politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Asserting that Clancy should be unfairly punished because poor women of color are treated unfairly isn’t the argument I would use.
That's not what I'm asserting. That's how the legal system works in cases. If she was found not guilty, going forward there would be massive changes. I'm asking why her? How is the bias of the judge not being reviewed? Is sending a triple murderer regardless of circumstances to a facility with possible reintegration into society safe? Yes, every case is different but we don't even have the will to feed our people. The solution they will come up with won't benefit women. It's going to be more padded rooms and women losing custody for being a little depressed.
Andrea Yates was retried and found not guilty by reason of insanity for killing her children during a bout of postpartum psychosis. This isn’t a novel case in the slightest.
Yes. Which is good. I still don't think she should be allowed to reintegrate into society because of it. I don't agree with the death penalty and I want men/women who have other psychotic brakes to get the same judgment. That's all I'm saying.
Yall I'm so passionate about this because how politically and legally dangerous all this is. We so unskilled at strategy and implementing a long-term plan it's alarming. This is way the fascist are winning. TLDR: Be careful who you choose to defend.
This is the Trojan horse of all cases if I've ever seen one. We do not want to have the legal and political compatancy of women being called into question during this Administration and Supreme Court. Roe v Wade was first implemented under the idea of equal privacy. Essentially the decision was, Any America (Regardless of gender.) should be able to see, speak, and receive treatments from their medical provider they believe is best for them without political and social scrutiny. That protection has been removed allowing the government to know about what you and your doctor are doing. We are increasing the gender differences as seen by the law; and that is catastrophic for women. Outside of Transwomen, men are not currently going to the doctor for anything seen as illegal. (Not trying to deminish Transwomen as they are dealing with so much right now. RvW protected everyone.) Now medical information is in the legal interest of the government. Soon anyone taking mental health drugs and who have children can be monitored more closely. Add in Ai's ability to go over mountains of medical data. This is right out of the Project 2025 playbook.
Im just saying of all the parents to be in prison for harming their children due to psychosis; this women is the least deserving and the message needs to move past her. We must link the genders in this fight or it will be women who lose out.