I think this rhetoric is common because it genuinely is powerful, and while it may not always be applicable in a straightforward way, there is some truth to the idea that the way nature does things is often more efficient, or has some less-than-obvious motivation.

The issue, to me, is that conservatives are on the wrong side of this argument. Same sex intercourse is incredibly common throughout the animal kingdom. Animals are occasionally observed engaging in clearly gendered behavior that *does not* match their sex. Phenotypical differences between human racial groups are statistically less significant than between individuals within the same race, on average.

Why should we let them have this argument? If it is a dog whistle, it's a shitty one, because it actually exposes a weak point in their logic.

Forwarding because it's a good comment

.

As of 3:48 PM EDT, Noam Chomsky is still alive. The rumors of his passing are false. His wife, Valeria, has confirmed this information to me. #NoamChomsky

🔗 Jose M. Santana (@JoseMSantana10)

The Senate voted nearly unanimously Tuesday evening to pass major legislation designed to reverse the American nuclear industry’s decades-long decline and launch a reactor-building spree to meet surging demand for green electricity at home and to catch up with booming rivals overseas.

The bill slashes the fees the Nuclear Regulatory Commission charges developers, speeds up the process for licensing new reactors and hiring key staff, and directs the agency to work with foreign regulators to open doors for U.S. exports.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/congress-advance-act-nuclear-power_n_6670a926e4b08889dbe5e626

Version with a quick denoscription of the article

<<CHECK IF YOUR MEDS AFFECT YOUR HEAT TOLERANCE.>>
<<SEEK COOL AND SHADE WHENEVER POSSIBLE.>>
<<STAY HYDRATED.>>
<<YOU GOT THIS.>>

NASA analysis confirms 12 consecutive months of temperature records

Source

"They think patriarchy is an inevitable natural consequence of unchangeable biological facts... they cannot imagine a society where the presence of men is not inherently a danger to women."

fucking THIS

Really interesting take, I think I agree

Natural spaces, if one believes them to be a right such as I do, can present interesting challenges in terms of accessibility. For example, many of nature's finest wonders require people to hike in, and creating accessibility for people with mobility issues in the form of roads and other infrastructure both presents risks to the wildlife and potentially introduce higher levels of pollution, risking the "pristine" quality some prefer for these spaces. How can we, as a society, balance the need to provide these things for all people while still preserving those areas? Discuss.