as much as it feels like Everything is Internet now, Very Online is still smaller than you think
Posts by Lola ΘΔ
Every use of the word "psychotic" to describe a fascist, is basically shorthand for "I'm afraid to admit that fascism enables a person to be incredibly violent without any need whatsoever for them to have a personality disorder"
People use words like "sociopathic," which has literally not been a clinical diagnosis for like half a century, because they recoil from the idea that fascism merely needs apathy instead of a DSM diagnosis.
And, because they've absorbed nazi propaganda about whether mentally ill people are people.
A key part of the banality of evil is that fascism trains people who are boringly and completely neurotypical to be incredibly violent, as part of their boring job.
It literally could not possibly work if it could only be done by the tiny fraction of the population with cluster B syndromes.
They think you're stupid.
160,000 people to be kicked off NDIS as government overhauls eligibility test
Mark Butler is an evil man and every the Labor politician who tows the party line instead of voting against this are genuinely bad people
So basically gonna strip a bunch of disabled Australians of support they need and make getting on the NDIS even harder for people who need it. Got it.
A deadly shooting in Mexico, exposes the accelerating convergence of neo-Nazi ideology and online subcultures that glorify mass violence, after a self-identified Nazi sympathizer carried out a calculated attack, highlighting how this digital ecosystems are shaping acts of terror.
Read more:
This was unthinkable not two years and would not have happened had the GOP not tried to do something similar in a bunch of states
Hopefully this is enough to send the fucking message
We've now reached vibes based judicial decisions because reality and truth are woke.
The key phrase—“an establishment of religion”—was readily understandable to founding-era citizens. See District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 576–77 (2008) (relying on a phrase’s “[n]ormal meaning . . . known to ordinary citizens in the founding generation”). The reason is simple. At the time, establishments were “a familiar institution.” McConnell, Establishment, supra note 12, at 2107.13 Someone on the streets of 1789 Boston, reading that phrase, would have instantly thought of the Church of England, the colonial established churches, or the current state establishments—in other words, a polity’s official church or religion. Ibid.
Although the colonial establishments became more tolerant of dissenters as independence approached, their essence remained unchanged. The original state constitutions reflect as much. Far from rejecting establishments, many states preserved the core components of their establishments, such as public financial support for the official church, regulation of religious institutions, and religious qualifications for civic participation.36 Most explicit was South Carolina, whose 1778 Constitution declared that “the Christian Protestant religion” was “the established religion,” requiring religious societies to subscribe to enumerated articles of faith to receive legal recognition. S.C. Const. of 1778, art. XXXVIII, reprinted in Poore, State Constitutions, supra note 36, at 1626.
The Fifth Circuit flatly states that when the First Amendment says Congress may not create an "establishment of religion," it means the Church of England. They then argue the Founders intended states to have their own churches unaffected by the First Amendment (!!!).
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals is out with a new (very bad) decision, and it's a doozy.
The Fifth Circuit says that Texas can require the Ten Commandments in classrooms. But somehow it gets worse.
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
What the founding generation understood as an establishment of religion is a legal question to be decided by a court, not a “fact” question to be decided by experts, no matter how credentialed. To be sure, courts must make a determined effort to grasp the relevant history bearing on that legal question. Hilsenrath, 136 F.4th at 491 (“This kind of historical inquiry requires serious work.” (citation omitted)); McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742, 803 (2010) (Thomas, J., concurring) (noting “[h]istorical analysis can be difficult”). See generally Heller, 554 U.S. at 592–95, 600–03, 605–19. They do so by consulting articles, books, and historical sources and bringing their own independent judgment to bear on them—not by appointing an “expert,” whose “findings” are insulated by clear-error review on appeal.57 _________________
And then, in one last bizarre twist, the Court says that judges aren't allowed to ask experts in history about questions of history, because experts impact "independent judgment."
Brb going to scream.
a pom :3
You're going "oooohhhhh two wrongs don't make a right!" about counter-gerrymandering when Evelyn Normielib is out there googling "drawn and quartering how to," I don't think you're really meeting the moment here sorry
I'm gonna be real honest, man: I think we need to spend the next 100 years of this dumb fuckin country's history treating the Republican party and the right wing in general as the hostile occupying power they are, and acting accordingly
bsky.app/profile/tysc...
One of my favorite things ever on social media is when a blue checkmark says something they're so sure must be incredibly wise and insightful only to completely faceplant. Going "watch this" right before taking a big step onto a cartoon banana peel and flying out an open window
A little-known law that lets the government sidestep the Constitution to spy on American citizens is set to expire at the end of this month.
We need to make sure Democrats don’t reauthorize this civil liberties disaster. 👇
JUST IN: FBI Dir Kash Patel loses libel suit he filed against former FBI agent Frank Figliuzzi for saying Patel "reportedly" has been "visible at nightclubs far more" than at FBI HQ. Judge George Hanks (Obama/TXSD) says it was "rhetorical hyperbole." Doc: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
The real purpose of "transphobes are all secretly trans teehee" is ultimately to allow the bystander to believe that transphobia is self-inflicted by trans people....
Same as "homophobes are gay" etc
Oh please don't call TERFs 'trans masc eggs,' it's already super embarrassing that I have to share pronouns with some of the worst people in the world. The genocide advocates can be hateful and ugly in their hearts without the whole demonization of trans mascs as a byproduct
“enhanced interrogation” instead of torture walked so “detention centers” instead of concentration camps could run.
"should we really resort to playing dirty to defeat the nazis i–"
yes. kick em in the fucking balls. what kind of question is that. grow the fuck up
I am always down for a fun OC + Fashion art meme~
And always down for an excuse to draw Erika 💙
FYI, Hi-res version and a bikini Alt are available on my subscribestar.com/ambris
Also, when he retired and had to find a new doctor, remember them mentioning something about prescribing high doses and asking us about continuing progesterone.
Never exactly looked into it, but was clearly some controversy there. Enough to make a man retire.
Not too sure on details, but injectable was commonly recommended by doctors and apparently stuff about them giving high doses.
Suspect met one such doctor. Although we didn't see him long, he recommended injectable rather than oral initially for us so.
Not approved by the TGA seems to be basically it.
Also, some stuff that happened in Sydney might not have helped.
you either make room in your movement for fruity furry freaks or your movement dies. it's that simple
we've seen the first flickers of backlash over the last ~5 years, with big name (self-described) leftist influencers reacting with grudging bemusement to news like a furry researcher becoming the frontline pandemic science communicator while working on a shelf-stable version of the vaccine