• 0 Posts
  • 31 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 25th, 2023

help-circle


  • I agree with everything you’re saying, except:

    We’re founded under a “1 person, 1 vote” ideology

    At the 1787 Constitutional Convention, delegates debated between Congress choosing the next president vs a straight popular vote. The former risked corruption between the legislative and executive branches, and the latter gave too much power to the uneducated, sometimes-mob-esque populous. After several debates, a compromised was reached - electors. These intermediaries wouldn’t be picked by Congress or elected by the people. Instead, the states would each appoint independent electors who would cast the actual ballots for the presidency.

    Overall, though some founders agreed with a “1 person, 1 vote” ideology, they were not the majority… unfortunate though that was.










  • confused_code_monkey@lemm.eetoComic Strips@lemmy.worldSingles
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Men can criticize modern dating. Any gender can. I’m not saying you can’t. The final frame in this comic portrays strong anger at rejection which is never okay. Sadness? Sure. Disappointment? Understandable. Anger? No. The anger signifies that you feel that the other person owes you something.






  • I appreciate the spirited response, but you’re misunderstanding things.

    Arizona, like 14 other states in the U.S., allows its governors to appoint justices to its highest court but gives voters the opportunity to vote them out later on. In Arizona, the initial retention vote takes place two years after justices are appointed. If a justice is not voted out, they will face another retention vote every six years; if they are removed, the current governor is allowed to appoint a new person to the state Supreme Court, albeit from a list provided by a statewide judicial commission.

    The previous post was merely attempting to specify how to “vote out” judges facing a retention vote.



  • The meat industry contributes to a significant amount of global carbon emissions (11-17% of global carbon emissions according to a few sources). The meat industry has been the primary reason for the Amazon rainforest’s deforestation. Industrial cow, pig, and fish farms are quite destructive/poisonous in whatever environment they’re in. The large amount of antibiotic misuse in meat farms is leading to super resistant bacteria. In multiple studies, a healthy vegan diet is has been shown to be better in multiple health metrics when compared to a healthy omnivore diet. And, finally, the meat industry is typically terrible for the life of animals involved, especially the large meat farms.

    Overall, prolifers typically supporting the political parties that typically support the meat industry does suggest hypocrisy. I imagine that’s what the original commenter was suggesting.