all 3 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Pretty telling that it required a 9 year fight. In one of the "liberal states." Ugh. But good news, I suppose.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago*

    the people in the 2 largest bubbles are liberal and those bubbles outnumber the rest of the state, but they keep voting in conservative governments nonetheless just like the rest of the united states does -- what americans consider liberal is centrist to the rest of the world, so the american government, including calfiornia, will always lean center-right.

    that's why we have trump right now and there will be atleast one more in the future.

  • source
  • parent
  • 6 comments in c/usa@midwest.social view that post
    [–] 12 points 1 month ago

    I hate that it's 2026 and it's still legal in places

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Excellent! I had been keeping an eye on this one and while it’s not a surprise it passed this time, it’s such a relief.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago

    Republicans want to fuck your kids.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    When I was a kid, the loophole for child marriage made sense to me: you need permission from your parents and a judge, and it probably only happens when someone’s pregnant to avoid the child being a bastard.

    As an adult, why the fuck would anyone care if someone’s a bastard and how could at least two people (at least one guardian and a judge) think anyone is mature enough to marry before 18?

    very sad story of the youngest married couple whose marriage I supported, and the reason they’re still not enough for me to support child marriageI had a neighbor who had “dated” the same guy since they were the first couple in our school, starting around 10 years old. He was diagnosed with leukemia at ~19 and died within six months of the diagnosis (in line with his given prognosis). In that time, he and my neighbor got married, because she didn’t want to go into the world after his death without objective evidence of the magnitude of their relationship and he didn’t want to die without marrying her. Had he been diagnosed and died two years earlier, they wouldn’t have been able to get married in our area, which would have been sad, but not nearly so sad as the practice of child marriage.

  • source
  • 2 comments in c/california view that post
    [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    I dont understand why Planned Parenthood or these other groups were fighting this. Seems weird as hell to me.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    "But after facing opposition from the American Civil Liberties Union, the Children’s Law Center and Planned Parenthood, legislators watered down the measure, citing concerns over how a ban could restrict a child’s reproductive freedom and ability to make healthcare decisions. "

    It sounds like perhaps prior versions of the draft legislation could have been used against a pregnant young woman (at age 17) removing the newly pregnant young woman her own reproductive choices. That would seem to stand in opposition to the Planned Parenthood mission.

    "Planned Parenthood, an influential group in California politics and a longtime opponent to child marriage bans, stopped fighting the proposal for the first time this year."

    So it sounds like the draft legislation was modified and Planned Parenthood put their support behind it and now its signed into law.

  • source
  • parent