There are a lot of ways they could do it… Maybe it’s like with gay marriage, where the government just can’t compel the individual who gives the marriage licenses to actually give one to an interracial couple. Then that paves the way for the next step…
Roughly half of all adults are married, and roughly 10% of marriages are interracial. So we’re talking about like 5% of people being impacted. That’s definitely a small enough group to be marginalized.
And again they only need enough voters to support this overtly to win Republican primaries in the deep south. So we’re talking about like ~20% of Southerners. How much faith do you have that the most racist 20% of Southerners approve of interracial marriage?
1 Like
It’s a mistake to think they won’t do x, y or z because it is unpopular or “bad electorally”. Literally all of their positions are. They care about gaining power through any means neccesary and using that to accomplish their goals. The idea they care about the popularity of something as a reason to do/not so isn’t based in reality. It’s Hillary brain to think the focus groups will save us.
5 Likes
I don’t think they’ll go after interracial marriages…yet, because there’s not much political will to do that. Alito was pretty much setting up the roadmap for next few years though. First abortion, then gay marriage, then criminalizing sodomy. That’s going to take a few years and probably keep the right wing psychopaths busy, but if they ever want to get around to criminalizing miscegenation, they can.
2 Likes
That’s pretty much my take on this, 100%. Gay marriage and sodomy come next, probably next year. Where it goes from there is very much an open question, but all of the things that have been discussed are in play even if less than 50% likely.
There’s also growing talk on both sides, but more from terrified Democrats and far-right openly and proudly racist Republicans, about going after Brown v. Board. That seems absurd to me, but how many steps are we from that being “next” in the agenda to take us back to the 1950s? Five? Seven?
Remember when Trump steamrolled her at the debate and she literally said “go to hillaryclinton.com” lolololol god I hate her
1 Like
That was the shot and this is the chaser:
VOTE FOR SANITY!!!
Loled at pro-choice activists. Literally none of them have done a thing for abortion rights in their political lifetimes.
You should definitely follow up on the Ayn Rand point. Dude is rapid-fire word-salading you. “Disease of the mind” without a hint of introspection. 
If I had more time I would overlay those words on scenes of an American flag blowing in the wind with some dramatic music. That could be literally any Republican candidate’s campaign ad for this upcoming election.
1 Like
https://twitter.com/burgessev/status/1521572030021259264
https://twitter.com/burgessev/status/1521572734844735488
https://twitter.com/burgessev/status/1521572849093423109
Checking in on Jason Whitlock, the sports version of Glenn Greenwald:
https://twitter.com/WhitlockJason/status/1521597984114421761
And just like that - half the country doesn’t even care that a 12-year-old will have to carry her uncle’s baby to term.
The whole thing is just so effortless for them.
2 Likes
“Can you chip in $5 to save Roe?” Make it a recurring donation!*
*to the DNC which will endorse centrist shitheads like the pro-life candidate they endorsed in Texas
1 Like
I think some sort of anti trans thing happens before gay marriage.
2 Likes
Trump is going to (rightfully) take credit for this and ride it to a 100+ point EC win.
Dems making this their key pitch in 2022 and 2024 is going to backfire spectacularly because they will both be labelled baby killers and people who can see past that will know they won’t do anything about it anyways.
2 Likes
Is the leak a crime? Is it just the breaking of a norm? Republicans care about norms now? I’m confused.
Anti trans is already happening. I think the thing after killing Lawrence is to allow discrimination in the name of religious objections to override state actions that might seek to guarantee LGBTQ rights so that conservatives in blue states can discriminate to their hearts’ content no matter state law on the matter. And from there it’s a short hop to get a religious license to discriminate according to race and sex.
1 Like
It’s going to be amazing if people vote and somehow someway against all the other odds the midterms go Dems way big time and they hold the House and hold Georgia in the Senate and flip Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, North Carolina, and like Ohio or something… and they manage to primary Sinema AND win the general…
And then they’re up 54-46 and they get nothing done because Casey ¶ is pro-life, Manchin is pro-life and pro-filibuster, and three or more others were secretly pro-filibuster all along.
So they try through regular order and lose 54-46 with Murkowski, Collins, Casey and Manchin cancelling each other out… So they’re just like…
Hey, we tried, VOTE HARDER!
I don’t think there are any pro-trans laws/rulings on the book for them to strike down, and I think they’re going to move on Obergefell next year. I could easily see them putting anti-trans laws on the books next year simultaneously and both moving side by side. I think that’s a bit of an audible to their plan based on current events, but yeah I see both of those two things likely happening before the next presidential election.
They aren’t making interracial illegal. Thats like a quarter of the marriages in 2022.
The GOP isn’t stopping until America is a theocratic hellscape, reminiscent of Handmaidens Tale, where all law and morality is derived from a badly written millennia old book whose central morality is that rape, incest, slavery, murder and genocide are moral goods.
US conservatives are a death cult unified by hate and desire to destroy and control everyone who isn’t cis white and male.
2 Likes
Best way to deal with someone like this is to just never respond. As in literally never communicate with them again.
2 Likes
I’d like to do an emergency podcast of Dopehat gargling my nuts
5 Likes
Counterpoint: a sitting US senator said Loving v Virginia was wrongly decided. To my knowledge, zero elected Republicans came out in support of interracial marriage or the ruling, or offered any sort of condemnation of his statement.
He walked it back a day or two later, but his walk back was clearly bullshit.
