volkris @volkris@qoto.org
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
@phaedral no, SCOTUS didn't preempt anything here. That's not how the US legal system works.
It's funny how in your post you recognize that the Court is perfectly willing to rule against Trump while still saying they give him carte blanc [sic].
No, sometimes Trump is right on the law, often he's wrong, and the Court explains the differneces.
@GottaLaff It's funny because Trump personally came out celebrating being completely vindicated, and his supporters said the same thing, getting the court ruling completely backwards.
So I guess he has at least some adults working for him who actually read the court case and realized he lost.
I don't think Trump and his people realize they lost.
@ppatel The new executive order is just posturing like everything else this President does
@continuation you say that, but that's not what I'm hearing from queer activists.
@EveHasWords you have no right to privacy in public. It's mainly a question of whether the people you elect to government fund these programs.
@Peter_Link meh That's sensationalism. Executive orders proposing to violate law are simply invalid.
@libramoon the Texas legislature is not the federal Congress. So no.
@gkmizuno honestly I want a lot less.
KJ was going off the deep end, as she often does, and plenty of people are pointing out that she doesn't seem to know what's going on in the world. I would like a lot less of her blabber.
KJ has no doubt. Well maybe she should have some doubts because she doesn't know what she's talking about.
The other Supreme Court Justices constantly try to give her remedial courses on how the courts work. She really is an embarrassment.
The problem is that yes, it is very explicit, and no, What it explicitly says doesn't support that stance.
@gkmizuno sure, none of those majority opinions back your claims.
Want to try again?
@gkmizuno What specifically are you talking about?
@kurtsh this post doesn't seem to understand the concept of co-equal branches of government. It is because of the rule of law that the executive branch can manage its own business.
@GeriAQuin there's nothing inconsistent about that.
One was about taking money from people and the other was about spending money. Yeah, Congress can dictate that students have to pay taxes, but on the other hand it can't dictate that the executive branch has to spend money.
If you understand how the US government works, this post is just spouting ignorance.
@lillyfinch No, that's the opposite of what's happening.
Whoever posted that is promoting a conspiracy theory that just doesn't match the historical record or how the US government actually works.
Please don't promote this kind of nonsense. It's antisocial.
@lillyfinch that makes for a nice conspiracy theory, but it doesn't match the record. And it doesn't even match how the US system of government works.
That's just wacko conspiracy theory stuff.
No, if you look at the legislative record that didn't happen. And why would it? We elect our own congresspeople, they get booted out of office if we don't like what they do.
This is just nonsense.
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris's choices:
