this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2026
283 points (98.6% liked)

conservative

1664 readers
3 users here now

A community to satirize conservtive and right-wing "ideals".

This community (now) exists as a pressure valve, a place to process through humor the often frustrating world of conservative politics. Above all, this is NOT the place for serious conservative support/viewpoints/arguments. There are other places on Lemmy for that if you desire it.

Rules:

  1. Always follow .world instance rules

  2. Parody With Purpose: This is a space for humorous takes on conservative politics. We welcome satire, but draw the line at content that promotes racism, sexism, homophobia, or other forms of bigotry.

  3. Memes Over Manifestos: This community focuses on humor and parody, not serious political debate. There are plenty of spaces for earnest conservative discussion, this isn’t one of them.

  4. Highlight Contradictions: Sometimes the best content points out inconsistencies and hypocrisies in conservative talking points. Creative commentary is encouraged.

  5. Public Figures Fair Game: Politicians and pundits can be satirized, but no targeting of private individuals, doxxing, or harassment.

Children of public figures under the age of 14 are also off-limits, a 16 year old has enough free agency to break with or adopt their parents views. An 8 year old kid doesn't.

  1. No News Zone: Memes only, news or other serious content should be sent to the nearest relevant comm. Meme's of current events, however, are encouraged.

  2. Clear Satire: Make your satirical intent reasonably clear. We’re here to mock bad ideas, not accidentally spread them. If you're unsure how it will be taken, feel free to DM the mod team ahead of time or explicitly tag it as satire in the body.

A note on ChadMcTruth: Chad's content is 100% satire, but his work can sometimes be hard to tell, but if he posted it be assured, its satire.

  1. Relevant Content: All posts should relate to conservative politics or ideologies in some way somewhere in your post. Either in the title or the meme itself.

For more general political memes please see !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

  1. Community Respect: Disagree with fellow members all you want, but personal attacks aren’t welcome. Save the criticism for the ideas, not each other.

  2. Moderation Discretion: Mods will use reasonable judgment in applying these rules. We’ll be fair, but firm. These kinds of comms have a tendency to get off the rails, so we might seem overzealous in moderation sometimes.

  3. For the moment, i'm allowing properly tagged NSFW content as long as its funny and relevant. Don't make me regret it.

And above all, HAVE FUN!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
cm0002@lemmy.world
283
conservatives again would rather waste time with culture war against imaginary monsters (discuss.online)
submitted 3 weeks ago by VetOfTheSeas@discuss.online to c/conservative@lemmy.world
15 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Why not ban it?

Well... for starters

A 2013 report by the Brennan Center for Justice warned that the bans may have the unintended effects of invalidating prenuptial agreements and court decisions made in other states where arbitrators may have taken into account Islamic, Jewish, or Christian legal norms. Randy Brinson, the president of the Christian Coalition of Alabama, criticized the ban in Alabama, calling it "redundant and a waste of time".

...

According to Sadakat Kadri, the ban on sharia laws notwithstanding, "the precepts of Islamic law ... have judicial force in the United States already", among Muslims who have had a dispute settled by Muslim conciliators. The 1925 Federal Arbitration Act allows Muslims, Christians, Jews, etc. to use religious tribunals to arbitrate disagreements and "the judgments that result are given force of law by state and federal courts". The statute "preempts inconsistent state legislation", such as laws to ban sharia.

While the US Congress could in theory repeal the act, it could not ban arbitration by Muslims while leaving other religious conciliators free to continue their work. "Any reform would have to impact equally on all faith communities, and it is not only Muslims who would object if federal legislators presumed to do that."

But more broadly, one does question why states that have already banned Sharia law in some capacity keep coming back to find new ways to ban religious organization

Legislatures continue to revisit the issue: Texas enacted a law aimed at preventing residential developments it characterized as “Sharia compounds,” and Arizona lawmakers in 2026 moved to ban any court recognition of Sharia despite no evidence of its use in the state’s courts

Increasingly, these prohibitions on "Sharia" begin to look like attempts by the state to harass Muslim religious communities and interrupt secular land development and business activity.