only way to be sure that, for example, Nancy Mace is actually the "she" "she" says "she" is is to check. And if we do that, to be fair, we gotta check everyone which means were going to discover that so many allegedly "male" members (heh) of congress do not, in fact, have any balls. WHAT THEN NANCY?? WHAT THEN???

[–] [email protected] 26 points 4 days ago (1 children)

To all the people saying to put in gender neutral bathrooms, remember, the point is to sow division. The GOP doesn’t actually want solutions that make this issue go away.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Bold move for a woman with that bone structure to be shitting on trans people.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 days ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 days ago

"I don't care or understand, really, just whatever gets me the apple off of your desk."

"Humans are so strange."

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago

This is a great use of time. I'm sure it'll lower the price of eggs, which I'm told are more expensive than Faberge eggs thanks to Biden.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 days ago

After some fear-mongering and a knee-jerk reaction from Speaker Johnson we can boast that no dicks will go anywhere near Nancy Mace. Mission Accomplished!!!

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 days ago

They be fucking their Lolita express deliveries in those bathrooms, no legit politicians allowed!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago

Given their spoken intent to enact the provisions in project 2025, this follows along those lines and is only the tip of the iceberg. Given also that they have expressed a desire to return to the world of some 70 years past, what Johnson is likely alluding to is a return to separate facilities for trans akin to separate facilities for "coloreds" that existed back then.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Proposal: replace all bathrooms with gender neutral bathrooms

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

Alternative proposal: replace the offices of all Republicans with gender neutral bathrooms.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

Trump administration hasn't even started yet, and we already have public space segregation based on a protected characteristic.

load more comments
view more: next ›