“It is a complicated issue. It is truly a complicated issue, with a wide range of views, truly a wide range of views,” Jean-Pierre said. “There is no ‘yes or no’ answer to this, it is complicated. There is a rule that the Department of Education [DOE] has put forward, and we’re going to let that process move forward, and again, we want to make sure that while we establish guardrails with this rule, we also prevent discrimination, as well, against transgender kids. But again, a complicated issue with a wide range of views, and we respect that.”

“Absolutely no reason for the Biden admin to do this,” New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wrote. “It is indefensible and embarrassing. The admin can still walk this back, and they should. It’s a disgrace.”

“Honestly, this move by Biden to push a rule on trans kids in sports is not only a backwards betrayal, it [forces] us to have to spend our time dealing with god d*** sports instead of criminal bans on our healthcare,” Alejandra Caraballo, a civil rights attorney and LGBTQ+ advocate, wrote. “He could have just done nothing. This is legitimizing transphobia.”

The mOsT PrOgReSsIvE Administration in History™ funny-clown-hammer “A complicated issue with a wide range of views, and we respect that” funny-clown-hammer Fuck off out of here with that “centrist” nonsense. There’s nothing complicated about it, and it’s not an issue unless you want to turn it into one and want to appeal to people’s emotions like Republicans are doing. It was only a matter of time before they’d start throwing trans people under the bus. I guess with the coming elections it’s as good a time as ever.

  • Rom [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    There have been multiple instances of Dems controlling both congress and the WH over the last 50 years. Where are our abortion rights? Livable wages? Universal healthcare? Why don’t the Dems actually do shit when they have the opportunity to?

    • GiddyGap
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Democrats have not had a 60-vote supermajority in the Senate to write those things into law. Abortion rights were stable until Trump appointed three justices. Not the Dems fault.

      • Rom [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Abortion rights only existed because of a Supreme Court ruling in 1973, which could have been (and was) overturned by another Supreme Court in the future. Rights decided by SC rulings and not codified into law are not, in fact, stable. The Dems have had multiple opportunities since 1973 to codify abortion rights into law and have failed to do so. Yes, the Dem’s fault.

        And let’s not pretend like the Dems would do anything if they actually had a 60-vote supermajority. They’d find some Manchin or Sinema scapegoat to shoot it down and pin all the blame on.

        • GiddyGap
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Let’s be real here. It’s the Republicans’ fault if anything.

          Also, it was different times when Dems had opportunities decades ago. Many Dems were not pro-choice and there has never been a majority within the Democratic Party to pass legislation until recently. It certainly wasn’t a priority since Roe was in place. Now they face a Senate filibuster without 60 votes.

          • Rom [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Let’s be real here. It’s the Republicans’ fault if anything.

            Right, just ignore every argument presented to you, cover your ears, and pretend as though no one disagrees with you.

            there has never been a majority within the Democratic Party to pass legislation until recently

            The Carter administration is recent?

            Now they face a Senate filibuster without 60 votes.

            Dems had the opportunity to get rid of the filibuster, but they didn’t do that, either. How convenient.

            • fox [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              The Dems would’ve definitely passed abortion protections into law, but you see the parliamanterian gave them 3 Pinocchio’s so that’s a bust

          • ZoomeristLeninist [comrade/them, she/her]@hexbear.netM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            the filibuster is a fake obstacle. dems can get rid of the filibuster at any time. remember the whole “parliamentarian” debacle? yeah that was manufactured too. they could just fire the parliamentarian and find a new one