this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2024
365 points (98.7% liked)

politics

19090 readers
4151 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
(page 2) 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 80 points 4 months ago (5 children)

My ex-wife and I filed the requisite paperwork and a month or so later met downtown at the courthouse to finalize our petition for a no-fault divorce. We had filled out some of the paperwork incorrectly, scooted over to the law library around the corner and returned less than an hour later to wrap things up, paying a fee so incidental I couldn't be bothered to remember the amount.

No-fault is a near necessity for folks that want to take the high road out of a shitty situation. Going on to think of the massive cost savings, we're left not only with religion to blame for the curtailing of our rights under law, but also perhaps the legal profession that spawned many of these legislators. Fuck them all.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 4 months ago

Hey republiQan women - a new vista! A new opportunity to damage the quality of life for all your countrywomen - for the forseeable future - possibly permanently! Just vote like you always do! (Ha ha! I know we don't have to tell you that. You're very reliable!)

Oh! uhhh . . mmmigrant caravan! Umm . . . don't say gay! . . . uhh . . and so on. You know the words.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

If they succeed with this, it will still fail.

Fewer people will get married. Domestic violence will rise. "Till death do you part" gets a much more malicious meaning.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago (3 children)

If domestic violence rises, how is still "failing"? It's the kind of success those fuckers want.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

But it will not be the kind of violence they want tho a lot more of broken glass in the husband meal than man beating their wife

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 183 points 4 months ago (7 children)

Let's be honest here... they don't have a problem with no fault divorce in principal... they have a problem with women being able to file for divorce on their own.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 4 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago

No man is a principality

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 32 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Marriage is just made up. People can partner off with no need for state intervention.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Don't worry, they'll reduce women back to property, so being unmarried, unowned property will be VERY dangerous for the property.

[–] [email protected] 73 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Yes, but if the married couple across the street are getting tax and other advantages simply for being married that you and your unmarried partner are not getting, then that is an injustice. Either no one should get such advantages or any pair of people regardless of gender or race should be able to get them. Either get rid of state marriage or let anyone get married.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago

I think the people making the rules have other things in mind. Not fairness.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Easy: Just form a corporation.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 4 months ago (1 children)

"We got married" becomes "We incorporated a Delaware LLC that manages our assets through a Swiss Trust"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 4 months ago (4 children)

They seem to have more rights than real people.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 44 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

As big fan of the original constitution, I personally don't believe in any laws or technology from after March 4, 1789.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Found the tankie!

That's what that means right?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Own a musket for home defense, since that's what the founding fathers intended. Four ruffians break into my house. "What the devil?" As I grab my powdered wig and Kentucky rifle. Blow a golf ball sized hole through the first man, he's dead on the spot. Draw my pistol on the second man, miss him entirely because it's smoothbore and nails the neighbors dog. I have to resort to the cannon mounted at the top of the stairs loaded with grape shot, "Tally ho lads" the grape shot shreds two men in the blast, the sound and extra shrapnel set off car alarms. Fix bayonet and charge the last terrified rapscallion. He Bleeds out waiting on the police to arrive since triangular bayonet wounds are impossible to stitch up. Just as the founding fathers intended.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

Upvoted for choice comment and hysterical username.

[–] [email protected] 88 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

If you force the peasants to stayed paired off and breed, especially in desperate, abusive conditions, they will produce the best kind of exploitation livestock for our glorious capitalist owners: the desperate kind that tolerates any abuse.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (5 children)

Human stock. That's what we are.

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

That’s why they find our empathy for livestock to be a joke not worth enforcing.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›