this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2025
555 points (98.1% liked)

News

37090 readers
982 users here now

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, blogs, 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.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Zephorah@discuss.online 148 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It’s on the Project 2025 list. As such, I expect it to fall, like Roe.

Heritage is clearly funding this erasure of what We The People want.

[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 20 points 5 months ago (8 children)

What can we do? Surely we outnumbered these people

[–] HasturInYellow@lemmy.world 22 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Find out where the heritage foundation meets, and have a crowd gather outside. Lock the doors. Burn the building. Let no one out.

That's how we get change.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 115 points 5 months ago (2 children)

It’s as if these people don’t remember the riots that happened to earn equality.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 136 points 5 months ago (1 children)

They do and now they have a surveillance state to make sure the riots don’t happen again

[–] Mirshe@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago (2 children)

And a president who wants to shoot those protestors, and a federal police, answerable to no one, who can definitely do it. I'm giving it a year before we see at least one protest met with overwhelming lethal force.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Meron35@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago

The false narrative that basic rights were earned through "civil debate" has been parroted by right wing talking heads for so long.

Most people are uninformed, and have an impression that rights just kind of happened via peaceful protests or debates, either due to their own ignorance or learning a very whitewashed version of history.

[–] badbytes@lemmy.world 66 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The U.S. should revisit if we need a supreme court anymore.

[–] Almacca@aussie.zone 27 points 5 months ago

Or at least set term limits and have a lot more of them.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (4 children)

I'll vote for anyone legally dismantling SCOTUS. Also if we can't get rid of the supreme court can we at least move it to the northern most tip of alaska? Nowhere in the constitution does it say scotus has to be in DC.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] MyOpinion@lemmy.today 64 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Gosh it is almost like these MAGAts are just doing whatever the hell they want. I have a few things we can do when we get back in power.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 44 points 5 months ago (4 children)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.org 59 points 5 months ago (39 children)

All the people that didn't vote are partly responsible for this.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 18 points 5 months ago (1 children)

"The overall turnout of eligible voters in the 2024 general election was 63.7%. This was lower than the 2020 record of 66.6% but higher than every other election year since at least 2004."

People did vote. Constantly blaming the small group of disillusioned voters is just weird.

[–] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.org 26 points 5 months ago (2 children)

"The small group" of more than one in three people that didn't vote.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 10 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Oh, you were actually aiming at 100% turnout. Well, that's just silly.

[–] IronBird@lemmy.world 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

mandatory voting looks like a small price to pay for a (more) healthy democracy, Australia seems to be doing a lot better than the other British colonies right now

of course with the US, something like that would have to be combined with an extensive overhaul of public education (moving away from the "breed compliant factory workers"-goal), because healthy democracy also requires an educated population capable of knowing when they're being lied too

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 10 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Argentina has mandatory voting and they have Milei. How healthy is that?

Argentina also votes on Sunday (a change way simpler than reforming education) and last elections they had 77% turnout. A lot of people simply don't participate in the democracy and there's no way around it. No one serious expect 100% people to vote and blames the 30% that doesn't for the outcomes.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (37 replies)
[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 51 points 5 months ago (2 children)

So much for individual freedom and small government, huh.

[–] MoogleMaestro@lemmy.zip 49 points 5 months ago

The small government is the biggest lie pushed by the right wing side of our country. In fact, when you read where the money comes from, it actually comes from a "Dark Enlightenment" coalition of techno-fascists looking to dismantle democracy.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 48 points 5 months ago (2 children)

So predictable. The angry assholes hated losing that ruling, as well as losing the culture war around it. That's why they didn't really give up, but switched to harping on bathroom bills and "men in women's sports". The wedge was trans and they were going to hammer on that until they got enough Confederates in office to, yeah, attack trans, but also go after gays, even if, or even especially because of, the culture being against them for it. They hope to deport, imprison, threaten and smash down enough people to reverse that culture war, too, believe that.

They won't be happy until they turn on streaming services or their television or go to the movies and won't have to see any gays, unless it is for comic effect or the like. They definitely don't want to see anything normalized...

This might not be reversed in the near future - maybe. But the weirdoes on the right will treat this just like they did abortion. They won't give up, even if it takes them 50 years to take the rights of others away.

I just have no idea why gays voted for Taco. Or any Confederates for that matter. It just makes no sense at all. I know some gays IRL who have voted for Taco. Twice. But I guess there was actually a group called "Jews for Hitler", too, until the Nazis shut it down...

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That’s why they didn’t really give up, but switched to harping on bathroom bills and “men in women’s sports”.

I'm so glad democrats circled the wagons around vulnerable minorities on this one. Can you imagine if they just ignored it and let republicans set the narrative, or worse, ran the "men in women's sports" hate in their own ads?

[–] scintilla@crust.piefed.social 10 points 5 months ago

Man imagine if people started saying that trans people should just suck it up "for a bit" too. As if somehow not fighting for our rights would lead to them being magiced into existence.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 37 points 5 months ago (4 children)

Well, Trump has taught us that you can ignore the Supreme Court if your party controls Congress. So if there ever is another Democrat president with Democrat control of Congress, just revert all this and ignore whatever the SC says.

We should only be elevating Democrats who make it clear they are ready to play hardball.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] SaraTonin@lemmy.world 37 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Do you mean that when the concurrence for the overturning of Roe v Wade said that they should also have another look at marriage equality, that meant that this was on the roadmap? Huh. Who could have possibly seen this coming?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] venusaur@lemmy.world 35 points 5 months ago (1 children)

They might just punt it to the states like they’ve been doing. Welcome back to the 90’s.

[–] NChiwana76@lemmy.world 42 points 5 months ago (5 children)

I won’t be surprised when inter-racial marriage and slavery are back on the docket.

[–] Zephorah@discuss.online 25 points 5 months ago (1 children)

They’re starting with trans, working their way to gay. Trans was their gateway item, it helped get them elected. (They tried gay marriage during campaigning, it didn’t stick, there was too much public support). Even so, now that they’re in, they’re going there.

This is all per Project 2025. They’re not going to touch slavery, but the items with a religious, Heritage mandate will be torn apart.

They’re going to hit hard when they get to women, not just an erosion of legal status but bodily autonomy. Ownership, by men, in terms of loss of legal status in re to pregnancy. Remember, MAGA ran on a reaction to women’s lib.

They’ve already declared decreased fertility, the current 1.6 replacement rate, a matter of national security.

They’re just grabbing more power (and money) and beating the public down into a more complacent state before kicking 51% of the population in the head.

P25 dismantles HIPAA and ends death with dignity at the national level as well. The religious mandates are pretty awful. I do not have much hope that gay marriage will survive the Supreme Court.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] d00phy@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago

“Who am I to stop an enterprising young person from willingly entering into a contract of indentured servitude?”

  • Clarence Thomas, probably
[–] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Slavery never ended though. Hell, I'm pretty sure it's not even illegal

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago

https://www.history.com/articles/13th-amendment-slavery-loophole-jim-crow-prisons

The 13th Amendment, ratified in 1865, says: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] azimir@lemmy.ml 12 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The first one has already been floated. The second just comes later. They're looking at doing an end run on slavery by declaring anyone a criminal, refusing due process, and sending them to work on a farm for nothing.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] UltraMagnus0001@lemmy.world 34 points 5 months ago

Fuck Kim Davis

[–] DirkMcCallahan@lemmy.world 27 points 5 months ago (5 children)

Yep, this was the logical follow-up to Dobbs.

Thanks, non-voters.

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 22 points 5 months ago (4 children)

Yes, but have you considered this?

both sides

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] dumples@midwest.social 25 points 5 months ago

I thought I never had to hear about Kim Davis again. I never want to hear or think about that toad again. What a shame

[–] SereneSadie@lemmy.myserv.one 22 points 5 months ago (4 children)

Once again, 'both sides'ers.

This is what they were ranting about doing all along. You allowed this to happen.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] aceshigh@lemmy.world 19 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Stay tuned… interracial marriage will be on the chopping block.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip 18 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Would they hear the case if a court clerk said she would no longer hand out marriages for anyone not religious as that is offensive to them?

Or maybe people who are left handed marrying people who are right handed? The abomination!

Where does this bullshit stop?

Government should NOT be interested in marriage. They simply should not care. The MOST they should do is have ready to made contracts if they want to manage divorce, child support, and death wealth distribution. Those are contracts. Contracts are made between consenting adults. The government either lets their citizens enter into contracts or not.

load more comments (1 replies)

This is my 0% surprised face

[–] MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago (4 children)

Good thing so many of us "protested" the election, what could possibly go wrong, right?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago

Wait until they challenge the equality of man and woman in a marriage...

[–] king_comrade@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago (4 children)

Yet another freedom that Yankees are happily throwing away lmao god it's like watching an entire nation commit self harm hahah

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Horsey@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago

I am so ready to pack my shit and never come back if marriage equality falls.

load more comments
view more: next ›