[–] 11 points 2 months ago (1 child)

The main issue would be proving seeing a pride flag “forces” him to “celebrate, recognize, and solemnize” anything LGBTQIA+. By that standard, a government employee wearing a cross necklace would be grounds for any non-Christian to sue for the same reasons. Insanely slippery slope.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • It pretty much is a loss of human rights indirectly, though. Losing birthright citizenship essentially means going through whatever processes he wants to become a citizen and gain the benefits of citizenship (voting, social programs, etc.). It also means he can use it as an excuse to deport whoever, which has usually ended up involved stripped those deported of their rights.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    There were no actual leftists on the ballot in every state that campaigned beyond the election year. Kamala was the realistic option. It’s perfectly reasonable to be conflicted about voting for someone because they’re the lesser of two evils, but there’s nothing rational thinking a leftist or faux leftist candidate that only shows up during election years had a realistic chance of winning.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • view more: next ›