this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
570 points (98.0% liked)

politics

19309 readers
2238 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Before the 1960s, it was really hard to get divorced in America.

Typically, the only way to do it was to convince a judge that your spouse had committed some form of wrongdoing, like adultery, abandonment, or “cruelty” (that is, abuse). This could be difficult: “Even if you could prove you had been hit, that didn’t necessarily mean it rose to the level of cruelty that justified a divorce,” said Marcia Zug, a family law professor at the University of South Carolina.

Then came a revolution: In 1969, then-Gov. Ronald Reagan of California (who was himself divorced) signed the nation’s first no-fault divorce law, allowing people to end their marriages without proving they’d been wronged. The move was a recognition that “people were going to get out of marriages,” Zug said, and gave them a way to do that without resorting to subterfuge. Similar laws soon swept the country, and rates of domestic violence and spousal murder began to drop as people — especially women — gained more freedom to leave dangerous situations. 

Today, however, a counter-revolution is brewing: Conservative commentators and lawmakers are calling for an end to no-fault divorce, arguing that it has harmed men and even destroyed the fabric of society. Oklahoma state Sen. Dusty Deevers, for example, introduced a bill in January to ban his state’s version of no-fault divorce. The Texas Republican Party added a call to end the practice to its 2022 platform (the plank is preserved in the 2024 version). Federal lawmakers like Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) and House Speaker Mike Johnson, as well as former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson, have spoken out in favor of tightening divorce laws.

(page 4) 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 31 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I'll be advising all of my daughters to never marry if that is the case.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 6 months ago (3 children)

The cons have been butthurt about the 60s for as long as I can remember.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago

If this ever happens, I will raise a volunteer army of foxy sex addicts to ensure adultery is committed. It’ll be like this Onion article but as a free, gender-neutral service. https://www.theonion.com/government-to-defend-marriage-from-dashing-reginald-st-1819568543

You think you don’t like no fault divorce? Then I’ll make it my fault.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

The ethos of these people is largely about enforcing the dominion of men over women.* This divorce stance is about disempowering women. Abortion is about disempowering women. The move they are about to make against contraception, about removing agency from women. Age of consent, ditto. Given the opportunity, they would absolutely remove women’s right to vote, own property, maintain credit, and on and on. This is the culture that’s dominating the Republican Party and they face very little meaningful opposition right now.

  • To be fair, they are also guided by a profound desire to enforce the racial dominion of what they perceive as white.
[–] [email protected] 87 points 6 months ago (6 children)

When Ronald fucking Reagan is too liberal for your party, I think it's time for self-examination.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago (8 children)

Those from the USA that grab the attention are not sane, but I assume there are sane people there. What are their take and outlook on this? What’s their outlook on the future, and are there developments in their outlook on the USA?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

This will reverse all the good done by those laws. Domestic violence, spousal abuse and murder, and suicide will all raise significantly. This is a terrible call that nobody who truly supports freedom could get behind. It makes me want to procure large amounts of glass bottles and cloth for no particular purpose at all.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 6 months ago (3 children)

I suppose I could call myself sane and I'm from the US. My outlook is pretty grim honestly. We have far-right "christians" trying to turn the US into a theocracy and install a dictator. It's real Hand Maid's Tail shit and it's scary as fuck.

I don't think we have crossed the point of no return yet but we are damn fucking close. I also don't know that there is going to be a way out of this without violence.

One thing I CAN say for sure, if Trump wins in November we have crossed that line and the US is going to be fucked for a long time.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Also semi-sane US citizen. Same feelings. Would not be surprised if there is a major civil incident within the next 20 years.

Lower class is fucked without anything to lose.

Middle class is getting milked dry to keep infinite growth alive.

Wealthy R class keeps making these rules for thee not for me proposals in order to seize control.

Wealthy D class, other than a handful of progressives, are just as corrupt with better marketing. Complacency over Israel's actions put some light on it at least.

These dinosaurs who are running these crimes against humanity won't retire from office.

R has been stupidly effective at wrapping up hate in "christian love." I can't even understand how people buy into this crap. Wealth and power is all they want. These social issues to keep people infighting is so blatant and obvious.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 127 points 6 months ago (17 children)

Easy fix, people will stop getting married. Give the younger generation another reason to not have kids.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Easy fix: marriage will become mandatory. Checkmate, libtards!

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago

Incels will be eradicated. How will the world go on?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Common law marriage!

Then people won't even get into relationships.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Shit, it won't be common if my ass is gone.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 41 points 6 months ago (3 children)

With no birth control or abortions, conception will become legally-binding marriage.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago

We're bringing back the shotgun weddings, boys!

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

And with child marriage looking to make a comeback, you can bet your ass that arranged marriage will also return.

Turns out the full Biblical definition of marriage is again, women and girls have no say in who they marry. Just wait. First they legalize child marriage, then they legalize arranged marriage. Got a debt to pay off? Just offer the guy you owe money to your daughter. Want to move up the social ladder at work? Have your daughter marry into a higher class. Don't worry about what she wants. Marriage isn't about "love", whatever that is. It's a tool for moving up in the world. /s

But it's almost like they want European-style feudalism back. The CEOs and billionaires become the new nobility, and we all become serfs, and we are basically already there. But, I have a plan. I'll join my liege lord's army and hopefully I'll serve honorably enough that he shall award me a fief and small parcel of land. Then y'all can move in and become my serfs!

[–] [email protected] 27 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Women tend to flee areas like that. Ask China how it worked out with the one child policy.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 months ago

I’m sure they’re counting on it being rather difficult to flee from most places in the U.S.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 6 months ago (2 children)

"Well that's easy to fix! We just have to prevent them from leaving without a male guardian's permission."

– Conservatives, probably

[–] [email protected] 16 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I guessing a spike in fathers/husbands being hammered to death in their sleep. Let me do jury duty for those cases. We'll be home by lunch.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Jury nullification. Prosecutors and judges hate it, but it's not illegal!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 6 months ago (1 children)

"Jury trial for a feeeeeemale killing a man? Don't be ridiculous, that's immediate capital punishment"

While I'm being facetious, there's probably a reason why Project 2025 is specifically pushing for more and faster capital punishment

[–] [email protected] 14 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Fuck everything attached to that wish list.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

Looks like it's time for Utah to share it's Mormonism.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Then it will be premarital sex.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago

Only the best.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Next up: arranged marriages!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That would be crazy. The courts would have to rule that kids can be legally culpable. That would be wild shit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 49 points 6 months ago (5 children)

If the only families pumping out kids are Christian crackpots, that's a win for them. They want to out-breed you.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

(You can have kids without getting married)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Quiverfull folks are a whole bundle of crazy.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 50 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The crazy Christian families usually produce non christian kids.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 months ago (1 children)

usually

Please cite your source for that. The religious nutters who are adults now were once kids of religious families themselves.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Christianity in the U.S. is quickly shrinking and may no longer be the majority religion within just a few decades, research finds

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/christianity-us-shrinking-pew-research/

Losing their religion: why US churches are on the decline

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jan/22/us-churches-closing-religion-covid-christianity

In U.S., Decline of Christianity Continues at Rapid Pace

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2019/10/17/in-u-s-decline-of-christianity-continues-at-rapid-pace/

Pick a study we are in a decline for a reason. The craziest ones are the most motivated but they are the few.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (7 children)

The xtian activists definitely are aware of this overall trend (even if many of them will outright lie about it and many of the flock probably still think they are some kind of supermajority even if they have been losing adherents at about 1% every year for year after year) and it's exactly why they are agitating to fundamentally change this country to a xtian one.

They want to be able to COMPEL people to join/stay in their little book club. The only difference between xtian radicals and Islamists is where the retconning leaves off is different. Both of them worship the same god of "the" bible - Allah/Yahweh/Jehovah and both of them have the same dim view of unbelievers and women and outsiders, etc...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

Both of them worship the same god of "the" bible - Allah/Yahweh/Jehovah and both of them have the same dim view of unbelievers and women and outsiders, etc...

I agree, all religion is backwards. There's always a group they don't like. It just changes depending on your "God's" region of authority.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›