joe @ joe @lemmy.world

Sorry about that.

---

Read more

Posts

3

Comments

389

Joined

2 yr. ago

Ugh, a podcast? I know it's not your fault about the format but that's not super useful. Thanks though.

The whole country is impacted when rights are stripped from anyone. Look at what you're saying: If some people are living a good life then it can't be all that bad. Well, Elon Musk is living a pretty swell life so it doesn't matter how many homeless people die in the street from hunger tonight, right? I know it's kind of jumping the shark, but your rationale would call America "not that bad" if slavery were still allowed nationally but forbidden, in some states, right?

We should be judged by what those that have allow to happen to those that have not. Take a step back and look at the bigger picture.

Dude you're not going to get through this with shitty wordplay. They did in fact lose a US constitutional right. This isn't a debatable statement, it is a fact.

What is your end game here?

You don't think there is a camera aimed at the register?

It is true that 50% of the population lost this constitutional right.

Dude take 30 seconds and google it. Yes some of these places don't have exceptions for rape and incest.

Look at you being the chef's kiss* perfect example of what I'm talking about. Why should anyone take your word on how great or not great America is when you're this misinformed.

I mean, case in point: someone replied to my comment apparently not knowing abortion is banned in places in America. I don't even understand how that's possible it was everywhere on the news for months.

Do you really need me to Google this for you?

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/us/abortion-laws-roe-v-wade.html

Stricter than a complete ban?

You skipped over the whole 50% of the population lost the constitutional right to control their own body.

You skipped over a lot of stuff.

America is pretty bad, and we'll never get better if everyone keeps insisting we're not that bad.

You clearly didn't come up with this analysis yourself, can you point me to your source? It will save us both a lot of time because I have questions.

Oh. I was thinking private like a password.

Yes, except you give that card to all sorts of people, right? So it is really private? Identifying, yes, but private?

I'm sorry but I'm not following your point. I'm questioning whether the info on a license is really "private info". I am not suggesting that people be forced to give Twitter their ID

I think you may have added a "not" to my comment that isn't there. I am in full agreement with you.

Well, the law itself (I just looked it up) focuses entirely on race. I don't see how it even applies to the scenario in the OP.

From hearing you describe it, I am pretty sure I saw the headlines. Something along the lines of "the GOP doesn't think people of different races can be friends".

It seems that the law in question is pretty focused on not making white people feel uncomfortable about racism.

I haven't read the book in question, but I'm pretty confident the gist of the lesson is "it's okay for people to be different". What kind of broken person sees that message and says "no it's not"?

For reference, fifth graders are usually around 10 or 11 years old. Gifted or not they're almost certainly intelligent enough for this topic.

According to the article, there is a law that restricts teaching "divisive concepts". That batshit insane. "Divisive" doesn't mean it's inaccurate.