Why do all the politicians who back stuff like this look like a thrice-divorced owner of a Cadillac with steer horns on the hood?
News
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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
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.
Remember, in most states, the legislature is not a full time job… so probably because that’s their day job
So far in history, we have not seen a peaceful cure for an infestation of conservatism. But, if we work together, we might have one at hand. Conservatives are bigots and should be openly shunned, outcast and marginalized from daily life.
Conservatism is not a protected class. It is perfectly legal to fire someone for being a conservative. It is immoral to employ or keep relationships with bigots. They should be openly treated as the bigots they are and excluded from polite society. And when they act tough and demand a fight, we should absolutely give it to them.
There is no such thing as a "good conservative".
ACAB… Also our country has a built in electoral conservative bias. This makes it so much harder to get anything done that is liberal. If Trump gets reelected this year it will not be because the majority of our country supports him. It will be because the majority of the country wants it.
Conservatism is not a protected class. It is perfectly legal to fire someone for being a conservative.
In that vein would it be legal and Constitutional to pass laws against conservatism? We can for bigotry but that's just one of their disgusting traits.
Even if it were legal and constitutional somehow I foresee some slight issues when it comes to enforcement and compliance.
Define "against". It would not be constitutional to legislate against someone for being a member of a political party, as that would be a violation of freedoms of speech and assembly.
Seems like this will become a legal bludgeon when one parent supports gender affirming care, but the other does not.
one parent ~~supports gender affirming care~~ isn't a hateful and/or ignorant bigot, but the other ~~does not~~ is.
Fixed it for you.
That will be interesting. Not sure if that is spelled out specifically in the law, but it could go either way if it isn’t explicit
Good to know kidnapping is still against the law. What a waste of time.
The article underlines the uselessness of the law very well:
In its latest attack on transgender youth, lawmakers in Tennessee passed a bill to stop the nonexistent problem of adults kidnapping kids and taking them to other states for gender-affirming care.
Emphasis, mine.
The problem is they’re going to say a minor can’t really consent to such procedures (like how a minor can’t consent to sex with creepy old men) and therefore it’s always kidnapping to get gender affirming care
The bill, S.B. 2782, was passed by the Tennesee House of Representatives on Thursday and is on its way to the governor’s desk. It amends a 2023 gender-affirming care ban, adding civil penalties for any adults who aid an unemancipated minor get out-of-state gender-affirming care without their parents’ consent
Still allowed with parents consent in this law.
For now. That’s what I’m saying they’re gonna get rid of.
Probably by saying something like “we don’t see this as a valid medical treatment, it’s outlawed here. Kids can’t consent.”
It’d be like jumping on a plane to rape kids. Sure, the raping kids is out of their jurisdiction. But they can make it “abduction” to get a kid on a plane for it.
You’ll notice, they care more about outlawing and stopping gender affirming care than they do child rape.
You’ll notice, they care more about outlawing and stopping gender affirming care than they do child rape.
Well yeah, they only participate in one of those.
They're just banking on all the parents being transphobic enough that nobody can get help from family friends