#gay marriage is not codified in law in america

[listen-to-the-inner-walrus]

being on this website right now is just like im being so brave by blacklisting the tags for a new movie thats very popular right now and not responding to any of the gifsets i still see of it with what is rightful criticism of it for being tone-deaf

[eyepool]

“When America’s Supreme Court overhauled the right to abortion, it also raised the spectre of curtailing other liberties. In agreeing with the decision, a conservative justice, Clarence Thomas, wrote that the court “should reconsider” rulings protecting same-sex marriage and access to contraception, too. On Wednesday Congress is expected to pass a law codifying same-sex and interracial marriage—both of which are legal because of Supreme Court rulings rather than federal legislation.

“The Respect for Marriage Act has been kicking around for a decade, but was revived in July. It would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, passed by a Republican-controlled Congress in 1996, which allowed states to ban gay marriage, but was later defanged by two Supreme Court decisions.

“Few Senate Republicans publicly support the bill. But Democrats say they have enough votes to ensure it will pass—and it received 47 votes from House Republicans in July. With more than 70% of Americans telling pollsters they support gay marriage, protecting it is popular.”

I hadn’t heard of this! We [US peeps] definitely need to lock in more civil rights with legislation, since the Supremes have shown they’ll roll back anything.

[bills-bible-basics]

Another Sad Day for America: Respect for Marriage Act Hello, my friends. Well, those liberal-minded senators did it! As you have probably already heard, they passed the so-called “Respect for Marriage Act”. Worse yet, as was predicted would happen, all three amendments to the act, which were crafted to more fully protect Christians and Conservatives from litigation by the LGBTQ crowd, were REJECTED! Now the bill goes to the House — where it will easily pass — and then to the president’s desk to be signed into law by Joe Biden. In short, while the SCOTUS — Supreme Court of the United States — recognized same-sex “marriage” as a constitutional right, the passage of this bill codifies same-sex “marriage” and makes it the law of the land. That means that the Supreme Court cannot overturn it — as they did with Roe v. Wade — because the bill was passed by Congress, and there is nothing specific in the US Constitution -- that I am aware of, at least -- which the Supreme Court can use as a justification to overturn this soon-to-be ungodly law. As you may know, that is exactly what the liberals wanted to do: make same-sex “marriage” bullet-proof against the Supreme Court. Now they are halfway to doing it! To the dismay of millions of American Christians, the USA continues to rebel against God’s Laws and pave her way to hell, as we read in this verse: “The wicked‭ shall be turned‭‭ into hell‭, ‭and‭ all the nations‭ that forget‭ God‭.‭” Psalm 9:17, KJV It should now be even more evident that many Americans -- including many American politicians -- worship God in name only, but their actual works/actions speak to the contrary. They in fact defy His holy Word! Just watch how in coming months/years, the passage of this law will result in even more litigation against Conservatives who embrace Bible-based, Christian values, by the LGBTQ crowd. As I said, this bill empowers the gay and lesbian community, and they obviously know it. Below is a link to a Washington Times article regarding this latest development: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/nov/29/same-sex-marriage-bill-passes-senate-lawmakers-rej/ https://www.billkochman.com/Blog/index.php/another-sad-day-for-america-respect-for-marriage-act/?feed_id=18459&_unique_id=63878d47af597&Another%20Sad%20Day%20for%20America%3A%20Respect%20for%20Marriage%20Act

[drheartstealer]

Real talk, I wonder how Americans feel about how widespread american media is due to the influence of Hollywood.

Though American politics suck 🤔 I heard that Bien is codifying gay marriage and interracial marriage so its not all bad

America also seems to have the worst lab our laws, but at least employment covers insurance 🤔 and they do have better LA our laws in some cases like non discrimination

Some of the kindest people I met were Americans, but I suppose it could be because of the number of them on English speaking internet 🤔

My favorite band, Tool, is American, I feel like Maynard Keenan wouldn't have come about without having both been in art school and the military 🤔 though a lot of bands I like happen to be german

My teddies are made I'm China but they're TY and I have to say, the quality is good though Teddy is balding, thats because he's old

I wish we had discount shops that sell ok quality products like Action, Primark and even Walmart, but I get around it by buying cheap stuff from Taobao and Shopee, but the quality depends on the seller 😑 I miss PRimark, Action and TK Maxx from Germany most. Walmart is also pretty nice I guess, but its been a long time since I was in america. I think if these brands come to my country the prices will just go up and it will defeat the purpose 😑

In general, I feel like American food is pretty standard 🤔 It can be delicious but is nothing interesting or really outstanding. I would say the same thing of German food. Maybe it is because schnitzels are so popular and easily found anywhere that it just becomes uninteresting 🤔 Cajun is nice though.

If I had to choose between my home country and america I guess I would choose america, but only if I were already a citizen there, being an immigrant anywhere is difficult unless youre sponsored by a native 😑 I hate my country

[freakvampiresex-2]

the horror of being a young adult in modern america is so fucking surreal. i lived through a pandemic for the last two years of high school, and my district did absolutely nothing to combat rising cases in the area (we had a mask mandate in schools for maybe four months). i graduated while my right to abortion access was in the process of being taken away, and bow as i enter college another global health emergency is starting up. and apparently we havent learned anything from the still-ongoing coronavirus pandemic. the narrative of monkeypox being a "gay disease" currently being pushed will only spur on the already vocal push to bring back anti-sodomy laws and outlaw gay marriage. gas prices are at an all-time high, a recession is on the horizon, and anti-trans legislation is being codified into law in every state in the country. christian nationalism is on the rise. global warming is only getting worse while companies lobby to our government so that they dont have to face repercussions, and an increasing population of our activists are turning to eco-fascism.

[lila-rae]

I'm currently in my final year of law school in my country (not America) and honestly, my brain just cannot process the absolute injustices of your judicial system. I'm from western Europe and most Constitutions here make it pretty much impossible to impose an *absolute* ban on abortions, because the woman's right to her own bodily autonomy must be protected. It's part of the idea that every human being has inherent dignity and worth. For the life of me, I cannot understand how rapists have more say over a woman's body than she does. It fucking infuriates me.

They’ll say I t’s cause the fetus is seen as a person with all rights, including the right to life. However if you read the opinion you’ll see that they mention how we have a huge demand for adoption but not a lot of babies being born. And our birth rate is at an all time low. And what better way to fix that then essentially making women breeding stock 😒.

I have 3 kids. I love them so much, but they were my choice. I’ve also had an abortion, which was also my choice and honestly probably set me up to have the amazing life and family I have now.

I spent the last 9 months on here talking about how awful pregnancy is, and no one should be forced to endure that if they don’t want to. Before viability a zygote/embryo/fetus is literally a parasite in the most basic definition of the word. I don’t understand how the government thinks it can compel people to use their organs to keep another organism alive. It would be akin to forcing someone to give someone else their kidney because someone else is endanger of dying. It’s a nice gesture if you want to, but it should never be forced. We should have control over any medical decision or procedure.

And this legal ruling is setting up the government to overturn other rulings like gay-marriage, access to contraceptives, sodomy laws, and interracial marriage (all of which use the right to privacy as a defense). And all of which the right argues the state should be able to decide. But why does anyone get to decide this. Honestly I want some state to just start making laws like a ban on heterosexual sex/marriage, or codifying a law forbidding men to get viagra for them to see how ridiculous their rulings are.

[lady-griffin]

I think one thing I’ve noticed, is the insistence of how democrats purposely never codified roe v wade, so they could always dangle the idea of abortion rights being a threat to gain support

Which….okay, there is a lot of political bullshit going on. Don’t misunderstand me. I mean look at how Schumer daughters have ties to big tech, Manchin and Synema’s bullshit; but so many people are legit getting into qanon conspiracy levels here and it’s scary how oblivious they are to it.

But I also think people are ignoring how secure so many people felt in the idea that roe v wade was safe.

Democrats definitely, but even the republicans who also support it.

To the point that many people were still shock by it being overturned, yesterday. Which baffles me personally, but I think goes to show how safe people believe they were.

People truly forget how laughable the idea of roe v wade being overturn truly felt. Even as states and conservatives stripped it away bit by bit. Even as conservatives committed to this 50 long year plan and ploy.

Just like how people forget how laughable and ridiculous the idea of Trump beating Clinton was.

It reminds me of how people both left and right say people are overreacting because trump and his people didn’t succeed in many ways and the institutions held up, despite their efforts. Our systems and institutions are apparently just that strong.

Completing ignoring that’s because people fought back to keep those institutions and whatever else intact.

You have so many republicans who are testifying that trump is a danger to America and what-not, and how he broke laws and spat on the principles of America, but yet still say they would vote for him if he ran, because he’s not a democrat.

You have so many people saying something doesn’t need to be a law because there’s simply no need to worry as that’s just the way things have been or it’s the accepted norm and nothing will change that; but that’s the problem.

Systems, foundations, checks and balances are not all powerful. They only hold up when people hold them up and when people don’t think they need to do that because said systems will hold up on their own, is it any wonder things will crumble down?

And it’s just….

People rolled their eyes at the idea that overturning roe v wade would/could affect marriage (gay) rights, sexual freedom/rights, contraceptive rights, and privacy rights.

But it absolutely will.

And people roll their eyes at the idea that this could also impact interracial marriage. Saying well obviously Clarence Thomas is not for that, he’s in an interracial marriage himself.

But that’s the thing.

I’m sure the likes of Thomas and McConnell think interracial marriage is safe and secure and has nothing to with all those other pesky “rights” and laws that they find to be egregious errors.

As all of those “rights” are completely unrelated to interracial marriage.

But they’re wrong. Because so many others, find interracial marriage to be just as wrong as same-sex marriage and body-autonomy.

Or as they put it, should be up to the states.

And that’s the problem.

Everyone, seems to think there is a limit to how far things can go or crumble away, but they’re wrong. There is no limit to destruction.

And I’ve lost my point and I’m tired and I’ll probably delete this later, I just needed to vent.

[whatiwillsay]

You know, something that people could really improve upon with rvw is the constant revolving around abortion specifically which conservatives will always justify is "wrong". What's ultimately the problem is a lack of privacy between a woman and her doctor, a woman no longer having bodily autonomy, etc...

You'll never change conservative Christians mind if you only talk about abortion, but if they realize there's no more privacy they may understand the nuance here....

This happens often and shoots us in the foot I think. :(

you don't have to change anyone's mind. just about 80% of America is pro-choice. we need to fix the government so it represents the majority not a small sliver of backward dumbasses. we need to do away with the filibuster (this should be way higher up on the priority list) and expand the supreme court. abortion rights (along with other privacy-based rights like gay marriage and "sodomy") need to be codified into the law. bidens needs to forgive student debt to ensure we do ok in the midterms and we need to get to work on this stuff.

i urge everyone to join the mother's day strike (or support it otherwise) if you can.

[thinktosee]

INSTITUTIONAL HATE CRIME – A NARROW DEFINITION OF GENDER AND MORALITY AND ITS CONSEQUENCES TO THE LGBTQ COMMUNITY

Image courtesy Amnestyusa.org

“When he was 16 years old, he came to my room and said he wanted to talk to me. And I said, “Yeah, sure go ahead.”

“Well, I thought you should know that I’m gay,” he told me simply.

I looked at him and all I could think of was, How am I to protect him from discrimination and bullying? Yet all I could manage to say to him at this critical time was, “Well, that’s great. I’m glad you told me. We are your family and we support you.” I reached out and hugged my son.”(1)

- from David’s biography, “Walking in my Son’s footsteps. David’s fight for freedom.”

“It is possible that the law, which is clearsighted in one sense, and blind in another, might in some cases, be too severe.” (2)

- French philosopher, Montesquieu (1689-1755)

Why would a parent, upon discovering that their child is gay, feel a sense of foreboding where it concerned the child’s safety and security? And what and who caused this feeling of fear or foreboding in me?

The ancient law (1871, amended 1938) against homosexuality in Singapore and in many parts of the former British Empire, remains in force to this day. (3) Generations of citizens were and continue to be narrowly socialized to the belief that homosexuality is immoral and that homosexual or same-sex love and marriage deviate from the normative. This law levies an enormous burden onto the LGBTQ community in so far as it enables or activates societal discrimination where none existed before, foments hatred and disdain among the citizenry for same-sex relationships, and upends justice, equal rights and dignity for the LGBTQ community.

That was the basis for my fear when David shared with me that he was gay. How does one begin to address an issue which is institutional and systemic in its very foundation? The law is the problem, failing miserably to serve justice, as Montesquieu averred. This is the challenge which the LGBTQ communities throughout the world have been grappling with for centuries. It is a struggle paid in sacrificial blood, many times over. And it will go on, until a time when we acknowledge that diversity and inclusivity are mutually reinforcing. Love does not get filtered at the border because the state or religious institution says it must. It is they who have placed a limit on their love, apparently.

Global Historical Overview of homosexuality

The history of the LGBTQ communities and cultures on our planet is as colourfully and richly elongated and layered as any within the realm of human civilization. Ancient cultures such as “Indian, Chinese, Egyptian, Greek and Roman accommodate homosexuality and crossdressing among….its citizens since the earliest recorded times.” (4) Similarly, in “ancient China….same-sex sexual behaviors were well-received and tolerated. Positive descriptions of homosexual behavior, or Nan-Feng as it was called, in historical records and in Chinese literature can be dated back to the Han dynasty (206 BC–220 AD).” (5) Pre-European colonial African societies, including in what are present-day Nigeria and Uganda, were relatively inclusive in their approach to same-sex or gender relationships.(6) In the First Nations or pre-settler/colonial American societies, two spirits and multiple genders were universally embraced and accepted. (7)

These societies exhibited a keen sense of spirituality and diversity, of moderation and acceptance of LGBTQ peoples and cultures, which we in this enlightened age may find quite surprising. We should not however. Researchers have, to some degree, attached the adverse change in society’s approach to homosexuality to the onset of European colonialism (16th to 20th centuries) :  

“In the age of European exploration and empire-building, Native American, North African and Pacific Islander cultures accepting of “Two-Spirit” people or same-sex love shocked European invaders who objected to any deviation from a limited understanding of “masculine” and “feminine” roles.” (8)

- Prof. Bonny J. Morris

“Transgender histories in the United States, like the broader national histories of which they form a part, originate in colonial contact zones where members of the arriving culture encountered kinds of people it struggled to comprehend.” (9)

- Prof. Susan Stryker

Accompanying these colonial invasions, were European administrative, linguistic, religious, educational, philosophical and juridical systems, beliefs and traditions. This alien cultural web, in most part codified, either through a caste or racially-affected administrative system or via prayer book and canons, or both, had its intended effect of diminishing or worse, eviscerating the native or indigenous culture, including their ancient belief system. Displacement and assimilation of the natives to the new paradigm were achieved through these extreme mechanisms.

To understand the criminalization and persecution of LGBTQ peoples and cultures, it is necessary to appreciate the intent of colonialism – a private cum state economic model (the East India Companies, Hudson Bay Company, etc.) requiring the creation of a unified or standardized, and exclusively hierarchical system of conduct and control, onto a traditional (organized) and diverse society or culture. This is to assure the latter’s coherence to the colonial enterprise through a coercive (violent), and extensive system of natural resource allocation and exploitation. Genocide and slavery were among its most extreme and tragic manifestations. Modern colonialism, depicted by European conquests across the planet, is arguably the first attempt in recent memory, to creating a unitary world – standardization of laws and governing institutions to address the complex administrative challenges inherent in diverse cultures and norms within the European empire. Diversity of cultures, thought and behaviours were among the first victims. The histories of the First Nations’ societies in the Americas and Australia serve as prime and tragic examples. (10), (11) It should also be stressed that European colonialism, in the context of this essay, includes 20th century Soviet and China-style communism, where an alien and totalitarian ideology was coercively employed across the Eastern European and Central and East Asian landmass, to suppress the local or indigenous peoples, their cultures and beliefs, in furtherance of a unitary political, economic and social order. Not surprisingly, the Soviet Union were also at the forefront of research into medical and psychotherapeutic or “corrective” procedures for homosexuality.(12)

The history and dignity of the LGBTQ peoples are inextricably linked to the plight of the indigenous communities, as they struggled from the 16th to 20th centuries against European-sourced colonialism. While almost every former European colony is considered an independent state today, the laws against same-sex relations and marriage remain on the statutes in many of these domains. Societal attitudes have no doubt evolved over the years, and consistent with the growing awareness of LGBTQ culture and social justice movements. A factor which appears to be holding the state back is the feeling that society is not ready to accept equal rights for the LGBTQ community. (13)  That being the case, what are we doing to prepare society for a future which recognizes and confers equal rights to the LGBTQ community, as we would any other citizen or community? Or as this Time Magazine article headlined :

“Homophobia Is Not an Asian Value. It’s Time for the East to Reconnect to its Own Traditions of Tolerance.” (14)

In Singapore’s context, what are we, as a society doing to :

- learn more about LGBTQ rights, discrimination and culture?

- what are the public education system and mass media doing about this?

- why are foreign-owned businesses prevented from sponsoring LGBTQ festivals and gatherings? How does this play out in terms of encouraging or dissuading local businesses to lend their support?

- learn of the discrimination against LGBTQ people in terms of equal access to public housing, employment, marriage and mental health care?

These are just a few questions which society should address constructively.

Years from now, when equal rights for the LGBTQ community have come to pass in most parts of the world, historians will look back and perhaps conclude that the community was subjected to a prolonged and systematic campaign of hate, which was originated and sustained by the state, and in some domains, performed in concert with religious figures/institutions.

“David was gay. He cared deeply about the rights of LGBTQ people everywhere. He attended the annual Pink Dot event since 2013. He felt discrimination in any form, especially through the law, was nothing short of Bullying. This included Singapore’s Penal Code Section 377A, criminalizing all gay persons…..David felt strongly that overcoming discrimination requires an unwavering commitment to free speech. He would never compromise….” (15)

- “Walking In My Son’s footsteps. David’s fight for freedom.”

Sources/References

1. Singh, Harmohan. “Walking in my son’s footsteps. David’s fight for freedom.” p68. Thinktosee Press, 2020

2. Montesquieu. “The Spirit of Laws.” Book IX, Chap 6. Originally published in 1748.

3. Radics, George Baylon. “Section 377a in Singapore and the (De)Criminalization of Homosexuality.” p3.  National University of Singapore. 2015

4. Wilhelm, Amara Das. “Tritiya-Prakriti : The People of the Third Sex: Understanding Homosexuality, Transgender Identity and Intersex Conditions Through Hinduism.” p68. Xlibris Corporation, 2010.

5. Zhang, Yuxin. “China’s misunderstood history of Gay tolerance.” The Diplomat. June 22, 2015

6. Alimi, Bisi. “If you say being gay is not African, you don’t know your history.” The Guardian. Sep 9, 2015

7. Davis-Young, Katherine. “For Many Native Americans, embracing LGBT members is a return to the past.” The Washington Post. Mar 30, 2019

8. Morris, Bonny J. “History of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Social Movements.” American Psychological Association

History of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Social Movements (apa.org)

9. Stryker, Susan. “Transgender History in the United States and the Places that Matter.” A Theme Study of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer History. National Park Service, Dept of the Interior. 2016

10. Holocaust Museum Houston, “Genocide of Indigenous Peoples.”

HMH | Genocide of Indigenous Peoples

11. The Guardian, “The killing times : the massacres of Aboriginal People Australia must confront.” Mar 3, 2019

12. Alexander, Rustam. ”Homosexuality in USSR (1956-1982).” p173. University of Melbourne. 2018

13. Velasquez, Tony. “Keeping it straight. PM says Singapore not ready for gay marriage.” ABS-CBN News, June 27, 2015.

14. Wong, Brian. “Homophobia Is Not an Asian Value. It’s Time for the East to Reconnect to its Own Traditions of Tolerance.” Time Magazine, Dec 17, 2020.

15. Singh, Harmohan. “Walking in my son’s footsteps. David’s fight for freedom.” P130. Thinktosee Press, 2020

[drdougdouglass]

 (Reuters) - Almost half of all Americans incorrectly believe that federal law protects lesbian, gay and bisexual people from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll released this week.

A month ago, the Democratic-controlled U.S. House of Representatives passed the Equality Act, which would codify anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people in areas such as healthcare and housing into federal law.

But the bill faces stiff opposition in the Republican-controlled Senate and the administration of President Donald Trump, a Republican, opposes the bill on the grounds that it threatened "to undermine parental and conscience rights."

Some supporters of the bill say the disconnect between the public perception and the actual protections afforded to LGBTQ people shows a need to drum up support for the legislation.

"The public might be getting the sense that we're fully integrated in society and that we live a trouble-free life, and that is a challenge for my organization," said Stacey Long Simmons, director of advocacy and action at the National LGBTQ Task Force, which works on behalf of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and other queer people.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll, conducted with the Williams Institute at the University of California at Los Angeles, was released as New York prepares to mark the 50th anniversary of the spontaneous rioting that erupted outside the Stonewall Inn gay bar in Greenwich Village in protest at police harassment.

The demonstration on June 28, 1969 gave rise to the worldwide movement for LGBTQ equality.

Church and Sate Sanctioned Hetero-Normative Marriage and the Right to Die in America's Petro-Imperialist Military are NOT THE SAME as Equal Protection Under the Law.

[oliverzafar]

CHANGE WILL COME FROM THE CHILDREN

Oliver Zafar officially announced his bid for the presidency in February of 2019, doing so as a left-leaning Independent candidate. His core values are based on progressivism and looking towards the future, ensuring a better America for both its present and future citizens.

Read more below about where he stands on the core issues facing Americans today!

CLIMATE CHANGE. Incredibly vocal about doing everything possible to stop climate change and vouches that the Green Movement can boost economic growth and create millions of new careers for those in the fossil fuel industry worried about losing their jobs. Launch a 10 to 15-year plan to transition to 100% clean energy and net-zero greenhouse gas pollution. Remove subsidies and tax breaks for the fossil-fuel industry and implement a Carbon Tax. Ban fracking and all fossil fuel exports. Require plastic bags in stores only be given out at a price. His own campaign is incredibly clean, offsetting all carbon emissions produced from travel activities and events by investing in renewable energy and carbon reduction projects.

GENDER AND RACE ISSUES. Mandate a universal paid parental leave policy for either or both parents. Fight the gender and race-based pay gap by requiring businesses to report salaries, promotions, and dismissals as broken down by gender and race to the public. Codify Roe v. Wade to continue ensuring safe and legal abortions. Conduct regular random, unannounced investigations into police officers to ensure no race or gender bias takes place. Work to decrease the disproportionate amount of women of color affected by infant mortality.

LGBTQ+ ISSUES. Describes the murder of black trans women in America as a “national crisis”. Include members of the LGBTQ+ community in the Equal Housing Act. Remove all legal loopholes that allow individuals to lose their jobs due to their sexuality in twenty-two states. Ban conversation therapy. Repeal the FDA’s policy that disallows gay men from donating blood.

HEALTHCARE: Work towards “Healthcare for All” by: a) sponsoring a buy-in program for Medicaid so that not only low-income individuals have the option to use public healthcare, and b) expanding Medicare by allowing people ages 50 to 64 to still buy into it. Have the government manufacture cheap generic drugs if prescription drug costs rise too high to stop excessive pharmaceutical price-gouging. Allow Americans to purchase medications from other countries as a way to lower consumer costs. Push to pass the Affordable Medications Act in the Senate to allow the federal government to negotiate drug prices with insurance companies under Medicare.

FOREIGN RELATIONS. Build a public and private international coalition against China’s intellectual property theft and compete against China in Asia with a TPP-style trade deal. Limit drone strikes, if not discontinue them completely. No military intervention in Venezuela’s current political climate.

ECONOMICS. Cut taxes on small businesses and farmers, raise them on corporations. Incorporate a VAT Tax to pay for many of his proposals, which he loves to emphasize is a tax already used by every developed country besides the US. Encourage more union-positive thinking throughout corporate America (he’s very proud of the fact that his own staff is unionized!). Stronger anti-trust regulations to break up monopolies and encourage companies to invest profits in their employees and communities.

IMMIGRATION. Repeal criminal penalties for people crossing the border. Reexamine the current immigration process and try to expedite/ease the process so that families are not forced to enter illegally. Conduct a comprehensive review of current ICE procedures and implement serious retraining based on federally approved security protocols. If this is still unsuccessful, abolish ICE and redistribute its responsibilities to other agencies. Increase foreign aid to Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, and other countries in crisis to thus reduce the flow of asylum seekers to the U.S.

STUDENT DEBT. Expand access to college by providing interest-free federal loans. Allow employers to make tax-free contributions to pay off their employees’ student debt and help those in work-study programs graduate without owing anything.  

EDUCATION. Introduce a free universal pre-K program to ensure all children have the same successful start. Introduce initiatives to increase the US’ advancement in science, technology, and mathematics when compared to other much more advanced developed countries. Research the amount of homework and schoolwork given at public schools and whether or not it’s the most productive to produce actual results.

DEFENSE. Lower military spending by ending regime-change wars and reducing the acquisition of nuclear weapons.

GUN REFORM. Enact the Disarmament Act with some modifications. Invest into research and development of “smart gun” technology and other technological preventative measures.

PACS: Reform campaign finance laws so that representatives don’t answer to donors, they answer to voters. Force every company that wants government contracts to disclose every campaign donation. Outlaw superPACs and overturn Citizens United.

— Please specify their target voter audience [age, ethnicity, region, income, etc]

Young, young, young! Oliver’s support is distributed between 18 to 44 years old, with very few older generations outside of his home state of Massachusetts willing to even hear him out. The quintessential Oliver voter is a grad student – high in education level but low in income. He’s also attracted a lot of support from people who are fed up with the two-party system that seems to permeate American politics and would instead prefer a more Independent candidate who doesn’t need to preen to Democratic powerhouses to make a decision. He polls very favorably among members of the LGBTQ+ community and people of color, especially Asians, Middle-Easterners, and Indians who want to see their region represented through either him or his fiancé. Both sides of the coast are the areas that his support is most concentrated in, especially Northeastern intellectual elites, while his spouts of passionate progressivism are lost on most of Middle America.

— What do their supporters love and believe in when it comes to their persona and campaign? AKA. What’s people’s reasoning for voting for your character?

The first thing Oliver’s supporters will cite as the reason that they vote for him is his passion. He speaks and campaigns with a kind of fire that most politicians lost before they even became elected. They love his youth after having grown up with generation of old white dirtbags ruling the country, and believe that as the first Millennial presidential candidate he understands the problems plaguing America’s most indebted, most stressed, and most socially conscious generation better than anyone else running. Progressives also appreciate how incredibly vocal he is about his experience as a gay man and a person of color who experienced an incredible amount of discrimination following 911.

— What does the opposition hate when it comes to their persona and campaign? AKA. What points are brought up when trying to convince others your character isn’t a good choice for the seat?

Take a seat y’all, this is gonna take a while: His youth is usually the first criticism people bring up, because it’s the one that’s least controversial as opposed to his sexuality or race (but we’ll get to that too). Even though he’s got over a decade of experience in politics, people hesitate to endorse someone who’s just a few years above the legal age to even run for president. His opposition will also bring up the hypocritical nature of his marriage, since Oliver’s this stalwart progressive while his fiancé writes for Republicans. Democrats and moderate Republicans usually stop there in terms of his personal life, but of course conservatives will reference his homosexuality as something “the country isn’t ready for” or bring up his Arabic roots as “something a post-911 USA shouldn’t trust”.

Aside from just personal issues, Oliver’s also received a lot of backlash for running as an Independent. Though he’s doing it for the sake of proving that a divisive two-party system is only going to ultimately hurt America (he’s got Madison 10 like… framed twice in his office), people are harsh to point out that he’s only going to take votes away from Berkeley and essentially hinder a Democratic victory. Oliver also doesn’t know how to just give no comment when asked questions by reporters (much to the exhaustion of his staff), which while seen as “endearingly passionate” by some is seen as “an inability to keep his goddamn mouth shut” by others. He’s also incredibly uncompromising on his key issues (climate change, healthcare, gun control, and student loans most prominently), which doesn’t resonate well with moderates who aren’t 100% committed to his radicalities. And as much as Oliver claims to fight for the people, he suffers from a chronic syndrome of Northeastern Elitism as a result of being an intellectually-raised, Harvard-educated, I’ve-read-The-Republic-in-its-original-Greek kind of guy that doesn’t hold Middle America at too high of a regard.

[boolpropper]

post-roe dump from a lowly simblr

I wanna apologize, because my posts from my gameplay are all queued and I don't know how to pause them in these dire times -- it feels insensitive and inappropriate that any of my sims content continues to go up right now. I feel really wrong being active at all on any social media after the news we received in the states on Friday. I only have, what, 30 followers? So I know my platform isn't big. But for posts to keep going up once a day from my gameplay from a time when I had bodily autonomy (only weeks ago)? Feels really wrong. And I sincerely apologize. Some of them are romantic/sexual in nature, because of the budding relationships in my Sim State University hood -- that feels even more off-key to be posting.

This isn't to bash anyone who does continue to post their gameplay. Just me saying that the sims gameplay posts you're seeing from MYSELF, if you follow me, are NOT current and do NOT reflect my current priorities or feelings. I am angry. I am furious. I am so, so deeply sad. Like I said, it feels inappropriate and tone deaf for cute fun little posts about gay college relationships to be going up when I know that gay marriage and contraceptive access and freedom to engage in consensual gay relationships are all next on the chopping block in the United States.

God, things are so scary. Most states are now in a complete ban on ab0rtion. Canada is preparing for American refugees. The world says America is unrecognizable. People are taking to the streets daily, nation-wide. And nothing changes. We are sincerely fucked and I'm so scared. The government does nothing to protect the ones they warn are going to be impacted the most by this news. They're asking us to donate money to progressive political parties. Are you kidding? After we voted you in, turning out to the polls in numbers not seen since RICHARD NIXON, you have done NOTHING to expand the courts or codify ab0rtion protections. And what do I do now? I rally. I march. I join human rights volunteer groups. And the work is meaningful. But it feels as if it is in vain. I find it difficult to do anything I need to do, or that I enjoy. How is ANYONE coping?

Please visit wewontgoback.com to find rallies near you. Please go. Please donate to ab0rtion aid funds, ESPECIALLY in the southern states of the US, so that these people who direly need care can get where they need to go -- but only donate if you can. Please call your legislators. Please post on social media. PLEASE make a ruckus and talk to everyone in your life about this. Please share your story with people around you of how this impacts you and how you've utilized reproductive healthcare, if you have. Please send love from other countries and urge YOUR law makers to stick up for us and get involved.

If you're about to come at me with some pr0-life shit, you can fuck right off and i'll be blocking you. If you're gonna reblog me with some pr0-life SIMS content? Get a life.

[bills-bible-basics]

Another Sad Day for America: Respect for Marriage Act Hello, my friends. Well, those liberal-minded senators did it! As you have probably already heard, they passed the so-called “Respect for Marriage Act”. Worse yet, as was predicted would happen, all three amendments to the act, which were crafted to more fully protect Christians and Conservatives from litigation by the LGBTQ crowd, were REJECTED! Now the bill goes to the House — where it will easily pass — and then to the president’s desk to be signed into law by Joe Biden. In short, while the SCOTUS — Supreme Court of the United States — recognized same-sex “marriage” as a constitutional right, the passage of this bill codifies same-sex “marriage” and makes it the law of the land. That means that the Supreme Court cannot overturn it — as they did with Roe v. Wade — because the bill was passed by Congress, and there is nothing specific in the US Constitution -- that I am aware of, at least -- which the Supreme Court can use as a justification to overturn this soon-to-be ungodly law. As you may know, that is exactly what the liberals wanted to do: make same-sex “marriage” bullet-proof against the Supreme Court. Now they are halfway to doing it! To the dismay of millions of American Christians, the USA continues to rebel against God’s Laws and pave her way to hell, as we read in this verse: “The wicked‭ shall be turned‭‭ into hell‭, ‭and‭ all the nations‭ that forget‭ God‭.‭” Psalm 9:17, KJV It should now be even more evident that many Americans -- including many American politicians -- worship God in name only, but their actual works/actions speak to the contrary. They in fact defy His holy Word! Just watch how in coming months/years, the passage of this law will result in even more litigation against Conservatives who embrace Bible-based, Christian values, by the LGBTQ crowd. As I said, this bill empowers the gay and lesbian community, and they obviously know it. Below is a link to a Washington Times article regarding this latest development: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/nov/29/same-sex-marriage-bill-passes-senate-lawmakers-rej/ https://www.billkochman.com/Blog/index.php/another-sad-day-for-america-respect-for-marriage-act/?feed_id=188001&Another%20Sad%20Day%20for%20America%3A%20Respect%20for%20Marriage%20Act

[techcrunchappcom]

New Post has been published on https://techcrunchapp.com/us-supreme-court-trump-vows-to-nominate-woman-as-ginsburgs-replacement/

US Supreme Court: Trump vows to nominate woman as Ginsburg's replacement

Media playback is unsupported on your device

Media captionHundreds of people visited the US Supreme Court to pay their respects to the late justice

US President Donald Trump has said he will next week nominate a woman to replace the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, escalating a political row over her successor.

Ginsburg, 87, died on Friday, just weeks before the presidential election.

Mr Trump’s Democrat rival, Joe Biden, insists the decision on her replacement should wait until after the vote.

The ideological balance of the nine-member court is crucial to its rulings on the most important issues in US law.

But President Trump has vowed to swear in Ginsburg’s successor “without delay”, a move that has infuriated Democrats, who fear Republicans will vote to lock in a decades-long conservative majority on the country’s highest court.

“I will be putting forth a nominee next week. It will be a woman,” Mr Trump said at a campaign rally in Fayetteville, North Carolina on Saturday. “I think it should be a woman because I actually like women much more than men.”

Some supporters chanted “Fill that seat!” as Mr Trump spoke, urging him to take the rare opportunity to nominate a third justice during one presidential term to a lifetime appointment on the court.

Image copyright Reuters

Image caption President Trump said Ginsburg’s successor will be a “very talented, very brilliant woman”

Earlier, Mr Trump praised two female judges on city appeals courts as possible choices. Both judges – Amy Coney Barrett and Barbara Lagoa – are conservatives who would tip the balance of the Supreme Court in favour of Republicans.

Democrats have vigorously opposed any nomination before November’s election, arguing that Senate Republicans blocked Democratic President Barack Obama’s choice for the US top court in 2016.

At the time, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell justified the move on grounds that it was an election year. But on Friday Senator McConnell said he intended to act on any nomination Mr Trump made and bring it to a vote in the Senate before election day.

Ginsburg, a liberal icon and feminist standard-bearer, died of metastatic pancreatic cancer at her home in Washington DC, surrounded by her family. She was only the second-ever woman to sit on the Supreme Court.

Supporters gathered outside the court on Friday night to pay tribute to the woman who had become affectionately known as “The Notorious RBG”.

What is the row about?

The appointment of judges in the US is a political question which means the president gets to choose who is put forward. The Senate then votes to confirm – or reject – the choice.

Ginsburg, who served for 27 years, was one of only four liberals on the nine-seat bench. Her death means that, should the Republicans get the vote through, the balance of power would shift decisively towards the conservatives.

Mr Trump, who has already chosen two Supreme Court justices during his presidency, is well aware that getting his nominee in would give conservatives control over key decisions for decades to come. Justices can serve for life, unless they decide to retire.

“We were put in this position of power and importance to make decisions for the people who so proudly elected us, the most important of which has long been considered to be the selection of United States Supreme Court Justices. We have this obligation, without delay!,” he wrote on Twitter on Saturday.

Media playback is unsupported on your device

Media captionTrump and Biden react to Ginsburg death

Earlier, Mr McConnell said in a statement – which included a tribute to Ginsburg – that “President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate”.

The senator had argued in 2016 that “the American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice” which meant “this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president”.

But now he says the Senate was within its rights to act because it was Republican-controlled, and Mr Trump is a Republican president.

Democrats, however, began echoing Mr McConnell’s words from 2016.

The Senate Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer, sent a tweet repeating his exact phrase, while Mr Biden told reporters: “There is no doubt – let me be clear – that the voters should pick the president and the president should pick the justice for the Senate to consider.”

Ginsburg had also made her feelings clear in the days before her death.

“My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed,” she wrote in a statement to her granddaughter, according to National Public Radio (NPR).

Future of abortion rights firmly on the ballot

Analysis by Laura Trevelyan, presenter, BBC World News America

The death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg has injected a new element of volatility into the presidential race, with questions about what it will mean for the already intense battle for the women’s vote. Now the future of the landmark Roe v Wade ruling on abortion rights is firmly on the ballot.

President Trump, who polling suggests has been steadily losing support among college-educated women ever since he was elected, has been making a play for what he calls the suburban housewife.

For conservative women, especially evangelicals, who have doubts about his character, the importance of the right to life may be an important factor. If the Republican nominee for the Supreme Court is a woman, this could also be a way for him to appeal to female voters.

Democrats who successfully won suburban House seats in swing districts in 2018 mostly emphasised that a woman should have the right to control her own body.

The death of the iconic RBG, who did so much to codify legal equality for women, will also be a rallying cry for Democrats, who can say to female voters that those gains are now under threat.

In a year which has seen so much turmoil in America over coronavirus and racial justice, now the culture wars over abortion are front and centre too.

What does the Supreme Court do?

The highest court in the US is often the final word on highly contentious laws, disputes between states and the federal government, and final appeals to stay executions.

In recent years, the court has expanded gay marriage to all 50 states, allowed for President Trump’s travel ban to be put in place, and delayed a US plan to cut carbon emissions while appeals went forward.

Why is the US top court so important?

It is also deals with issues like reproductive rights – one of the main reasons some pro-life conservatives want to tip the balance away from liberals.

Who are seen as top contenders?

Barbara Lagoa: A Cuban American of the Atlanta-based 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, she was the first Hispanic judge on the Florida Supreme Court. She is a former federal prosecutor

Amy Coney Barrett: Member of the Chicago-based 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, she is a favourite of religious conservatives and known for her anti-abortion views. She was a legal scholar at Notre Dame Law School in Indiana

Kate Comerford Todd: Deputy White House Counsel, has a lot of support inside the White House. Served as former senior VP and Chief Counsel, US Chamber Litigation Center

of young feminists, turning her into a cult figure.

[rcclv]

What Happens When Women Are In Charge?

Putting more women in positions of power has always been one of the goals of the women's movement. The thinking goes that if women are leaders and decision makers, their leadership and decisions will be good for all women. The result is systematic change that reduces inequality.

This is not always true. We can point to plenty of examples of female politicians and CEOs whose policies reinforced gender oppression just as much any male, even when those female leaders claim to be feminists. Many female politicians oppose comprehensive sex education, gay marriage, and abortion even in cases of rape and incest. And the co-founder of Thinx period-proof underwear, Miki Agrawal, was ousted as "She-E-O" following allegations that she groped an employee and otherwise created a toxic work environment in a company which, notably, had no HR department or parental leave policy.

Just being a female leader, even one who identifies as a feminist, does not automatically mean that your leadership is good for other women. But when female leaders produce policies that address systematic inequality, that is when change in leadership leads to change in society.

The 2019 Nevada Legislature broke a record. It was the first time in the history of the United States of America that women held a majority of seats in a state legislature. Just over half of our state representatives this year are women.

"Women hold fewer than 30 percent of state legislative seats across the country, fewer than 25 percent of congressional seats, so getting to 50 percent in any one place is something significant," says Kelly Dittmar, a scholar at the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University.

This history-making body of lawmakers introduced many bills addressing issues like sexual violence, child marriage, equal pay, education, and more. And while not everything made it through, here are just a few of the laws that did pass which will benefit women:

AB456 will gradually increase the minimum wage from $8.25/hour to $12/hour over the next five years, a significant improvement for minimum wage workers (the majority of whom are women, and many of whom are also single parents).

AB139 addressed the issue of child marriage by setting the minimum age for marriage to 17 (with parent or guardian approval).

AB176 codifies sexual assault victims' right to access a victim advocate when getting a forensic exam or making a report to law enforcement.

AB142 eliminated the statute of limitations for sexual assault in cases where DNA evidence can identify a suspect.

SB166 added state protections to ensure equal pay for equal work.

SB173 expanded the list of crimes for which victims of sex trafficking can have convictions sealed or vacated.

SB383 makes it explicitly illegal for law enforcement officers to have sexual contact with a person who has been arrested or detained.

AB248 in cases of sex offense crimes or gender-based discrimination, this bill prohibits agreements from including gag orders that would prevent the victim from disclosing information about the incident.

AB19 gives police more ways to serve temporary protection orders.

AB40 extends the effective dates for initial temporary protective orders from 30 to 45 days.

SB218 increases the penalties for repeated violations of temporary protection orders, and should make it easier for victims to get protection orders.

AB60 expanded the crimes that can be counted as domestic violence and increased the penalties for repeat offenders.

AB41 requires public utilities and government agencies to accept fictitious addresses from victims of domestic violence in order to protect victims' privacy.

AB472 requires health plans to cover maternity care for surrogates.

SB94 provides $6 million in grants over two years to cover the cost of contraceptives.

SB179 decriminalized abortion, already protected by the state constitution, and streamlined informed consent for those seeking abortions.

And many, many more.

Only time will tell how much these policies impact social change on a large scale. But they are clearly intended to address systematic sexism as it manifests in economic inequality, reproductive rights, and intimate partner violence.

[twittermemesofficial]

America, Anaconda, and Dank: THEY CALL THE GOP RACIST WHICH PARTY WAS MORE RACIST? Oceupy Democrats The Republican Party was founded.The K was founded as an arm f The ISth amondment, giving frood primanily to oppose slavery he Democratic Party and resistence against the Republicans. slaves the right to vote, was passod with 100 % Republican support Foor for thought 1854 1866 1870 First they came for the Mexicans, and I did not speak ou- Because I was not Mexican Then they came for the and I did not speak out- Because I was not Gay 1865 1868 1900 Then they came for the Jews and I did not speak Because I was not Jewish. With 100% support from the Republican Party, slavery was abolishod via the 13th amendoent The 14th amendment, giving blacks ull citinmship, was ratifiod. All votes in aver of it case from Republicans By 1900, every former confederate state hod onactod the anti-black ” Then they came for the Blacks, and I did not speak o- Because I was not Black Crowlaws, all from Democratic legislators Then they came for the Muslims and I did not speak oU Because I was not Muslim President Woodrow Wilson a Democrat, took office and was also a member of the KKK FDR, a democrat placed Japanese Americans in imernment camps. Republican President Esenhower pushed for the 1957 Civil Rights Act. Lyndon Jonhson opposed him. THINK Then they came for me and there was no one liot 1913 1942 1957 to speak for me BUT WHAT DOES HISTORY SAV? 1937 1945 1964 Hugo Black was appoinied to the Supreme Court by Democrat FDR despite having been a member of th llarry S. Truman, another Democrat became President despite also being a KKK member. Th 1964 Civil Rights Act passed w 805. Bouse Republican and 82% Senate Republican suppot, but only 63% and 69% Democratic support. THE MISLEADING CLAIM: Per the Democratic Party, the Republican Party is racist. THE REALITY: History shows it may actually be the other way around. • The Republican Party was founded primarily to oppose slavery. With the successful introduction of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill of 1854, an act which allowed slave or free status to be decided in the territories by popular sovereignty, and therefore allow slavery to spread throughout the growing nation, anti-slavery Whigs began meeting in upper midwestern states to form a new party. One such meeting, in Wisconsin on March 20, 1854, is generally remembered as the founding of the Republican Party, primarily created to oppose the spread of slavery. [1] • “Radical” Republicans: During the Civil War era, the “Radical Republicans” were given that name because they wanted not only to end slavery but also to endow the freed slaves with full citizenship, equality, and rights. [2] Such a concept was deemed “radical” by the Democrats. • The Republican Party abolished slavery. The 13th amendment was passed in the Senate at the end of the Civil War, in April of 1864. President Lincoln then insisted that passage of the 13th amendment be added to the Republican Party platform for the upcoming Presidential elections and the House later passed the bill in January 1865 with a vote of 119–56, with 100% Republican support and only about 23% of Democrat support. [3] [4] • The Republican Party passed the 14th amendment, giving blacks full citizenship. “The 14th Amendment guarantees due process and equal protection of the laws to all citizens. It enshrines in the Constitution provisions of the GOP’s 1866 Civil Rights Act. The original purpose of the 14th Amendment was to defend African-Americans from their Democrat oppressors in the post-Civil War South.” [5] June 8, 1866 – The Senate passed the 14th Amendment by a vote of 33 to 11. [6] June 13, 1866 – The House of Representatives passed the 14th Amendment by a vote of 120 to 32. [6] “All votes in favor of the 14th Amendment were from Republicans, and all votes against it were from Democrats.” [5] • The Ku Klux Klan was originally and primarily an arm of the Southern Democratic Party. “Founded in 1866, the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) extended into almost every southern state by 1870 and became a vehicle for white southern resistance to the Republican Party’s Reconstruction-era policies aimed at establishing political and economic equality for blacks. Its members waged an underground campaign of intimidation and violence directed at white and black Republican leaders. Though Congress passed legislation designed to curb Klan terrorism, the organization saw its primary goal–the reestablishment of white supremacy–fulfilled through Democratic victories in state legislatures across the South in the 1870s.” [7] • The 15th Amendment, giving freed slaves the right to vote, passed in 1870 with 100% Republican support and 0% Democrat support in congress. The 15th Amendment to the Constitution granted African American men the right to vote by declaring that the “right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” The House of Representatives passed the 15th Amendment on February 25, 1869, by a vote of 144 to 44. The Senate passed the 15th Amendment on February 26, 1869, by a vote of 39 to 13. Secretary of State Hamilton Fish later issued a proclamation certifying the ratification of the 15th Amendment by the states on March 30, 1870. [8] • Jim Crow laws, poll taxes, grandfather clauses, Literacy tests, white only primaries, and physical violence all came from the Democratic Party. “In 1832, the phrase “Jim Crow” was born. By 1900, every former Confederate state (including Wyoming, Missouri, Ohio, Utah, Kentucky, Kansas and Oklahoma) had enacted “Jim Crow” laws prohibiting everything from interracial marriage to racially integrated public school systems. These state laws served to place blacks back on a virtual plantation. Similar to the “Black Codes” that came before them, Jim Crow laws were numerous. However, one denominator codified their sound support in Southern states: They all resulted from Democratic legislators.” [9] ��� President Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat, was in office from 1913 to 1921 and was also a member of the KKK. [10] • Taking office in 1937, Hugo Black was appointed to the Supreme Court by FDR, despite having been a member of the KKK. He assured the Klansmen, “I realize that I was elected by men who believe in the principles that I have sought to advocate and which are the principles of this organization,” and said to them and to the Grand Dragon, “I thank you from the bottom of a heart that is yours.” Hugo Black was awarded a special life membership, a gold “grand passport.” Black had thanked the Klan for this honor, which only a half dozen men in the United States had received. Most important, the card was presumably still valid because there was no evidence in the Klan archives that it had been returned. [11] Full disclosure, near the end of his life, Justice Black said joining the KKK was a mistake and that he would have “joined any group” if it “helped get him votes.” After decades on the bench, he ended up actually being a supporter of civil rights, but at the time of his appointment back in 1937, make no mistake about it, he was appointed by FDR specifically as a compromise since he was favored both by “new dealers” AND by racist southern democrats, whose support FDR wanted. • FDR threw Japanese-Americans in internment camps. In 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Presidential Proclamation No. 2537, requiring aliens from World War II-enemy countries–Italy, Germany and Japan–to register with the United States Department of Justice. Registered persons were then issued a Certificate of Identification for Aliens of Enemy Nationality. A follow-up to the Alien Registration Act of 1940, Proclamation No. 2537 facilitated the beginning of full-scale internment of Japanese Americans the following month. [12] • Harry S. Truman, another Democrat, was President from 1945 to 1953 and was also a KKK member. [10] (FYI: Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge were Republicans and also potentially members of the KKK, but many sources take issue with this claim’s validity. [17] [18] In particular, only one unsubstantiated account of Harding possibly being sworn into the KKK exists and other biographies of his claim no corroborating evidence of this was ever found. [17]) • In the 1950s, President Eisenhower, a Republican, worked to desegregate the nation’s capital and successfully desegregated the US military. [13] Eisenhower even pushed through the Civil Rights Act of 1957. The federal judges President Eisenhower appointed would later serve as a counterweight to the segregationist judges appointed by President John F. Kennedy, who was beholden to racist southern senators from his party, the Democrats. In addition, one of Eisenhower’s primary political opponents on civil rights was none other than Lyndon B Johnson, then the Democratic Senate Majority Leader who had voted as a segregationist for the first 20 years of his career. [13] [14] (Please note there’s a technical error in our attached graphic. While true that Lyndon Johnson had opposed Eisenhower’s civil rights efforts for years, he stopped opposing such efforts in 1957. Our graphic implies that he opposed the efforts up to and including 1957. Please accept our apologies for not making that clear in the graphic.) • The Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed with more Republican support than Democratic support! Contrary to modern assumption, “the Civil Rights Aft of ’64 was supported by a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats in both houses of Congress. In the House, 80 percent of the Republicans and 63 percent of the Democrats voted in favor. In the Senate, 82 percent of the Republicans and 69 percent of the Democrats voted for it. “Minority Leader Republican Everett Dirksen led the fight to end the filibuster. Meanwhile, Democrats such as Richard Russell of Georgia and Strom Thurmond of South Carolina tried as hard as they could to sustain a filibuster.” [15] • What about the supposed “Party Switch,” afterwards? Here’s a list of Conservative civil rights legislation since the supposed switch: [16] August 4, 1965 Senate Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) overcame Democrat attempts to block 1965 Voting Rights Act. Ninety-four percent of Republicans voted for the landmark civil rights legislation while 27% of Democrats opposed. The Voting Rights Act of 1965, abolishing literacy tests and other measures devised by Democrats to prevent blacks from voting, was signed into law. A higher percentage of Republicans voted in favor. February 19, 1976 President Gerald Ford formally rescinded President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s notorious Executive Order authorizing the internment of over 120,000 Japanese-Americans during WWII. September 15, 1981 President Ronald Reagan established the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities to increase black participation in federal education programs. June 29, 1982 President Ronald Reagan signed a 25-year extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. August 10, 1988 President Ronald Reagan signed the Civil Liberties Act of 1988, compensating Japanese-Americans for the deprivation of their civil rights and property during the World War II internment ordered by FDR. November 21, 1991 President George H. W. Bush signed the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to strengthen federal civil rights legislation. August 20, 1996 A bill authored by U.S. Rep. Susan Molinari (R-NY) to prohibit racial discrimination in adoptions, part of Republicans’ “Contract With America”, became law. CONCLUSION: The Republican Party has a long history, ever since its creation, of fighting for individual rights, specifically black rights. The Democrat Party, on the other hand, fought them at nearly every turn and created the KKK. Over time, they merely adopted different tactics, switching from overt racism to a subversive strategy, encouraging minorities towards dependence on government services. Perhaps today the Democratic Party is no longer intentionally racist, but their history and policies are far more guilt-ridden than that of the Republicans. ———————- Sources: [1] https://ift.tt/1oZrTnK [2] https://ift.tt/2HlX8bY [3] https://ift.tt/2fZYcar [4] https://ift.tt/2d40X95 [5] https://ift.tt/2uYVj29 [6] https://ift.tt/1GQhgz5 [7] https://ift.tt/1jPJ8ct [8] https://ift.tt/1Ijh5cS [9] https://ift.tt/2uZ7jkm [10] https://ift.tt/2HmVFCi [11] https://ift.tt/1wUHfuy [12] https://ift.tt/RyOC9j [13] https://ift.tt/2ExXhpW [14] https://ift.tt/14R2EP1 [15] https://ift.tt/2tFuCya [16] https://ift.tt/2HkEOzX [17] https://ift.tt/1HLpsLH [18] https://ift.tt/2HmTAq5 LIKE AND FOLLOW FOR NEW CONTENT EVERYDAY <3 for more visit: www.memelang.ml