Australis13

If this isn't a crime, it really ought to be as a violation of duty of care. It should not be possible to cut funding to trials like this mid-way and endanger the health and/or lives of the participants.

Your experience parallels quite well with the neurodiverse community too, so whilst I do not have the lived experience of your situation, I can empathise with the general feeling of not belonging. I guess this is why Star Trek episodes like this and other franchises (e.g. X-Men) that deal with fictional minorites work so well across so many real-world minorities and "out groups". They also provide a useful talking point to introduce the majority to the perspective of a minority.

I like to think that fans of shows like Star Trek are typically more aware of the diversity in humanity and more understanding of these differences.

I can't quite decide if this is just virtue signalling or not from the Democrats. I know some of them would genuinely support it, but this feels very much like it is too little, too late - if they were actually serious about saving democracy in the US, they could have done this when it actually stood a chance of being useful.

This pretty much proves that the US government is experiencing its worst cybersecurity breach ever.

See also https://lemmy.world/post/25293137

The US has had many warnings over the past century of issues with its system of government. Each time they've ignored that and failed to fix the underlying issues. For example, Nixon and Agnew was a warning that the system was ill-equipped to deal with a corrupt president and corrupt vice-president. The opportunity was there at the time to strengthen the system and prevent precisely what Trump has done over the past 8+ years, but nobody did anything about it.

The founding fathers may be responsible for not envisioning how a gentleman's agreement would be abused, but the greater responsibility lies with those who came afterwards, saw how the system could fail, and did nothing.

I don't live in the US, but I did want to just say that as an outsider I appreciate the effort you are putting in, especially given the hostile working environment.

They are ignoring court orders. See also https://beehaw.org/post/18430614

As an international observer, I would argue yes.

Firstly, Trump's position as president violates the Constitution (the 14th Amendment Section 3 - the insurrection disqualification clause). Then there is the chaos he has unleashed since inauguration, with plenty of clear overstepping of authority. The other branches are either unwilling or unable to stop him, so yes.

Not surprised, but didn't expect to see this quite this early into the Trump regime.

https://bpr.studentorg.berkeley.edu/2020/11/04/americas-forgotten-history-of-forced-sterilization/ https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/03/07/469478098/the-supreme-court-ruling-that-led-to-70-000-forced-sterilizations

Legally, no. Practically/functionally, yes, since nobody's actually going to stop him.

Unfortunately, neither Netanyahu or Trump are going to care what Amnesty International says, right or wrong.

Countries need to be assuming that nothing is beyond the Trump administration and then plan to deal with that.

That's a great idea. Glad it worked.