this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2023
10 points (100.0% liked)

News

17 readers
1 users here now

Breaking news and current events worldwide.

founded 1 year ago
 

A Detroit-area community has banned LGBTQ+ flags from publicly owned flagpoles. The unanimous vote by the Hamtramck City Council came during a tense meeting that raised questions about discrimination, religion and the city’s reputation for welcoming newcomers. The council voted to display only certain flags, including the American flag and one that represents the native countries of immigrant residents. More than 40% of Hamtramck's residents were born in other countries, especially Yemen and Bangladesh. Some members of the all-Muslim council said the pride flag clashes with the beliefs of some members of their faith. Residents and businesses are free to fly pride flags.

top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Tormented@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Man I hate that our existence is becoming increasingly political. It's so incredibly messed up that a bunch of people see no issue dehumanizing others in our society.

[–] OnceAndFuture@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

That really sucks dude, can’t imagine how that must feel on a daily basis, seeing stuff like this. I’m sorry you have go through this bud

[–] admiralteal@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Political speech is the most protected form of speech. A ban allowing a Russian or Saudi flag but not a Pride flag is unlikely to pass any constitutional muster. A complete flag ban might be able to, though it would still be awful.

But now we also know that Hamtramck near Detroit is a place full of people who do not want LGBTQ+ people to exist in public. Hamtramck, Michigan. A place full of bigots. Proudly bigotted. It's even part of their official Wikipedia identity now. Good for them, letting the world know their true colors.

[–] stephfinitely@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Stop wasting time and tax payers money on this culture war. Let people live their lives.

[–] Flaky_Fish69@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

Ive a better idea. we should somehow convince them to start a culture war against child hunger.
I'll volunteer to play the bad guy if it'll help convince them to stop being assholes and feed some kids.

[–] borkcorkedforks@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Well, that's going to be a lawsuit.

[–] CMLVI@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What? What's wrong with a group of people banding together to say "don't display things we don't agree with"? That's why Nazis can't display their regalia, right?

Right?

[–] Penro_Town@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nazis can display their regalia. It's frowned upon by the public, but there isn't a legal ban on it like this.

[–] CMLVI@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] effingjoe@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You fell into a classic Poe's Law blunder.

[–] CMLVI@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Lmao inb4 I'm branded pro-Nazi within 3 days of joining kbin. Definitely not!

Never change ~~Reddit~~ kbin

[–] effingjoe@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The general rule of thumb is that if it's plausible that your comment could be typed out in all seriousness, then you should make it clear that you aren't typing it in all seriousness. And these days there's not much that couldn't be typed in all seriousness.

[–] CMLVI@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

I guess; but there is literally always the possibility that any satire goes over someone's head. That would have every comment beyond just stating fact ending in /s.

/s, because I don't mean literally every comment, I'm exaggerating for effect.

But I agree to a point. It's real shitty that it's even an option for people to think I'd support Nazis.

[–] JonEFive@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's amazing how poorly government employees understand the constitution. Or if you prefer the more cynical view, it's amazing how much government officials can knowingly get away with in terms of unconstitutional behavior.

[–] Photon@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

The trick is that people believe the bill of rights is the only protection afforded by the constitution. The framers were against such a list of rights because it implies exclusivity and may ignore the precepts of the entire document: that we're all created equal and entitled to the pursuit of happiness. Surprise, surprise. As soon as landed white men were not the only ones covered by it, suddenly we split hairs about the amendments instead of the point of the entire document.

[–] CatLover12@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

My city got so upset about raising the pride flag that they banned ALL flags other than the American flag. I don't understand how a flag can get people so crazy.