201
submitted 11 months ago by einat2346@lemmy.today to c/politics@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] LopensLeftArm@sh.itjust.works 85 points 11 months ago

All it would take would be Trump dropping a single line in one of his rambling diatribes about how he ate a guy once, and folks like this would do an immediate about face and push to legalize cannibalism.

[-] Cort@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

Yeah then trump steaks could really make a comeback

[-] Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

He was a great guy, the best, so smart, just the smartest. He had a brain the size of a watermelon, it was just so huge. It tasted so good. It was so huge and jiggle. And so tender, you didn't even need a knife we all just had spoons, they came from my great Uncle's spoon factory. He had the best spoons, my Uncle, he knew everything about spoons. Do you all have a spoon guy? If not you need to get a spoon guy, you haven't lived till you had a spoon guy.

[-] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 61 points 11 months ago

in one of the only states that already has anti-cannibalism laws. a completely ignorant 'lawmaker'

[-] ASaltPepper@lemmy.one 28 points 11 months ago

Gotta get those single issue voters somehow

[-] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 24 points 11 months ago

I worry about the mental state of anyone who's single issue is cannibalism.

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

On either side of the debate.

[-] AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 11 months ago

Have you read The Jungle by Upton Sinclair?

[-] chaogomu@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

If that was your single take away from that book, you might want to reread it.

[-] AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Do you have some reason to believe that was my only take away from the book, or are you only parroting Upton Sinclair, who complained about that exact thing?

He [Upton Sinclair] complained about the public's misunderstanding of the point of his book in Cosmopolitan Magazine in October 1906 by saying, "I aimed at the public's heart, and by accident I hit it in the stomach."

[-] thefartographer@lemm.ee 13 points 11 months ago

A vote for me is a vote to double-outlaw cannibalism!

[-] Hegar@kbin.social 41 points 11 months ago

“I thought — this is going to be normalized at some point,” Scott said. “The way our society is going, and the direction we’re going, this is going to be normalized.”
“There is a lot of documentation out there,” Scott insisted. “If you just google it, people showing it, and how they’re doing it.”

After watching a decade old David Spade show! 😂

Of the Republican party's two main factions - the grifter wing and the rube wing - it's pretty clear which one she caucuses with.

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 21 points 11 months ago

The absolute disconnect from reality truly is disorienting.

"I heard about a thing that seems so implausible as to be ludicrous. I won't verify it. It has to be true!"

These people are living in a fantasy world that doesn't remotely exist. It's no wonder we're so fucked.

[-] charonn0@startrek.website 28 points 11 months ago

Without looking at the article, guess what party she's a member of.

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 49 points 11 months ago
[-] Okokimup@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago
[-] einat2346@lemmy.today 4 points 11 months ago

Both parties are against cannibalism, I'm pretty sure. Both parties are equally susceptible to hoaxes.

[-] LopensLeftArm@sh.itjust.works 56 points 11 months ago

One party in particular makes a habit out of blowing up literal non-issues into doomsday political theater though.

[-] awesomesauce309@midwest.social 18 points 11 months ago

One party in particular benefits more from making those non issues into dog and pony shows. The bullshit asymmetry principle.

[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 37 points 11 months ago

No they aren't equally susceptible to hoaxes, and you can tell that's true because I can predict which party she's from.

[-] charonn0@startrek.website 20 points 11 months ago

Both parties are equally susceptible to hoaxes.

Don't confuse fallibility with gullibility.

[-] rtxn@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

The main difference is the "willful" part of ignorance.

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

What's the democratic equivalent of this? Or kitty litter in schools? Or any of the Q nonsense?

[-] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago

BoTh SiDeS!!1!11!!

[-] grabyourmotherskeys@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

If Biden made an anti-cannabalism speech, R's would be coming out for it in hours. And don't forget how Russia is totally cool with cannabalism for that tip of the hat to the far right.

[-] Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

I would argue any true libertarian wouldn't be against cannibalism.

[-] SteefLem@lemmy.world 25 points 11 months ago
[-] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 24 points 11 months ago

Republicans are mentally defective. They should have no say over anything of consequence.

[-] Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

“So, I wanted to address this because what I didn’t want to see is bags of compost with human bone fragments.”

“I didn’t want to see that in my Home Depot stores,” Scott said.

Sorry what???? Like what the fuck is happening in her brain? Having said that. I would totally buy the human bone meal at Home Depot.

[-] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago

She was upset because Washington legalized human burial without preserving the dead?

So, hold up. Are they worried that if you don't preserve the dead they turn into zombies or something?

[-] billwashere@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Only if you embalm them with Worcestershire sauce.

[-] wabafee@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Give your meat a good ol rub!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] theneverfox@pawb.social 3 points 11 months ago

What, do you think the funeral industry mutilates corpses and soaks them in chemicals just for enormous profit? Don't be a conspiracy theorist.

[-] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

It's definitely not a perfect business model, what happens if people stop dying, or all people are dead?!

[-] Soggy@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

They oppose anything that challenges cultural norms.

[-] Phillmebucket@lemmy.ca 7 points 11 months ago

It's because sooner or later they know we're going to have to eat the rich and they're getting a leg up before it starts.

[-] khan_shot_1st@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Are we sure they weren't trying to ban weed?

[-] AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago

Jokes aside, this bill is problematic for a couple of reasons I can think of (although this bill isn't going to pass unless big funeral throws money at it). It sounds like this bill would ban green burial practices. Embalming is not good, the chemicals leech into the ground and eventually can end up in the groundwater. And some of those non embalming burial methods are basically the equivalent of chaining yourself to a tree for the foreseeable future due to the way our culture treats burial sites - your body is protecting the existence of a forest or similar.

Another non-embalming burial is a traditional Jewish one. They wrap a body in a decomposable sheet and bury it in a hole in the ground. It's pretty eco friendly too. Would this bill end up with freedom of religion issues?

[-] ThePantser@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Everybody's gotta eat, I just happen to eat bodies. /s

[-] bluey@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aghori

They also practice post-mortem cannibalism
[-] Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

The official statement of purpose of House Bill 522 states that the expanded law “has no fiscal impact,” because it “causes no additional expenditure of funds at the state or local level of government, nor does it cause an increase or decrease in revenue for state or local government.”

But it is revenue neutral.

[-] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

You guys are welcome to eat me when I'm dead. I cannot think of something I'm less concerned about.

[-] Tarkcanis@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Did this happen once before or am I having a case of déjà vu? The human composting thing is ringing some bells.

[-] NewPerspective@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

You know, I would have expected today's repubs to open up the law allowing the eating of the homeless and unemployed. Nice to see their ignorance at least trying to do good for once.

[-] TheRealKuni@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

I have a Modest Proposal for you…

[-] HollandJim@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Now now - repubs don’t like Swifties.

[-] TheRealKuni@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

I have a Modest Proposal for you…

Now now - repubs don’t like Swifties.

This is such a good joke that I felt it deserved acknowledgment beyond a simple upvote. Well done!

[-] HollandJim@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago
load more comments (1 replies)
this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2024
201 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19296 readers
1565 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS