[mschuster91]

> You need to let crazy people do crazy things (within the law of course).

Yeah, like stripping away LGBT rights or abortion? The far-right, no matter if we are talking about the US, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Argentinia, Israel or the UK, has clearly stated what they want to do, and they have shown in more than enough cases (Argentinia, USA, UK) that they are willing to throw the entire nation under the bus for their ideological bullshit! And the people have suffered horribly for the foolishness of their fellow countrymen.

[throw310822]

> like stripping away LGBT rights or abortion?

These are ideological battles which are specular to those of the left. All these laws to extend and protect LGBT rights? Marginally useful only to a small minority (which should be already protected in its fundamental rights by the normal laws) but great to avoid talking about difficult issues: how to go against established interests to improve the economy, how to modernise administration so that is more efficient and cheaper, etc.

[protimewaster]

It seems strange to associate abortion as something only the left cares about. It's been a very big talking point for the right for a long time.

[throw310822]

I agree, I also think it's fundamentally different from other "minority" rights. Anyway, I think the state referendums have proven the voters are going to defend abortion, whatever the right says about it.

[mschuster91]

> I agree, I also think it's fundamentally different from other "minority" rights.

Both result in completely preventable deaths. In the case of LGBT in massive youth suicide rates compared to non-LGBT youth, in the case of abortion bans deaths from medical complications of which there have been a few very widely publicised cases since Roe v Wade fell.

> Anyway, I think the state referendums have proven the voters are going to defend abortion, whatever the right says about it.

The problem is, when the federal government does things like revoke the certification of mifepristone (abortion pill) or levonorgestrel (plan b), there's jack shit the states can do. If they go and classify it as scheduled drugs, grey-importing or shipping it around the country will be a serious federal crime now.

And yes, that is the strategy. They already tried with mifepristone [1], they will try again now that they actually control the FDA and can just do it themselves instead of asking for a court order, and plan b is already dropping massively due to restrictions of states [2].

[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c2qq1wqw3w2o

[2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-06-26/plan-b-us...

[consteval]

> which are specular to those of the left

Are we cosplaying Hellen Keller? The only ones who are upset about the current state of those minorities are conservatives. Not those on the left, the left doesn't care and has moved on. The right is the only one propping up the "culture war" (your dreaded "ideology"). I don't understand how you guys can't see it, it's so obvious.

[immibis]

Conservatives are always cosplaying Helen Keller when it suits them and not when it doesn't - just like everything else they could possibly do. It's an ideology of "how do I win this next sparring matc?" not one of consistency.

[lnxg33k1]

It has been a whole campaign based on the needs of the 0.whatever% part of the population, I’ve always been a respectful member of society thinking that lgbt people have the rights to be whatever they want and everyone has the right to define himself, I’ve been even to a gay pride, but now they’ve broken my balls, a bunch of people can’t just monopolize the debate for everyone

[huijzer]

I don’t know about you, but I actually watched interviews with Trump and he mostly seems to indicate that he doesn’t want a nation-wide ban on abortion. It should be up for individual states to decide. Although I’m in favor of more choice for women, I don’t think Trump’s stance is completely unreasonable. There are already more than enough federal rules and some states want to be more strict. But you make it sound like Trump wants to strip away abortion rights. Please give me a recent interview in which he himself clearly said that. Otherwise it seems someone else came up with that narrative.

[ywvcbk]

> he doesn’t want a nation-wide ban

I guess he’s too old now but it still must be pretty personal to him.

[akimbostrawman]

>like stripping away LGBT rights

Not even a week ago a new law was signed that enables anyone to legally change there sex yearly while making it a finable offense up to 10.000€ to state reality.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-Determination_Act_(Germ...

I think crazy people is very fitting.

[mschuster91]

> Not even a week ago a new law was signed that enables anyone to legally change there sex yearly while making it a finable offense up to 10.000€ to state reality.

First of all, that's Germany, not the US. Second, the only people who will realistically be using this right are trans people whose legal situation has been defined by a very old law that has been partially declared unconstitutional multiple times for years now.

Of course, there will be trolls abusing it - but it's expensive, so TBH I do not expect more than a dozen dumbasses going through with it. Even name change after a marriage is a huge fucking deal of bureaucracy. I went through that one just a year ago. Banks, authorities, association memberships of all kinds, billing changes for tons of services, new name => new card => new CC number, probably the associated effort cost me well over 5000€ if I include the value of my time, and probably around 1000€ in travel (dual citizenship) and fees for new documents. And for fucks sake it's a smokescreen anyway. There was nothing stopping creeps from invading women's toilets, installing cameras or outright raping women before, and such cases were on the regular. The new SBGG changes absolutely nothing, sexual coercion, rape and other abusive behavior were and will remain crimes.

[akimbostrawman]

None of this addresses the problem of making reality illegal not to mention that there is a monumental difference between illegally installing cameras and being legally physically in women spaces. If you want to play dress up and be called something else good for you but forcing people by law to lie is tyranny.

[mschuster91]

> None of this addresses the problem of making reality illegal.

Recognizing that trans people exist in reality and providing them legal backing for it is not new. Trans (or gender-nonconforming, third gender or whatever you want to call it) people have been a thing for millennia. Even back in old Greece their existence was recognized [1], the Talmud has regulations on their status in society [2], various Southern Asian countries have some sort of legal recognition for them for centuries [3].

"Reality" is a societal definition, and nature alone provides a lot of interesting edge cases such as various sport stars who pass for females in all aspects including having vaginas but have chromosome sets (or hormonal levels) typically associated with males.

[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgynos

[2] https://www.talmudology.com/jeremybrownmdgmailcom/2019/6/17/...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijra_(South_Asia)

[akimbostrawman]

>"Reality" is a societal definition

Reality can be whatever crazy people want it to be

[mschuster91]

Given that I just posted evidence of non-binary people over millennia and at a large enough scale to warrant inclusion into legal systems, it's hard to call non-binary people "crazy" - they have always been a staple of humanity.

[immibis]

Crazy people have been trying to reshape reality to fit their two-gender ideology for thousands of years and it has never worked.

It did bring us the most well known historical atrocity though.