this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2024
340 points (94.7% liked)

politics

19243 readers
2244 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
 

HRC Article:

WASHINGTON — Last night, President Biden signed the FY25 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) into law, which includes a provision inserted by Speaker Mike Johnson blocking healthcare for the transgender children of military servicemembers. This provision, the first anti-LGBTQ+ federal law enacted since the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, will rip medically necessary care from the transgender children of thousands of military families – families who make incredible sacrifices in defense of the country each and every day. The last anti-LGBTQ+ federal law that explicitly targeted military servicemembers was Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, which went into effect in 1994.

Biden's press release:

No service member should have to decide between their family’s health care access and their call to serve our Nation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] leadore@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

It's called facing reality and dealing with it, which isn't nearly as much fun as mindlessly bashing oversimplified interpretations of click-bait headlines. Sure, it's nice to play the game online where you pick one issue and ignore all the other issues no matter how important they are, but in the real world you have to do the best you can do. The consequences of vetoing the bill would be huge, while one of the articles posted elsewhere in the comments here[1] talks about the number of children who could be affected and that there are very few circumstances where the provision in the bill would have an impact (e.g. it only disallows treatments that would result in sterilization, which doesn't include puberty blockers, etc.). But you're obviously not interested in seriously considering the details and practicalities of the real world situation, just enjoying railing against Biden, so have fun with that.

[1] edit to repost that link: https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2024/12/senate-passes-military-bill-with-provision-restricting-trans-healthcare/

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 7 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

Being willing to sacrifice the rights and protections of 'a few' minorities so that our already inflated military doesn't face delays in payment is exactly what Biden and the other democrats are being criticized for here.

That you agree that those rights are unimportant isn't exactly the impassioned defense you think it is

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 4 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Being willing to sacrifice the rights and protections of ‘a few’ minorities

Democrats aren't just willing to sacrifice trans people. They're eager to.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 6 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

"But protecting minorities just isn't popular. We'll never win if we're too woke."

[–] vga@sopuli.xyz -3 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

It's reasonable to suspect that woke politics was one of the issues that made them do so badly. As the elections have been lost already, there's no reason to maintain that pretense anymore.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Tell you what - go ahead and try to put into words what you think 'woke politics' are without being bigoted or breaking comm rules and then I'll be happy to share why I think you might be more comfortable hanging out at a nazi bar.

[–] vga@sopuli.xyz 1 points 54 minutes ago* (last edited 52 minutes ago)

The problem is not the core goals of woke, which I understand to be inclusivity and social justice. The problem is perfomative outrage and a relentless search for microaggressions. This will alienate people who might in other circumstances be -- if not allies -- at least sympathetic to the causes.

[–] leadore@lemmy.world -3 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Anyone who could vote and says they care about the rights of trans people better have voted for Harris or you have no standing on this issue.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 1 points 9 hours ago

Lmao

"Only people who were able to set aside their moral/ethical objections to genocide are qualified to speak on the topic of standing up for minority rights"

[–] StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 9 points 22 hours ago

The copium is strong in this one.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I already accepted your concession. You got what you wanted out of this bill. It's a shame they had to fund the military too, huh?