10 ms·

>Personal politics, IMO, is not a good reason to avoid living in certain areas. I'm a liberal-leaning moderate but many of my favorite people (friends and famil

• justinzollars 3y ago
  This is a very preachy church lady like response.
  • slg 3y ago
    Maybe, but is anything I said inaccurate? Try telling a trans person that the local political environment shouldn't impact their decision on where to live. Your best case scenario is an eye roll. Only certain people are given the freedom to ignore politics.
    • mattcaldwell 3y ago
      Trans woman here, can confirm eye roll.
      • nervlord 3y ago
        [dead]
    • iinnPP 3y ago
      Yes, tell people how they ought behave in order to meet your view of them.
  • CapstanRoller 3y ago
    It's only "preachy" if acknowledging the harsh reality faced by repressed minorities makes you feel uncomfortable.
  • fundad 3y ago
    Yeah ask a church lady how she feels about government and if her state should defend the rights of ALL religions.
• fundad 3y ago
  Yes it's pretty plain to see which states are using the law to suppress the rights of many people. Also most suburbs even in blue states are conservative enough, no need to go further MAGA.
  • refurb 3y ago
    Which states? I mean, if you asked me, California’s gun control laws suppress the rights of many people, but I’m guessing you don’t agree? My point is, you have your own political views, but at the same time live in a country with a lot of differing views. You should feel free to live wherever you want but at the same time realize you’ll never find a place that 100% agrees with all your views.
    • ovao 3y ago
      Oregon and Washington — both blue states — are examples of other states that have begun to lean more heavily into restricting gun rights (whether you agree or disagree with the motivation & justification). So, agreed, it’s accurate to say that there are examples of different states imposing legislation that restricts some sets of freedoms depending on the state’s political leaning.
    • toss1 3y ago
      >>California’s gun control laws suppress the rights of many people Seriously? I have a relative who lives in CA and bought a pair of AR-15s a few years ago, just because... I've never seen any serious gun proposal that would actually infringe on any actual right. They are all about ensuring that background checks apply to all sales, waiting periods, red flags, etc. People seem to forget that allowing any mentally ill incompetent full and immediate access to the highest caliber and rate-of-fire weapons at any time is the exact opposite of "a well regulated militia" (citing the exact words of the Second Amendment which grants that right). Please cite some actual legislation entered for consideration (not right wing "They're coming for our guns" rhetoric) that would actually restrict that right for any sane, stable, and responsible citizen. This is not a rhetorical question, I would like to know if there is any actual such legislation proposed. And no, I don't consider restricting weapons above certain levels of high power, high caliber, high magazine capacity, high rate-of-fire, etc. to be illegitimate. I actually think it should be a sliding scale of qualifications according to the above criteria, e.g., kid's 22 requires a basic safety course and you're good to go, but semi-auto high-power require solid marksmanship skills, combat training, proof of mental stability from licensed psych, insurance, etc., and all qualifications mean you can be called up for militia service at any time. So, seriously, under "as part of a well regulated militia", what actual proposed legislation in any state would actually restrict such a right?
• _gabe_ 3y ago
  > places like Kansas City because local abortion laws rule out certain medical procedures that could save the mother's life What? The headline of the article you linked literally says: > Missouri, Kansas hospitals that denied emergency abortion broke the law Also from the article you linked: > But federal law, which requires doctors to treat patients in emergency situations, trumps those state laws > In Kansas, when Farmer visited the hospital, abortions were still legal up to 22 weeks. It’s unclear why University of Kansas Health refused to offer Farmer one. It's clear that the hospitals in these cases were the ones breaking the law by refusing to treat these women in need of emergency care.
  • slg 3y ago
    What federal investigators say after the fact doesn't change what happened in the moment. The hospital refused the treatment during a medical emergency. The article also quotes a hospital spokesperson who sticks by their behavior suggesting they will do this again in the future. At the very least, doctors need to think about these issue during medical emergencies in many red states in ways that they don't have to in blue states. I personally don't want my doctor to have to consult legal counsel before giving me the treatment the doctor knows I need.
  • DangitBobby 3y ago
    It's now difficult in many states for a doctor to know ahead of time if actions they take for the health of the mother which risk terminating a pregnancy will be determined criminal in a court of law. And in some states, literally any relative of a fetus has standing in civil court to sue a doctor if the doctor's actions result in termination of a pregnancy, with huge minimum payouts for successful litigation. Idaho for example [0]. 0. https://idahocapitalsun.com/2023/01/05/idaho-supreme-court-upholds-abortion-ban-civil-enforcement-law/ https://idahocapitalsun.com/2023/01/05/idaho-supreme-court-u...
  • seanmcdirmid 3y ago
    When faced with competing laws, doctors without law degrees are not going to sort things out as efficiently when compared to lawyers in a 10 year court battle.
• dumbotron 3y ago
  > my hobbies tend to be populated mainly by the conservative demographic What are conservative (and liberal) hobbies?
  • imajoo 3y ago
    My assumption would be hunting perhaps? Since that involves gun ownership, and gun ownership/rights typically being associated with "conservatives".
    • seanw444 3y ago
      Which is stupid. It's everyone's right. One side just understands the importance of it, the other tries their hardest to throw it in the trash.
      • AndrewKemendo 3y ago
        Yours is a naiive position positioning itself as enlightened Firearms are worthless without organization and there is no actual revolutionary force in America even at the seed stage that is approximating anything near even Taliban levels of insurgent capabilities. Your 2A “movement” has neither the coherent holistic political philosophy nor the competent leadership needed to actually create a viable social structure So no, you’re cosplaying as a hollow copy of the Taliban with none of the threat, risk or even dedication to a real cause.
        • seanw444 3y ago
          It is so weird how you guys belittle those that appreciate 2A as though it's not useful until we have "Taliban-levels of capability and organization" but if we did, you'd immediately cry "insurgency! This is too dangerous for our democracy!" There's no winning with you people. That's why the 2A movement is progressing finally. You're impossible to please.
          • deleted 3y ago
            [deleted]
• FrontierPsych 3y ago
  >This is a comment that originates in privilege. This sounds like a comment about privilege that originates in privilege. The person just expressed his or her opinion, and bandying words like "privilege" shuts down communication by route of shaming someone. Not everyone is LGBT+, ethnic minority. If someone was to offer someone $20 million per year to do a job in Kansas, I guess many people would turn it down to make a point, but no reason to crap over someone who wants to make that $20 million. The fact of the matter is that in most red states, there are blue cities. Texas - Austin (Travis County) - 72.8% voted for Joe Biden Georgia - Atlanta (Fulton County) - 72.6% voted for Joe Biden Arizona - Phoenix (Maricopa County) - 50.3% voted for Joe Biden North Carolina - Charlotte (Mecklenburg County) - 67.5% voted for Joe Biden Tennessee - Nashville (Davidson County) - 61.7% voted for Joe Biden Florida - Miami (Miami-Dade County) - 53.3% voted for Joe Biden Ohio - Cleveland (Cuyahoga County) - 68.1% voted for Joe Biden Indiana - Indianapolis (Marion County) - 60.2% voted for Joe Biden Missouri - Kansas City (Jackson County) - 60.7% voted for Joe Biden Utah - Salt Lake City (Salt Lake County) - 62.9% voted for Joe Biden And remember, geographically, California is MAJORLY red. Look at the last election map. What happens if someone moves there. Sure, you get abortion in California, but your neighbors are going to still be hard-core MAGA Republicans. I must say, it is extremely disheartening when people throw around words like "privilege" just as an easy way to shut down communication by shame. I know you'll most likely deny it, what else can you do, but it is what it is. So I'd appreciate it if people would argue their case without these types of coded words. Just my opinion, don't tell me I'm privileged or misogynist or transphobic or fat-shaming or the million other words designed to immediately shut down a conversation by name-calling. I mean, I know that's the game these days - continual virtue signalling, de-platforming, gotchas for showing the world how virtuous one is and tallying up one's "I'm good" checkmarks. And if you say you aren't or that isn't the purpose...right, ok, sure. If you say so. Whatever you say. I believe you. Right.
  • ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
    can you elaborate why you think the comment about privilege is wrong, rather than emphasizing that you don't like that the word was used? > Not everyone is LGBT+, ethnic minority yes, but some are, and ignoring concerns which apply to them because you're not personally affected by the concerns is, well, privileged - you literally have the privilege of not having to worry about right-wingers driving a car into you only because you're the wrong ethnicity or nationality, like one just did in Texas if you feel shame as a result of this, look inward and ask why, because nobody here is shaming you for simply being privileged
• prepend 3y ago
  > …hostile to them. This is true for a variety of targeted groups including LGBT+ people, ethnic minorities, or even just women I suppose that’s a personal design and a trade off that you and others need to make. I live in a “red state” and am described by several of the groups you mention and don’t feel the government nor community is hostile to me. I think it’s hard to understand beforehand what is hostile and how much hostility is worth peace of mind, prosperity, etc. That being said, I think it’s possible that everywhere has some unpleasant aspects and I wish that it wasn’t a “pick your poison” situation of having to choose between $5k/month rent and piles of human poo and not having to travel out of state for an abortion.
  • LeanderK 3y ago
    is there really no middle ground (not an American)? What about cities like Seattle or Boston (just guessing here)? For me, the thought feels a bit like just going back in time. I mean there are still issues everywhere but this is so drastic and feels like you're back to constantly fighting for really basic rights. This comment also reads a bit like it's ok for you if you don't personally feel hostility, so this might only be true for your personal situation. I don't think it's really that much of a personal question because different groups feel different amounts of hostility. Will you just ignore them?
    • red-iron-pine 3y ago
      > is there really no middle ground (not an American)? What about cities like Seattle or Boston (just guessing here)? For me, the thought feels a bit like just going back in time. I mean there are still issues everywhere but this is so drastic and feels like you're back to constantly fighting for really basic rights. Keeping the political and social narratives focused on fights for basic rights ensures that no one passes laws that impact the ruling class. Kinda like the Trump era tax cut, or how minimum wage hasn't changed. Meanwhile all everyone is talking about is guns and abortion.
      • deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]