Yeah I mean I think most people know that there are negative consequences that can happen, just like with any medical procedure. I’m just surprised by the fact that people might get a medical procedure then want to prevent all future people from getting it because they had a bad experience. Shows what I know about people.
I’ll say I don’t buy this argument, though that’s just my opinion. I don’t think these politicians care one way or another what happens to people as long as they get more power. I find it far fetched to say they’re seeking power so that they can be cruel.
Cruelty is a means (or side effect), not an end.
Wow I’ve never heard of someone wanting to ban a medical procedure all together because they experienced an adverse effect of it. Thanks for the view into a psyche that I didn’t know about.
Granted, but that doesn’t really answer the question. I’m asking why they’re so insistent on doing it, not how they’re maintaining power despite being unpopular.
I’d like you to cite a source to back up that claim.
Yeah here’s a take that resonates with my cynicism about Republican politicians. They literally see it as a way to get more numbers in the long run because they know it disproportionally affects poor people (ei forces them to have more kids) and they know they can get those people to vote for them through other manipulation.
Seems like a pretty long con though right? The same cynicism tells me these politicians just care about short term wins.
I’m not basing my statement (about American sentiment) on what I see on the internet though! The polls and votes seem to support abortion access.
When somebody powerful does something perplexing, my guess is usually “because money”. Is that the case here? I’m not that informed about how politicians get their money…
It’d be really nice if they clustered by instance. Then one could theoretically follow all politicians in their favorite party without having to look them up manually.
Sometimes local subscribers is nice to know. Maybe not more important than total subscribers, but useful nonetheless. Especially on a small/specific instance where you get to know your instance-mates, you might want to know how many of them are following a thing and whether you’re about to introduce them to something entirely new.
Well would you look at that
The four-color theorem is pretty cool.
You can take any map of anything and color it in using only four colors so that no adjacent “countries” are the same color. Often it can be done with three!
Maybe not the most mind blowing but it’s neat.
Expand and term-limit SCOTUS. This system is ridiculous
You know it’s just bots right?
This happens to me sometimes too! Very wierd
I’ve seen this comparison many times and it does nothing to help my understanding of the fediverse. I have no idea how email servers work.
That’s kind of the problem I think. I was able to find like 2 people there I want to follow. Lemmy is going to be far more successful at displacing its alternative because all the communities you’d want to subscribe to are here.
No. My other instance is WireBase.org. It’s a smaller one
It’s type 2 fun. You don’t want to do it, but you’re glad you did when you do
Expand and term limit SCOTUS. This system is ridiculous