News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
You’re right, we should stand silently aside while the vulnerable get chewed up by the far right. Something something then they came for me but no one was left to stand up for me
Aren’t being killed? My guy…. They have been being killed for a while now…. And hounded into suicide, abused, harassed. The harm is happening now. Yes, it can get worse, but it is already bad. I don’t think standing aside is the winning move you think it is. Stand with your allies. A very liberal solution there
So what's the end point? If the left doesn't win then where do we go?
We go towards death. They will kill more and the only hope is resistance. The only hope is we kill as many of them as they kill of us. That's the future down the line! However, most people will go into hiding because they don't want to be hunted down. So either way the only way out to survive is silence, is to lay low and hope democracy prevails. If it doesn't then be ready to run, hide, or KILL
I just don’t get why you think abandoning the vulnerable is a winning move?
I wholeheartedly disagree, and you’re not a friend
With "friends" like this, who needs enemies?
If they win, Democrats might put on a show about "justice" but they aren't going to deliver on it. This goes far deeper than just one rogue president or one political party. Trick question: If you represented a large group of decadent, sociopathic billionaires with essentially unlimited funds and control of the vast majority of information and media, who wanted to infiltrate American politics to regulatory capture and disable all rules that apply to themselves so they can take more and more and push their unpopular agendas, which political party would you infiltrate?
If you answered either "Democrat" or "Republican": you're wrong, the correct and actual answer is "both". Voting itself is not an actual sham (yet?) but you don't get to decide the actual important questions at the ballot box. You get a bunch of theatrics and rehearsed policy speeches to distract you from the fact that you're not being offered any real choices. You get to decide whether your oppressive police nanny state is going to be decorated with scary goons with scary guns, or cheerful rainbows and polite smiles, but you don't get to decide whether your going to end up in an oppressive police nanny state or not. They're both pursuing the same goals, just using different tactics so it doesn't look so obvious how perfectly aligned they both really are while they both keep moving the ball towards the endzone, one play at a time.
My rights are not a distraction.
Trans women are now being put into men's prisons and being forced off of their hormones. This is not a "distraction" it's genocide.
The sports thing is just a wedge issue they can use to salami slice our rights away, and when they win here they'll move on to the next thing, and the next thing, and the next thing until all of us are forced to either flee the country or die.
Two things can be true. Conservatism requires a boogieman to distract from the other heinous shit they're doing.
That doesn't detract from the harm they're doing to the distraction.
And when you're campaigning, you have to choose your messaging carefully. Even if you want to stop all of the atrocities happening to the boogieman, changing the conversation away from it can be a good strategy. If you react, you give them talking points and keep it in the news cycle.
El-Sayed did the right thing when he said that it's silly that we're discussing who can play what sports instead of talking about the economic and health care crisis. It's taking power away from the boogieman that has literally nothing to do with them and shifting the focus to a topic that actually affects the most voters.
The whole country needs to be shoved to the left before trans rights are cemented. It's deplorable that it's like that, but it means that it might not be the best strategy to make it the focus of messaging at this point. If they lose more ground by keeping it in the spotlight, it hurts trans people even more.
I know it's frustrating and demoralizing, but just because it's not the main focus doesn't mean work isn't being done to protect you.
You are making a huge mistake thinking that pro trans politicians are losing. Dems lost in 2024 without ever voicing a position on trans rights specifically.
MAGA talked about it so much, that the dems left it alone and we saw what happened. After that, in by-elections plenty dems who took a strong stance came out ahead.
Also, fuck you for responding to someone talking about their rights being taken away with a ‘Lol’ response.
Lol man so did the trans not vote for Dems because they were quiet. In that case fuck the trans if they don't know who their natural allies are. Holy shit, so if Dems don't pander to trans they won't get their votes? No wonder trump won
You're saying Trump's victory was dependent on the small percentage of voters who are trans and not the massive percentage of the population that routinely doesn't vote?
Oh, I see, you're one of those. Ta-ta, windbag...
trans make up such a small portion of the population, i seriously doubt they have significant voice in the party to make it viable for it to be part of a dem presidency in fact it might even is a death sentence for a campaign, because of how pervasive it is,go ahead and act antitrans. and not ever Dem voter is pro-trans, the ones that lean more to the right are usually very dismissive of them.
Article 2 of the Convention: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.
That's the reality of denying essential medical care to trans inmates (thus mutilating their bodies and encouraging suicides) and forcing them into men's prisons (putting them in physical danger of being r*ped or murdered or both), but all you have to say to that is "idk lol whatever buddy" because you do not give a shit if my sisters are tortured to death in federal r*pe dungeons.
Lol because it's going to get worse if the Dems to win big in the mid term! Trans peeps should know who their allies are, IT'S NOT THE REPUBLICANS!
You're advocating for our allies to be "no one".
Huh? So 2024: trans people were complaining that the Democrats didn't pander to them so that's why trump won. I'm saying you would rather let your enemy win instead of someone that will not persecute you (they will not pander to you though)
Trans people don't need to be visible in the democratic party for you to vote for Democrats
What the fuck are you talking about?
Who will you vote for in November?
Not your stupid ass. That’s for sure.
Almost certainly whoever the not republican is, unless they also want to explicitly fuck over people like me.
I don't think someone telling me to keep quiet is my ally, actually. If trans voices are silenced and Democrats win, they will take this to mean that they should continue the genocidal policies of the Republicans. The only way I live is if I don't let them silence me.