politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:

- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
As the Pentagon doesn't ~~host~~ promote services for the holidays of other religions to the same extent as they do for evangelical Protestantism, this is a clear violation of the separation of church and state.
Edit: Highlighted corrections to the above statement in italics.
Just add it to all the other violations.
I'll just put this violation with the other violations, then…
Unfortunately, it's added to the list of "so sue me" which is basically this administration response on anything they have done in the last year and change
What are you going to do about it? Is the only question that matters to this gangster Administration.
The Constitution allows for the possibility of a gangster Administration. Checks and balances. The hope was that the Supreme Court and Congress would keep the executive branch in check.
The Constitution also recognizes that no system is perfect, so it adds the right to bear arms. Not for sport. Not for defense. The Second Amendment exists specifically to fight tyranny. Just in case the elections get rigged and an extremist party takes control.
Such an unlikely scenario, amiright?
I thought the second amendment was there because militias were cheaper than a standing army.
Yeah but there is no one left to oppose them. The rules don't apply. Who is going to stop them?
...the argument your making about the 2nd amendment is why it's now obsolete. When America was founded, firearms could actually be used to overthrow a corrupt government. They had practical utility. At this point, however, half the population armed with assault rifles wouldn't make a difference. A combination of the government's mass surveillance and superior firepower would put down the rebellion before it got off the ground
I'm of the opinion that the constitution should adjust to changing times. 18th century laws aren't geared to solve 21st century issues.
Totally agree with you, a handgun is no match for a tank. If the military wants to make war on citizens, they will lose.
However, there is more going on that meets the eye. Many members of the military would not want to shoot their own citizens. And armed citizens can still do more damage than unarmed citizens. In other words, the 2A forces an authoritarian administration to use violence in order to repress the citizens. It ups the stakes. And citizens can strike in ways that the military can't. Guerilla warfare tactics. They don't need to "win", they just need to disrupt, to spread fear.
But, yeah, with the current surveillance state, along with the culpability of the media, it seems a dubious proposition that armed citizens can save themselves from the fascists. Regardless, I have suddenly become a HUGE proponent of guns. Especially when I see the Black Panthers providing security for demonstrators. Respect.
This is false.
The Pentagon hosts a Ramadan dinner (at the end of the holiday, to celebrate the conclusion of the fasting ritual).
The Pentagon has hosted Hanukkah menorah lighting ceremonies. (I'm not sure if they still do.)
The issue here isn't the sponsoring of a religious activity. The function of the military is to send soldiers to their deaths. Those soldiers who need spiritual support should absolutely have access to it.
The issue is that the president and the defense secretary have incorporated evangelical Christianity into their cronyism. Religion is being used as a litmus test for loyalty.
Signed,
A pragmatic (ex-militant) atheist
Made corrections to my comment. Importantly, Pentagon leadership should not be any more involved in the organization and celebration of any religious event more than another.
...anymore? When my mother worked there (admittedly, decades ago), the catholic chaplain conducted mass every Friday morning. (Very quickly. "GodblessAmenGetbacktowork.") They also had other religion's services. Nothing mandatory.