Even if it is referring to right-wing assholes, the US is one of the safer places in the world for LGBT folk. That's not high praise of the US so much as damnation for most of the rest of the world, but either way, one is definitely not in "FAR more danger" inside the USA than "almost anywhere else".
Abbott’s decision comes after the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles voted unanimously Thursday to recommend a full pardon and the restoration of firearm rights for Perry
Can we discuss how FUCKED the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles is too?
I’m not super well read on the subject, but is that not true? Or, if it is true, does it not matter?
The issue is that unconditional support of past American actions is no longer acceptable, and so all America's past actions are being re-evaluated. This is good! However, this also often results in people simply taking the reverse position than the accepted one. This is bad.
The atomic bombings were less bloody than a blockade or an invasion would have been, and the people who claim the Soviet Union was going to successfully invade the home islands or that Japan was about to surrender under any terms that would have been considered reasonable, pinky-promise, are just misinformed or deluded.
When most people say the Founding Fathers, they mean the big seven.
The sticking point for the Constitution (as early drafts did repudiate slavery) was the Southern delegates - though slavery had not yet fully developed as a core part of the region's identity, a lot of money was still tied up in the disgusting trade. Even so, the assumption was that slavery would die out in the South the same way it had done elsewhere - a trend which was reversed by the invention of the cotton gin.
Many of them owned slaves and had zero issues with slave ownership.
Three of the seven Founding Fathers were slave-owners.
One was restricted by law from freeing them due to the massive debts he ran up funding the Revolution (Washington) but came to believe that slavery was an unambiguous evil by the end of his life, making plans to free his slaves lawfully (which is a bit of a dick move considering the state of the law at the time, but 'we are creatures of habit, not originality').
One was a dickhead, but one who thought slavery was bad and should die out (Jefferson).
Only one was an unrepentant slaver (Madison).
The other four were staunch abolitionists.
This land was populated by people who “escaped” Europe because of “religious persecution” which actually meant Europe was getting all progressive and deeply philosophical so you couldn’t just shove your bullshit religion down other people’s throats anymore with impunity.
That was true for the Puritans who founded Mass and Connecticut. But for most of what would become the US, the exact opposite was the truth. Europe quite explicitly was NOT progressive and deeply philosophical about religion at the time - the Puritans on the Mayflower were fleeing, specifically, the Netherlands, which was a rare bastion of religious tolerance in Europe. Maryland was founded as a refuge for Catholics where all Trinitarians would have equal rights - far more radical than most of Europe. Pennsylvania was explicitly founded on religious tolerance by a Quaker. Rhode Island instituted freedom for non-Trinitarian Christians in the 17th century. European Jews fled to New York (after it was no longer New Amsterdam) specifically BECAUSE it was more tolerant than Europe. New Jersey, North Carolina, and South Carolina were religiously diverse from the outset.
Most of the Founding Fathers were deists or highly deist influenced, and all believed in freedom of religion.
Hagiography of the early days of America is dumb. But demonization doesn't provide a clear view simply by being the reverse.
They were unpaid because Egypt didn’t have the concept of currency.
You don't need currency to be paid.
They weren’t forced, they volunteered their services.
That's not what 'obligatory labor' means.
All work in Egypt was intermittent due to Nile floods.
Okay? All work for peasantry is intermittent due to the changing of the seasons. That doesn't mean you can't impose corvee on a peasant - in fact, peasant farmers are USUALLY the ones who ARE getting corvee'd precise BECAUSE their own ordinary labor is intermittent. The point of distinguishing corvee as intermittent is to differentiate it from slavery and ad hoc forced labor, not because picking up drifters who do small jobs instead of full-time factory workers changes the nature of a corvee.
It wasn’t for the purpose of public works, it was for the purpose of religion.
It was a public monument by the government. Your own link says, and I quote:
From the Egyptian Old Kingdom (c. 2613 BC, the 4th Dynasty) onward, corvée contributed to government projects.[6] During the times of the Nile River floods, it was used for construction projects such as pyramids, temples, quarries, canals, roads, and other works.
I'm not seeing the unskilled Egyptian workers we're talking about here miss any of these criteria.
What do you think 'obligatory labor' in the context of a 'feudal'-like system for the Pharaoh by commoners on a massive construction project is exactly?
Okay, great, I see our argument is "Words don't matter, corvee isn't corvee, unskilled labor isn't unskilled labor; because they lived in a barracks and were fed well".
If not slaves, then who were these workers? Lehner's friend Zahi Hawass, secretary general of the Supreme Council of Antiquities, who has been excavating a "workers' cemetery" just above Lehner's city on the plateau, sees forensic evidence in the remains of those buried there that pyramid building was hazardous business. Why would anyone choose to perform such hard labor? The answer, says Lehner, lies in understanding obligatory labor in the premodern world. "People were not atomized, separate, individuals with the political and economic freedom that we take for granted. Obligatory labor ranges from slavery all the way to, say, the Amish, where you have elders and a strong sense of community obligations, and a barn raising is a religious event and a feasting event. If you are a young man in a traditional setting like that, you may not have a choice." Plug that into the pyramid context, says Lehner, "and you have to say, 'This is a hell of a barn!'"
Lehner currently thinks Egyptian society was organized somewhat like a feudal system, in which almost everyone owed service to a lord. The Egyptians called this "bak." Everybody owed bak of some kind to people above them in the social hierarchy.
People are (sometimes willfully) confusing "the current status quo is fucked" with "there is no improvement resulting from the measures taken by the administration". The former is true - the latter is not.
Even if it is referring to right-wing assholes, the US is one of the safer places in the world for LGBT folk. That's not high praise of the US so much as damnation for most of the rest of the world, but either way, one is definitely not in "FAR more danger" inside the USA than "almost anywhere else".