355

This new bill, signed into law by President Joe Biden, includes a provision that limits access to gender-affirming care services for the children of people serving in the military.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Snapz@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

None of you read the article or the white house quote. This is a purposefully misleading headline. Bill was poisoned by gop, if he doesn't sign it a shit load of other things are fucked, by design from conservatives.

None of you are adults, man. Gop is a cancer. You have to amputate your leg. Yes, you stop cancer spreading, but you lose your leg. Designed so that you're fucked either way, but the other way, you die. Grow up.

[-] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 56 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Democrats say the American public doesn't need the 2nd amendment anymore, but here they are proving to your face that when push comes to shove, no one will be coming to help you when your lawn has a mob of 61 MAGA coming to lynch you for whatever delusional reason they manufacture.

We are on our own.

SocialistRA.org


You're gonna die of old age soon biden, but your garbage legacy will linger forever in the history books like shitting on the pages and slamming the book shut.

A cowardly empty shell of a man to the bitter end.

Enjoy hell you piece of shit.

[-] kreskin@lemmy.world 21 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Agreed.

Biden's legcy will be bringing a bit of the Israelis geniocidal hatreds home to rot the core of the US. Enshitifying the western world order and democracy itself with the same pathetic "bipartisanship" centrism and selling out that has defined his entire career and been a plague on all of us. An old white bigot with no relevance, intent on sitting in a chair that was always too big for him. At best he was not Trump. And thats about all he will be remembered for.

[-] ynthrepic@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

I dunno man, rhetoric like that. Doesn't sound like you'll be the most easy person to share this earth with either. Better to figure out another way forward them encouraging civil war, no?

[-] Tinidril@midwest.social 211 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The bill just "includes" the provision? Nobody put it there, it's just that new language often spontaneously erupts in a piece of legislation?

And why the vague language of "limits access to gender-affirming care services". What's actually in the bill is no more complex and a lot more clear. Are psychological gender-affirming services still available? Yep. Are puberty blocking drugs still covered? Yep. All that's blocked is coverage for procedures that might result in sterilization - procedures that are already not generally done on minors who arguably aren't yet capable of giving proper consent.

Tell the whole story or GTFO. Debating Biden's complicity is fine, but don't skip the Republican's role with the passive voice like you're CNN describing how more violence just "erupted" in Gaza. Don't hide what's actually in the bill and potentially cause trans kids to not bother seeking medical services because they were misled by your hack politics.

This is not legitimate outrage at the legislation. If it were, you wouldn't have left out the main protagonists, what's actually in the legislation, and the entire story. It's just mastebetory outrage bait meant to divide the left which is (surprise) the entire reason Republicans forced the issue to begin with.

If you're not already a right wing troll, you should go find the people who pay money for posting this kind of garbage.

[-] Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 39 points 3 days ago

All that's blocked is coverage for procedures that might result in sterilization - procedures that are already not generally done on minors who arguably aren't yet capable of giving proper consent.

I've been upset about restricting care. But if what you're saying is true, then it's VERY different from how it's been portrayed.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 19 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

That's because IT'S NOT TRUE. Procedures "that could result in sterilization" could apply to anything the controlling administration wants it to apply to. It's rare and is influenced by long-term usage, but at least some scientists believe HRT can result in sterilization. And the UK just banned new prescriptions for puberty blockers for trans kids only because they have a shitty report that says the science isn't settled about side effects and it could (they claim) result in sterilization. And we can point out that's not true and it's extremely safe and 99 out of 100 doctors agree, but they'll give the 1 doctor a megaphone and say as long as it's not clear we need to ban them.

These fucking minimizers always more worried about outrage being faked than the harms being caused. "Hey, black people, stop with this 'masturbatory outrage' they're just going to give you your own separate but equal facilities."

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[-] fadingembers@lemmy.blahaj.zone 29 points 2 days ago

With allies like these on Lemmy who the fuck needs enemies. So anytime we want to throw trans people under the bus just add it to a funding bill? Would y'all be singing the same tune if these provisions targeted gay people? Black? Jewish? At what point does an anti trans law cross the line for y'all? How many rights do we have to lose before you'll speak up?

[-] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 days ago

I mean, they've already signed off on wholesale genocide, it's pretty clear they have no lines left to cross.

[-] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 days ago

Bro... the genocide. All lines have not only been crossed but erased forever as the Democrats ratchet the USA to the right.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Bassman1805@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Anytime you want to pass a measure that doesn't have quite enough sort in congress, you add it to a funding bill.

It's the easiest way to add leverage to your demands, with the way our legislature currently works.

[-] vga@sopuli.xyz 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

As a detail that's missing from the article and kinda sorta lied about in the headline, it seems like this gender-affirming care was introduced in 2016 by the Obama administration as part of other additions of transition-related care.

[-] kandoh@reddthat.com 89 points 3 days ago

They start with the weakest and most vulnerable and then they work their way out to the rest of us.

load more comments (20 replies)

This is who he is, a pushover.

[-] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

I think it's pretty well known that the democrats do not have spines.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 80 points 3 days ago

Fuck off Joe. Stop doing Trump's dirty work for him.

Pocket veto that shit.

[-] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago

This whole thread is fucking disappointing. Yes it's super shitty that tricare isn't going to cover trans kids. We just had a budget showdown where Elon fucking Musk tried to tank the entire nation. Biden signed this shit and said he hated that he had to do it because it excluded trans kids.

I'm no Biden fan but holy shit get your course corrected and get ready friends because this ain't shit compared to what's to come.

load more comments (30 replies)
[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 days ago

Whoever could have predicted this. The Democrats will throw anyone under the bus.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 24 points 3 days ago

Well, with the incoming terrorists that will be running things in a few weeks, brace for a lot more.

[-] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 days ago

I don't know what it's going to take for people to truly acknowledge that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were never progressives to begin with. So much time and energy has been spent trying to convince trans people that they're good and they would protect our rights and they care about our well-being and want to protect us.

But here he is signing a literal anti-lgbt rights bill as one of his final actions in office. Why isn't he making a last ditch concerted push to safeguard trans rights? He could do that you know he's the president he could be trying to do something right now to help us. But even so he isn't. He truly never did care about trans rights.

[-] Phegan@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago

Joe Biden over here complying in advance.

[-] IDKWhatUsernametoPutHereLolol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 55 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The fuck? Did Joe fall and bump his head?

🤦‍♂️

Edit: I see why...

almost $900 billion defense bill

Yup, gotta keep the Military Industrial Complex going... 🙄

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] Shardikprime@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago

This guy was everyone's hope?

[-] kreskin@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

I despised him before it was cool. So yay me I suppose.

[-] Snapz@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

No he wasn't, he was a leaky bucket of water, but the house was on fire, so we took it.

Don't rewrite history to serve your narrative, dipshit.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2024
355 points (86.3% liked)

politics

19254 readers
2313 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS