Story Hour Triggers Some People
In response to the dire threat of drag-queen story hours, a bunch of states are trying to pass laws to make it illegal to appear in the attire of a gender other than the one you were assigned at birth. I am dying to see how it turns out. Though Republicans have enjoyed taunting people who can't define what a "woman" is, they can't define it themselves, and in fact gender is an empirically undefinable concept -- you got nothing to go on but self-report. A society adopts some self-presentation norms to signal individuals' roles, including ethnic and class norms, indicators of profession such as work uniforms or suits-and-ties etc., and norms that indicate gender, and somebody always has fun pushing against that boundary, whether it's earrings for men or tattoos for women. I saw the King of England on TV in a skirt the other day, and what do you think shaving is? Men have beards, women don't, that's how God made us. Will women be allowed to wear pants? What about men with long hair, like me? I cannot think of anything sillier to pass a law about.
And tell me, what is less threatening than a drag queen? Oh some have a dangerous sense of humor, their grasp of irony can be deadly, but really now. If you are concerned about "grooming" and the "safety of the children," then I'm not joking, you should do something about the church and the Republican Party. A guy in a party dress with false eyelashes is reading stories to kids at a library, how is that scary to anybody?
And now the Proud Boys and other violent groups are showing up with guns and disrupting the story hour. Hey, you're being trolled, guys. You're yelling cuss-words at little kids who want to hear fairy tales, do you see how that looks? You're scaring librarians, of all people. Ssshhhh. Everybody's having a good time and you're waving guns around and calling people hateful and nutty names. The whole situation is engineered to make you look stupid when you do that.
There is no detectable irony in the news that a newly elected Republican Congressman used to perform as a drag queen named Kitara Ravache. It's almost as if it doesn't really matter.
I can't even see what the issue is with drag queens, including drag queens reading stories to kids. I have never heard even a rumor of anything inappropriate at one of those events. The drag queens are there to entertain, it's fun, it's pretend, it's outrageous. I assume most are gay but that isn't even part of the deal, we can find photos and videos of a lot of straight men in women's clothing over the years, it's a standard schtick. Drag is not contagious, they aren't trying to recruit or convert anybody, it's just fun. They like pretending, they like dressing up, and everybody seems to have fun at these story hours.
Clothing is a cultural expression, it changes over time. There is nothing "biological" about any of it and God did not give orders in the Bible to dress in some way. Today's fashions and gender cues are not even "traditional." The culture decides what is appropriate but fashion emerges from individual choices and is not imposed by law, at least in a free country (ahem). Of course drag queens are intentional dress-code violators, the outrageousness is part of the show. Part of the fun of it is that it is at once shocking and also not harmful in any way. Some rules and laws exist to protect people, and ... some don't really do anything for anybody. The idea that the government wants to tell people how to dress is just amazing.
I used to think that it was a cheap shot to speculate that people who doth complain too much are dealing with their own personal impulses. There is a long tradition of anti-gay crusaders getting caught having gay sex -- we had one just last week, typical story. So it seems that, at least sometimes, these poor guys are thinking if it's not illegal, what will stop me from doing it? Whatever "it" is. Dressing in drag, maybe. Since I can't allow myself to do it, I won't allow anyone else to, either. And so these tortured moralists have to threaten other people for doing the things they can't admit they want to do.
Drag queens, by their very existence, remind us that cultural norms are malleable and arbitrary, we participate in them by choice and are actually free to be whatever we want to be. And freedom is threatening to some people.
posted by JimK at 3:43 PM
127 Comments:
Boys will be boys!
what the deuce!
I thought TTF was defunct...
"A guy in a party dress with false eyelashes is reading stories to kids at a library, how is that scary to anybody?"
warped is a better adjective than scary
11 months until Crismas :)
Jim said "Drag queens, by their very existence, remind us that cultural norms are malleable and arbitrary, we participate in them by choice and are actually free to be whatever we want to be. And freedom is threatening to some people."
As I posted in the previous thread, many, many conservative men live in fear of experiencing same sex attraction or unconsciously displaying feminine mannerisms. It really is the case that many of them are thinking "If it's not illegal, what will stop me from doing it?" Contrary to what W/R/BA says, they really are scared of drag queens.
It's not the government's place to tell people what they can or cannot wear or what they can or cannot do with their bodies when they aren't harming anyone. This is just another step in the right wing authoritarian march to dictatorship, micro managing people's lives to enforce conformity to narrow and rigid gender roles that suffocate the human spirit of freedom.
The increase in bullying of LGBTQ youth in Florida makes sense when you realize that the people in their 30’s and 40’s who called us f****ts in high school are in charge in Florida and want their kids to be able to do the same without repercussions.
No one is pressuring school children to reject traditional gender expressions. The pressure is entirely the other way, children who don't want to adhere to stereotypical and traditional roles are being bullied and punished with the approval of the government while DeSantis forces schools to look the other way.
Children with non-traditional sexual orientation or gender identity deserve the same protection and support non-trans heterosexual children get. Let children be who they are, they and society will be far better off.
"many, many conservative men live in fear of experiencing same sex attraction or unconsciously displaying feminine mannerisms. It really is the case that many of them are ...they really are scared of drag queens"
I don't think either of these is generally true
if you were to say many men fear that if they are too sympathetic to homosexuals, they will be suspected of secretly being homosexual, that may be accurate
but it's likely true whether they are conservative or liberal, secretly gay or not
and, unfortunately, they are sometimes right
but this has little to do with the opposition to having drag queens perform in public schools and libraries
most people find drag queens repulsive and don't think kids should be conditioned to view them as role models
drag queens are free to do as they wish but taxpayer-supported institutions shouldn't provide a venue for their performance to children
It's not the government's place to tell people what they can or cannot wear or what they can or cannot do with their bodies when they aren't harming anyone. This is just another step in the right wing authoritarian march to dictatorship, micro managing people's lives to enforce conformity to narrow and rigid gender roles that suffocate the human spirit of freedom.
The increase in bullying of LGBTQ youth in Florida makes sense when you realize that the people in their 30’s and 40’s who called us f****ts in high school are in charge in Florida and want their kids to be able to do the same without repercussions.
No one is pressuring school children to reject traditional gender expressions. The pressure is entirely the other way, children who don't want to adhere to stereotypical and traditional roles are being bullied and punished with the approval of the government while DeSantis forces schools to look the other way.
Children with non-traditional sexual orientation or gender identity deserve the same protection and support non-trans heterosexual children get. Let children be who they are, they and society will be far better off.
The cognitive roots of prejudice towards same-sex couples: An analysis of an Australian national sample
Abstract
There are well-known correlations between low cognitive ability and support of prejudicial or non-egalitarian attitudes. This paper adds to existing knowledge by providing the first analyses of the associations between cognitive ability and attitudes towards LGBT issues in a non-US sample (Australia), comparing these across three measures of cognitive ability, and examining the separate, joint and interactive effects of education and cognitive ability. Findings from a high-quality, national Australian dataset (n = 11,564) indicate that individuals with low cognitive ability are less likely to support equal rights for same-sex couples. This pattern holds in the presence of confounds, is consistent across measures of ability, and is more pronounced for verbal ability. Education and cognitive ability affect attitudes through similar channels, but retain independent effects.
Introduction
Research conducted chiefly in the US, Canada and Western Europe reports correlations between low cognitive ability and support of prejudicial or non-egalitarian attitudes towards certain social groups (including ethnic minorities, migrants, women and people with AIDS), as well as related constructs, such as conservatism, ethnocentrism, authoritarianism, and dogmatism (Brandt & Crawford, 2016; Dhont & Hodson, 2014; Hodson & Dhont, 2015; Onraet et al., 2015; Stankov, 2009; Van Hiel, Onraet, & De Pauw, 2010). However, despite the significance and contemporaneity of the subject matter, few studies have specifically addressed the links between cognitive ability and attitudes towards LGBT issues.
Identifying the individual and social factors that contribute to the emergence and perpetuation of negative attitudes towards LGBT people and/or same-sex couples is important and topical. Even in highly tolerant societies, non-heterosexual individuals remain disadvantaged across life domains –including income and poverty, physical and mental health, labour market outcomes, and homelessness (see e.g. Institute of Medicine, 2011; Perales, 2016; Uhrig, 2015). The dominant paradigm used to explain the comparatively poor life outcomes of LGBT people, the minority stress framework, attributes these deficits to the day-to-day barriers and stressors non-heterosexual people face due to a hostile social environment, which diminishes their capability to function in society (Meyer, 2003). These stressors emerge from cultural and institutionalized heteronormativity, and are enacted by other people within society via discrimination and stigmatization. Individuals' behaviors follow from their beliefs (Kraus, 1995), and attitudes towards LGBT people predict how the heterosexual majority interacts with the non-heterosexual minority (Mereish & Poteat, 2015; Morrison & Morrison, 2011). Thus, identifying how individual differences such as cognitive ability influence attitudes towards LGBT issues is a necessary step to devising strategies that promote equality of opportunity by sexual identity.
This paper makes three contributions to the existing knowledge base: it provides the first analysis of the associations between cognitive ability and attitudes towards LGBT issues in a non-US sample (and the first focusing specifically on attitudes towards equal rights for same-sex couples), (ii) it compares these associations for three widespread and validated measures of cognitive ability (the National Adult Reading Test, the Symbol Digits Modalities Test and the Backwards Digit Span test), and (iii) it delves into the separate, joint and interactive effects of education and cognitive ability. To accomplish this, it relies on data from a high-quality, national Australian dataset, the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey (n = 11,564).
--- Section Snippets ---
Cognitive ability and socio-political attitudes
Cognitive ability refers to a compendium of mental abilities that capture individuals' “psychological resources to process and retain knowledge, solve problems and master challenging tasks” (Dhont & Hodson, 2014, p. 454). Since Adorno's observation that ethnocentric people are less intelligent than non-ethnocentric people, (see Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswik, Levinson, and Sanford's 1950) a large and growing body of research in psychology, political science, and sociology has established that low...
The Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey
The analyses use data from the HILDA Survey (Watson & Wooden, 2012). This is a household panel study which collects annual information from the same respondents over the 2001–2015 period. It is one of the largest panel surveys in the world and part of the Cross National Equivalent File. The HILDA Survey features a complex, probabilistic sampling design, and its sample is largely representative of the Australian population aged 15 and older. Information is collected through a combination of...
Bivariate correlations
Table 2 shows the bivariate correlations between the different cognitive ability measures and the 7-point measure of attitudes towards equal rights for same-sex couples. All correlations are highly statistically significant (p < 0.001). The three individual measures of cognitive ability are highly and positively correlated with each other (Pearson's r = 0.20 for NART-25 & SDMT; 0.36 for NART-25 & BDS; 0.32 SDMT & BDS) and with the composite measure (Pearson's r = 0.80 for NART-25; 0.57 for...
Discussion and conclusion
This paper has examined the associations between different measures of cognitive ability and prejudice against same-couples. A first contribution to the literature was expanding current knowledge on the links between cognitive ability and prejudice by considering a new outcome measure (attitudes towards equal rights for same-sex couples) in a new country context (Australia) using high-quality, nationally-representative data (HILDA Survey, n = 11,654). The findings are consistent with previous...
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Alice Campbell, Abram Todd, David Ribar, Mark Wooden, Walter Forrest, Janeen Baxter, Mark Western, Stefanie Plage, Chris Ambrey, Tony Beatton, Michael Courts, Rochelle Côté and two anonymous referees for helpful comments and suggestions. This research was partially supported by the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Children and Families over the Life Course (project number CE140100027) and by an Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career...
Summary:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289617303628
I posted "many, many conservative men live in fear of experiencing same sex attraction or unconsciously displaying feminine mannerisms. It really is the case that many of them are ...they really are scared of drag queens"
W/R/BA said "I don't think either of these is generally true"
You are very wrong about that and given that closeted men like you wouldn't admit it if it were true, what you claim to think has little bearing on reality. Only half of gen zed identifies as exclusively heterosexual. As lgbt people have increasingly been accepted by the American public (over 70% support same sex marriage) the majority of people are becoming willing to stop hiding that they have same sex attractions as well - to the benefit of everyone's mental health.
One study found that 85% of of self described homophobes get sexually aroused when watching gay sex. In the time I was presenting as male I had heterosexual men regularly "joking" about wanting to have sex with me and making sexual advances. Note the Christian pastor who advised young men not to look at their naked bodies in the mirror lest they become sexually aroused by the sight. The "dirty" little secret of christian conservative communities is that they deal with a large percentage of their male members expressing same sex sexual attractions - like Jerry Falwell Jr enjoying watching his wife have sex with other men. This is very common, there are a great number of christian men just like Jerry Fallwell Jr., 65% of Republican men report fantasizing about their partner having sex with another man, there is a very long history of conservative politicians and religious leaders who attack and decry some sexual practices, and then get caught engaging in that very behavior.
"if you were to say many men fear that if they are too sympathetic to homosexuals, they will be suspected of secretly being homosexual, that may be accurate but it's likely true whether they are conservative or liberal, secretly gay or not"
Far fewer liberal men are worried about being perceived as gay than conservative ones. Fear of being perceived as gay is mostly a conservative male concern.
W/R/BA said "most people find drag queens repulsive and don't think kids should be conditioned to view them as role models drag queens are free to do as they wish but taxpayer-supported institutions shouldn't provide a venue for their performance to children".
You're confusing what you think with "most people". Males wearing traditionally female attire harm no one - this should never be restricted. Most people are fine with drag queens, it's the right wing authoritarian minority of Americans that is pretending this is a problem in order to justify perpetrating violence on their lgbt scapegoat. Drag Queen story hour is no different than having a clown show up at a child's birthday party. If you were to show an 8 year old a picture of a drag queen and a picture of a clown and ask them to explain how they are different they wouldn't be able to do so, drag queens and clowns are all the same to young children.
It's sadly ironic that bigots falsely claim drag queens "sexualize" children but they've never had any problem with the "Little Miss" beauty pageants where heterosexual parents dress up their toddlers in sexually suggestive outfits and heavy makeup and have them prance around on a stage for the entertainment of adults. If the conservatives had ever complained about that, or tried to stop that, it wouldn't be so hypocritical for them to suddenly be "concerned" about children seeing drag queens.
Marjorie Taylor Greene's amendment failed 14-418
"You are very wrong about that"
Am I? If so, you sure had nothing that could refute it.
I just don't think very many conservatives "fear" either (1) experiencing same sex attraction, or (2) unconsciously displaying feminine characteristics
that's not to say there aren't some who experience same sex attraction or display some mildly feminine characteristics
I just don't either is really scaring anyone
for the subset of conservatives who belong to some traditional religious community (Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Judaism, et al), they may consider homosexuality sinful and will avoid acting on such impulses, but that's not something that could fairly be described as "fear" any more than the avoidance of any other sinful desires
"As lgbt people have increasingly been accepted by the American public (over 70% support same sex marriage) the majority of people are becoming willing to stop hiding that they have same sex attractions as well"
it's hard to say, because who knows how many actually experience such attractions, but it's likely untrue that the "majority" of them are discussing it are discussing it openly
"In the time I was presenting as male I had heterosexual men regularly "joking" about wanting to have sex with me and making sexual advances"
really? how often?
you must not have been "presenting" very well
"The "dirty" little secret of christian conservative communities is that they deal with a large percentage of their male members expressing same sex sexual attractions"
an assertion without any evidence
"Far fewer liberal men are worried about being perceived as gay than conservative ones"
not true
"Males wearing traditionally female attire harm no one - this should never be restricted"
well, it isn't restricted
but running programs for young kids involves making choices and it probably isn't appropriate to choose to expose the kids to guys with mental illness
"Most people are fine with drag queens"
that's a fantasy you have
most parents don't want to have cross-dressers serve as role models for their kids,
that's true regardless of whether the parents are liberal, conservative, or apolitical
"justify perpetrating violence on their lgbt scapegoat"
declining to have drag queens read stories to kids is not violence
"It's sadly ironic that bigots falsely claim drag queens "sexualize" children but they've never had any problem with the "Little Miss" beauty pageants"
I think most conservatives, as well as liberals, have negative views of those pageants
I said "As lgbt people have increasingly been accepted by the American public (over 70% support same sex marriage) the majority of people are becoming willing to stop hiding that they have same sex attractions as well"
W/R/BA said "it's hard to say, because who knows how many actually experience such attractions, but it's likely untrue that the "majority" of them are discussing it are discussing it openly"
Again, only half of Gen Zed considers themselves completely heterosexual. 64% of Republican men report fantasizing about seeing their wife have sex with another man - clearly the majority are becoming willing to stop hiding.
I posted "The "dirty" little secret of christian conservative communities is that they deal with a large percentage of their male members expressing same sex sexual attractions"
W/R/BA said "an assertion without any evidence"
Oh, it's most certainly not without evidence. 64% of Republican men (almost all christian) fantasize about watching their spouse have sex with another man. Clearly most Republican men have same sex attractions.
I said "Males wearing traditionally female attire harm no one - this should never be restricted"
W/R/BA said "well, it isn't restricted"
It hasn't been recently restricted but Republican politicians are introducing all manner of laws to restrict who can wear what when and wear. They're going back to the 50's and 60's where laws against "female impersonation" effectively made it illegal to be transgender. Conservatives hate freedom.
I posted "Most people are fine with drag queens"
W/R/BA said "that's a fantasy you have most parents don't want to have cross-dressers serve as role models for their kids, that's true regardless of whether the parents are liberal, conservative, or apolitical"
Clearly most people are fine with drag queens, look at the huge popularity of Ru Paul's Drag Race and it's imitators around the world. Drag has exploded in popularity and that's why conservatives are freaking out about it. Drag shows abound, and many parents take their children to them. It's only the right wing authoritarians fearing their own same sex attractions who are opposed.
I said " it's the right wing authoritarian minority of Americans that is pretending this is a problem in order to justify perpetrating violence on their lgbt scapegoat.
W/R/BA said "declining to have drag queens read stories to kids is not violence".
Showing up at drag shows and shooting the participants and audience most certainly is violence. Violence is encouraged by right wing authoritarian propaganda saying all lgbt people are necessarily pedophiles and any effort to show support or acceptance for lgbt children is an attempt to lure them into sex. This is stochastic terrorism, Tucker Carlson tells his audience to "Fight back" against lgbt people every way they can and some take him up on it.
I posted "It's sadly ironic that bigots falsely claim drag queens "sexualize" children but they've never had any problem with the "Little Miss" beauty pageants"
W/R/BA said "I think most conservatives, as well as liberals, have negative views of those pageants"
B.S. - you never hear hypocritical conservatives object to them or oppose them, only drag shows and pride parades. Conservatives don't rant and scream about the "Little Miss" beauty pageants "sexualizing" children and call the participants' heterosexual parents "groomers", they don't show up with guns to try to stop them, they don't kill anyone at "Little Miss" pageants. Conservatives are using violence and the threat of violence to force every child to be heterosexual and to adhere to their narrow and rigid ideas of gender expression. Conservatives hate freedom.
Most Christian conservatives fear sexuality that isn't rigidly controlled and directed. They teach their children that it's immoral to masturbate despite research showing it's a necessary part of good mental health.
Jordan Peterson advises young men not to masturbate "because there is nothing noble about it". The right wing authoritarian Proud Boys have a rule that their members are only allowed to masturbate to orgasm once a month and then it must be within three feet of a woman. Throughout history dictators have pressured young men to refrain from masturbation. This creates sexually frustrated young men, young men full of anger and resentment over their lack of sexual fulfillment, young men primed for violence, rape, and war and ready to do so in the name of a "higher" cause.
Human psychology evolved to help hunter gatherer tribes to succeed in an environment where there was occasional inter-tribal warfare. A certain percentage of males have a natural psychological tendency to want to wage war on their neighbours and rape the conquered women. Leaders keeping young men sexually frustrated can promote and trigger this tendency.
There are a growing number of incidents of incels mass murdering women. If they weren't taught that it's shameful and wrong to masturbate they could be experiencing a lot of the sexual satisfaction their leaders have coerced them to deny themselves. A single male can have a fulfilling sex life just by themselves through fantasy. When you masturbate you have any sex partner(s) you desire and the sex goes exactly according to your favourite script. In that way it can be better than sex with another person as that generally doesn't go exactly the way you fantasize about.
Speaking for myself, when I was full of testosterone I had a very strong sex drive and sometimes went several years without a sex partner. Was I sexually frustrated? No, not at all because I regularly used sexual fantasy satisfy my desires. Even when I had a partner, at times I preferred to masturbate because that always goes exactly as you want, with whomever you want and you can live out desires your partner might not be able or willing to fulfill. I never felt angry or jealous that some highly desirable female was out of my reach, I could have her however and whenever I wanted in my fantasy life.
Convincing young men not to masturbate can make those without a sexual partner deeply frustrated, angry and arouse their natural psychological tendency to want to wage war and rape conquered women. Jordan Peterson and right wing authoritarians like the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers are grooming a generation of young men to feel angry, hostile, and entitled to sex with women. They are steering these young men to violence, they want to use them to seize power by force. They don't believe in democracy or freedom.
Society best suppress anger, aggression, and violence, not sexuality.
The pandemic and the raucous political climate have taken a devastating toll on the mental health of LGBTQ youth — nearly half of whom have seriously considered suicide in the past year, according to a nationwide survey released Wednesday.
The rates of suicidal thoughts among LGBTQ youth have ticked upward over the last three years, according to the fourth annual survey conducted by The Trevor Project, a nonprofit suicide prevention and crisis intervention organization for LGBTQ youth.
The survey comes at a particularly fraught moment for advocates of LGBTQ rights as Republican lawmakers push for rules that prohibit classroom instruction about sexual orientation and gender identity, ban books featuring LGBTQ themes, curb transgender students’ ability to access gender-affirming medical care, participate in school athletics or use restroom facilities that match their gender identities.
“When we take a group of young people who are already very vulnerable to poor mental health and then we initiate these conversations,” the hardships compound, said Jonah DeChants, a research scientist at The Trevor Project. Not only are young people being targeted by these laws, but they also now have to wake up and log onto social media or turn on the news and hear elected officials talking about their identities in very misinformed, ignorant and in many cases very anti-LGBTQ perspectives.”
DeChants stressed that LGBTQ youth are not “inherently more suicidal” than their straight and cisgender peers. Poor mental health outcomes, he said, are the result of “minority stress” like social stigma and are not the direct result of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
“It’s the fact that you wake up and you have to navigate a society that doesn’t want to allow you to love who you want to love or express your gender the way you want to express it,” he said. “That is what creates these poor mental health outcomes, not young peoples’ internal identity.”
The survey suggests a simple path forward that could shield young people from serious harm: Welcoming communities. LGBTQ youth who felt strong affirmation from their families reported attempting suicide at less than half the rate of those who lacked social support. Suicide attempts were also reported at lower rates among LGBTQ youth who found affirmation in their schools and broader communities compared to those who felt ostracized. Yet fewer than a third of transgender and nonbinary youth reported that their homes were gender affirming.
“The science actually shows that when communities push back against these attacks and choose to affirm LGBTQ young people — whether that’s talking openly about these issues and not banning discussions or books from libraries — those steps are actually potentially life-saving,” DeChants told The 74.
The survey also highlights the extent that LGBTQ youth are targeted with harassment and physical violence — attacks that ultimately heightened their risk of suicide attempts. More than a third of LGBTQ youth reported that they have been physically threatened or harmed due to their gender identity or sexual orientation.
The online survey was completed by nearly 34,000 LGBTQ youth in the U.S. between the ages of 13 and 24 between September and December 2021 — even before officials in states like Texas and Florida launched the latest round of policy attacks against LGBTQ youth.
Another recent survey, released in March and conducted by Morning Consult for The Trevor Project, found that a majority of adults oppose efforts to ban books or censor school curricula featuring LGBTQ topics. Just 1 in 3 adults expressed support for laws that ban gender-affirming medical care for minors. Reported rates of physical abuse, homelessness and hunger were also disproportionately high among LGBTQ youth, the CDC survey found.
BUT WHAT ABOUT THE PARENTS? NEW YORK TIMES FALLS INTO THE ANTI-TRANS ‘PARENTS’ RIGHTS’ TRAP
What do you call parents who side with the ADF, a right-wing legal advocacy group, against their own transgender teens? “Bigots” would be one valid response. So of course The New York Times recently published an article deeply sympathetic to the parents in question, playing up tropes associated with the anti-trans Right and so-called trans-exclusionary radical feminists (TERFs) in what members of the trans community and allies have long since recognized as a troubling pattern at America’s “paper of record.”
The article, written by Katie J.M. Baker, focuses on the resentment some parents feel when they discover their children have been allowed to socially transition at school, using names and pronouns in the classroom that are different from those they use at home. In some states, such as California, when high school children don’t want their parents to know about their preferred names and pronouns, the sensible policy is not to inform the parents. In other states, such as Alabama, the cruel policy in place is to legally compel teachers and school administrators to out trans children to their parents should the children come out at school.
In a September 2022 announcement welcoming Baker to the Times as “a correspondent covering the social and cultural conflicts that divide the U.S. today,” Baker’s editors noted her “empathetic eye.” But empathetic to whom? When it comes to the matter of trans minors’ safety, Baker’s empathy seems to be lacking. Instead, her reporting gives pride of place to the resentment of parents who seem to think they have the right to control every aspect of their children’s lives—an attitude that often leads to the suicides of trans youth.
Baker seems concerned to reassure readers that these parents aren’t right-wing Christian zealots, so she uses diagnoses like autism and ADHD to invalidate a transgender teen’s understanding of himself before quoting his mother saying “It felt like a stab in the back from the school system” and, “It should have been a decision we made as a family.”
This is fine, Baker’s reporting indicates, because the parents “accepted their teenager’s new gender identity,” even if “not without trepidation.” His mother, after all, was just concerned that the school might be putting her child “on a path the school wasn’t qualified to oversee.” And if parents like her join up with the Christian Right to protect their “parental rights” and start voting for Republicans—as some of the mostly “liberal” parents interviewed for Baker’s report did—well, who could blame them?
While Baker focuses on such parents, her article quotes very few trans people. She does, however, quote a single “expert,” Erica Anderson, a transgender psychologist who has become the darling of TERFs and other transphobes for her willingness to side with them and against the rights and safety of trans minors.
Let me, as a transgender person, say one thing very clearly right now in response to those concerned that schools might be putting kids “on a path [schools aren’t] qualified to oversee.” No one puts anyone “on a path” to being trans. Being trans isn’t some contagious curse. And being trans is hard—increasingly so as the environment for trans people in the United States (and elsewhere) becomes more hostile. No one who decides to “try on” a transgender identity to be “trendy” or “edgy” is going to persist in it for long, because, again, being trans is hard.
Rather than do the hard work of asking themselves why their children don’t feel safe and comfortable talking to them about things like sexuality and gender identity, they’re pressuring schools to force their children to do it or remain in the closet at school.
It may not be ideal for children to use names and pronouns at school that their parents are unaware of. Ideally, parents, teachers, and administrators would partner in a healthy way that nurtures children as they become themselves. But we do not live in an ideal world. We live in a world in which most American states enlist teachers and school administrators as mandated reporters because we know that far too many parents violently abuse their children.
We also live in a world in which many parents attempt to force children into roles the children cannot fit into, as exvangelicals or survivors of extreme childhood indoctrination of any kind can tell you. State intervention may not be possible in those cases, but that doesn’t mean that the indoctrination isn’t wrong and psychologically harmful, or that authoritarian religious ideology doesn’t easily provide cover for the kinds of physical and sexual abuse that we do deem appropriate causes for state intervention.
Schools should provide a supportive environment for children to be themselves—an environment in which bigotry and bullying are not tolerated. To report responsibly on the cultural battles playing out in state legislatures and school districts across the United States regarding the accommodation or forced outing of transgender students, one should empathize above all with the trans students. Instead of uncritically adopting right-wing tropes about parents’ rights, reporters should also explicitly consider the issue of children’s rights.
And instead of focusing on why parents may resent states and school districts that afford their queer minors safe spaces without explicitly informing the parents, reporters ought to ask why so many queer and especially trans minors feel unsafe coming out to their “liberal” parents. Anyone who’s ever been a teenager who felt like they couldn’t tell their parents something important should be able to muster up the empathy with ease. But apparently that’s too much to ask of The New York Times.
Satanic Temple opens telehealth abortion clinic and names it after Samuel Alito's mom
My Son Asked For Minnie Mouse Underwear And I Realized We Have A Big Problem
Standing in Target with my 3-year-old son, I searched for Minnie Mouse underwear. Check any retailer online or in stores and you’ll see: Minnie Mouse and every other female character you can think of is printed exclusively on underpants labeled “girls.” For boy-specific briefs, you’re stuck with Mickey or Pluto. Good luck if you’d like the whole gang: Boy and girl characters — like boy and girl toys, clothes and shoes — do not occupy the same spatial plane.
If we believe in equality and inclusivity, it’s incumbent we create space early in kids’ development to experiment, experience and grow outside of narrow labels. For me and my son in that Target, these labels raised questions on why we separate genders in the first place and the ways this separation impacts how each of us sees the world.
Ultimately, we solved our underwear dilemma through crowdsourcing and daring: We put him in “girls” underwear, one size up. He wore them without a sense of oddity or difference, confused when kids attempted to correct him after seeing a glimpse of his undergarments at group potty time. “I think they said it was girls’ underwear because it has girl characters on it,” he said. But later, when he wore his Disney princess socks to school, he began to realize that the label “girls” was seen as inferior and strange ― a source of ridicule.
Separating people into categories has an adverse effect on children’s worldviews, reinforcing at an early age harmful stereotypes.
A study shares that empathy — the ability to live in or understand another person’s perspective — can reduce human bias and improve real-world interactions among those who are different. Meanwhile, the California Department of Education recommends education on gender inclusivity start early.
Recent attacks on transgender rights at schools and legislation discouraging any education on gender identity until fourth grade, as adopted in Florida, represent an increasingly fervent backlash to broadening gender labels and norms. The idea we should stick to our own corners, like 1950s segregation, is one as old as human existence, but one that’s been proved to hinder society from thriving.
Take same-sex schools, for example. Human behavior experts and neurologists have debunked the idea boys and girls should learn in separate schools. Moreover, studies of same-sex schools have demonstrated these institutions help engender harmful stereotypes and promote inequalities between men and women.
So how do we proceed? Pushing past the mainstream means facing harassment and being confident against it. Kids — age 3 or 15 — are not emotionally equipped to handle these repercussions. However, we, as parents, can help build a supportive environment. When I asked other parents how they handle clothing, most said they steer their boys toward the boys section — even if they want pink or unicorns — to save them humiliation. It may feel like an OK strategy in self-preservation, but should our fear of how they will be treated dictate how fully they can express themselves? Our own upbringings are perhaps the culprit — generationally outdated undertones of sexism and misogyny guiding us wrongly about what it means to enjoy a cultural moment that is deemed feminine instead of masculine. If femininity hadn’t been so maligned, would we care if boys embraced it?
Even as conservative debate heightens, more people are seeking a fluid gender space — one where gender assigned at birth does not dictate cultural gender expression.
Far right protests targeting the LGBTQ community show a troubling correlation with violent attacks
Across the country, right-wing extremists with guns have been showing up at libraries and churches to intimidate parents and children attending drag queen story hours. Groups such as the Proud Boys conflate the reading of books by members of the LGBTQ community with the predatory "grooming" of kids.
Hospitals that provide gender-affirming care have received death threats after being targeted by social media influencers like Chaya Raichik, the former real estate agent who runs the "Libs of TikTok" account on Twitter, and featured in prime-time diatribes by Fox News's Tucker Carlson.
Other soft targets for the hard right have included gay pride parades. Over the summer, 31 members of the neo-Nazi Patriot Front were arrested in Idaho after a concerned citizen reported seeing them loading up a U-Haul with what looked to be a "little army" of men in riot gear.
By the end of November, far-right activists took part in at least 55 public actions targeting members of the LGBT+ community — up from 16 the year before, an increase of some 340% — with a corresponding rise in violent attacks on people perceived to be gay or transgender, according to a report released this week by the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project, or ACLED.
While racism remains the primary driver of the far right, anti-LGBTQ actions have "fueled the largest increase in far-right protest activity," the report states, with the rise in such activity "strongly" correlating with a rise in violent attacks, of which there have been no fewer than 20, including the murder last month of five people at a gay nightclub in Colorado Springs. Though we don't have a specific motive the suspect has a history of online and offline bigotry.
Such deadly attacks are often carried out by self-styled vigilantes who are not formally members of any far-right group, but where those groups are most active is tied to where attacks then take place.
"They have been inspired by the rhetoric that they might be seeing online, and by the mobilization they might be seeing offline," Kishi said. "Those people are then deciding to take matters into their own hands and engage in violence."
If a mainstream platform airs an attack on a minority group, then radicals will increase their activity around that sort of attack as a means of recruitment — while perhaps masking their other views, such as organizing under the guise of merely standing up for "free speech/ Despite such rhetorical appeals to the First Amendment, a far-right presence at a demonstration makes that protest "nearly five times more likely to turn violent or destructive").
The U.S. labor market clocked a shockingly strong month in January, adding 517,000 jobs and dipping down to 3.4 percent unemployment, according to data released Friday by the Labor Department.
The numbers blew past expectations. Analysts were projecting an increase of around 185,000 jobs and for the unemployment rate to edge up to 3.6 percent. In December, the unemployment rate dipped back down to 3.5 percent and added 260,000 new jobs, according to revised figures released Friday.
“This is an unbelievably strong unemployment report, not to suggest there’s a problem with credibility. The unemployment rate takes out the recent historic low going down to 3.4 percent while payrolls were a blowout topping 500,000 jobs. An additional 71,000 jobs are added with the revisions for the previous two months,” Bankrate analyst Mark Hamrick wrote in a statement.
“The stronger than expected employment report stands in direct conflict with fears of an imminent recession, which has been weighing on the minds of economists and business leaders alike,” he added.
The gain of 517,000 new jobs tops the monthly average gain of 401,000 for 2022, a year that already had outsized job growth.
Growth was strongest in the sector of leisure and hospitality, which added 128,000 new jobs compared to a monthly average of 89,000 in the sector last year.
Employment numbers were also revised up for 2022 by about 500,000 in total and were posted higher for November and December.
The data also showed that average hourly earnings rose by 0.3 percent, or 10 cents, to $33.03 an hour as wage pressures in the economy continued to moderate. Over the past 12 months, earnings have increased by 4.4 percent, compared with 4.6 percent as measured last month....
Jim said "A guy in a party dress with false eyelashes is reading stories to kids at a library, how is that scary to anybody?"
W/R/BA said "warped is a better adjective than scary"
Only those who fear it say it's warped. Conservatives are scared of permitting male femininity because witnessing that makes it harder to suppress their own feminine feelings.
W/R/BA said "if you were to say many men fear that if they are too sympathetic to homosexuals, they will be suspected of secretly being homosexual, that may be accurate but it's likely true whether they are conservative or liberal, secretly gay or not. [It's] not true [that far fewer liberal men are worried about being perceived as gay than conservative ones]
Liberal men are far more sympathetic to gays than conservatives. Liberal men joke about desiring sex with other men, conservative men don't. Liberal men are clearly far less concerned about being thought gay.
W/R/BA said "and, unfortunately, they are sometimes right [they will be suspected of being gay if they are sympathetic]"
"Unfortunately"? You oppose sympathy for gays, clearly you prefer men fear they'll be thought of as gay if they are sympathetic.
W/R/BA said "but this has little to do with the opposition to having drag queens perform in public schools and libraries"
It has everything to do with it. Conservative men are afraid of males expressing femininity, the taboo helps them deny their own feminine feelings.
W/R/BA said "most people find drag queens repulsive and don't think kids should be conditioned to view them as role models"
Only an insecure minority finds drag queens repulsive. White supremacists feel that way about blacks, that doesn't mean their oppression is okay. Children should see drag queens, they need to know it's okay for males to be feminine, as some will always be.
W/R/BA said "drag queens are free to do as they wish but taxpayer-supported institutions shouldn't provide a venue for their performance to children".
They should as long as they provide religious indoctrination to children - look at Kurt Cameron. Republicans are introducing laws now to make it illegal for people assigned male at birth to express femininity. A healthy society lets people be free to be who they are.
W/R/BA said "but running programs for young kids involves making choices and it probably isn't appropriate to choose to expose the kids to guys with mental illness"
I agree. But males expressing femininity aren't mentally ill so it's entirely appropriate.
W/R/BA said "most parents don't want to have cross-dressers serve as role models for their kids that's true regardless of whether the parents are liberal, conservative, or apolitical"
It's only conservatives pushing to make it illegal for males to express femininity. Throughout history 65% of societies have been accepting of male femininity - most parents are fine with drag queens, as it should be - this harms no one.
Donald Trump is offering to post a $1 million bond as part of his effort to appeal sanctions imposed last month on him and one of his attorneys for filing a “frivolous” conspiracy suit against his old rival Hillary Clinton and others.
On Friday, Trump and lawyer Alina Habba sent a letter to U.S. District Judge Donald Middlebrooks. They offered to post a $1.03 million bond in order to appeal the order sanctioning the pair $937,989, for filing a conspiracy suit against Clinton and others, Bloomberg reported.
Middlebrooks last month blasted the lawsuit as completely without legal merit, and said it amounted to nothing more than a partisan political manifesto that wasted taxpayer money and time for legitimate court actions.
He accused the former president of a “pattern of abuse of the courts” for filing a number of such suits for political purposes, which Middlebrooks said “undermines the rule of law” and “amounts to obstruction of justice.”
He added: “We are confronted with a lawsuit that should never have been filed, which was completely frivolous, both factually and legally, and which was brought in bad faith for an improper purpose.”
Middlebrooks raked Trump as “a mastermind of strategic abuse of the judicial process,” who uses the courts “to seek revenge on political adversaries.”
Middlebrooks imposed the sanctions on behalf of 18 defendants who submitted a joint motion accusing Trump of knowingly filing a suit with bogus claims to dishonestly advance a political narrative.
As of Saturday, Middlebrooks had not issued a decision on Trump and Habba’s posted bond offer.
A new Missouri bill takes Florida's ground-breaking Parental Rights in Education law, dubbed the "Don't Say Gay to Small Children" law, even further.
The bill says that "no nurse, counselor, teacher, principal, contracted personnel, or other administrative official at a public or charter school shall discuss gender identity or sexual orientation with a minor student" unless they're a licensed mental health care provider and have a guardian's permission.
The Missouri bill goes further to protect children than the Florida law, which only restricts classroom instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity through kindergarten to grade 3, by covering all minors and explicitly barring discussions on these topics.
W/R/BA said "The Missouri bill goes further to protect children than the Florida law".
Parental Rights? What about the rights and needs of children whose parents may harm or abandon them for being lgbt? These bills don't protect children, they imperil them. There will always be children who are not heterosexual and who don't thrive in rigid, narrow, traditional gender roles. No heterosexual non-trans child is harmed by knowing such people exist and deserve fair treatment.
The bills tell students their lgbt peers are wrongdoers who deserve to be punished and shunned. Because teachers aren't allowed to say it's okay to be lgbt they can't stop the bullying and assaults on lgbt children. These laws are in effect a license and incitement to bully which will cause permanent harm to a large fraction of school children.
The Missouri is the latest state that is devising a bill to protect girls who participate in sports from unfair competition by banning guys who call themselves transgender girls from participating in girl's sports and cutting funding to any school that allows it.
Similar bills have been proposed in Georgia, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Kansas, Indiana and other heartland states.
There are tens of millions of American women competing in sports. Out of the tens of thousands of contests every year there has only been a couple of examples of trans females winning. It almost never happens that trans females win female sporting contests. Since the Olympics allowed trans people to compete in 2004 no trans woman has won a medal in an individual sport.
A study by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) found that only 0.006% of student-athletes identify as transgender. There is only one transgirl playing high school sports in Kentucky. Thank god Kentucky legislators targeted this lone trans child with legislation as she was sure to destroy society if allowed to play with and lose to other female students.
The laws banning trans females from women's sports is a "solution" to a problem that doesn't exist. Republican legislators demonize trans females to distract from their failure to do anything to actually improve the lives of Americans.
In the meantime the capabilities of artificial intelligence are exploding with untold implications for the future well-being of humanity. Rather than scapegoating trans children for votes Republicans' time would be far better spent studying and coming up with ways to prevent A.I. from running out of control, re-enforcing bias in society and being used to con and manipulate the masses to the detriment of humanity.
Better mental health found among transgender people who started hormones as teens
For transgender people, starting gender-affirming hormone treatment in adolescence is linked to better mental health than waiting until adulthood, according to new research led by the Stanford University School of Medicine.
The study, which appeared online Jan. 12 in PLOS ONE, drew on data from the largest-ever survey of U.S. transgender adults, a group of more than 27,000 people who responded in 2015. The new study found that transgender people who began hormone treatment in adolescence had fewer thoughts of suicide, were less likely to experience major mental health disorders and had fewer problems with substance abuse than those who started hormones in adulthood. The study also documented better mental health among those who received hormones at any age than those who desired but never received the treatment.
“This study is particularly relevant now because many state legislatures are introducing bills that would outlaw this kind of care for transgender youth,” said Jack Turban, MD, a postdoctoral scholar in pediatric and adolescent psychiatry at Stanford Medicine. “We are adding to the evidence base that shows why gender-affirming care is beneficial from a mental health perspective.”
In addition, participants who began hormones in early or late adolescence had lower odds of past-month binge drinking and lifetime illicit drug use than those who began hormones in adulthood.
The major American Health organizations recommend gender affirming care for children with gender dysphoria including the use of puberty blockers where indicated. Republican politicians with no knowledge of the appropriate treatment are banning gender affirming care for the children who need it to improve their mental health outcomes. Ignorant politicians have no business setting policy in this area that contradicts the medical and mental health professions.
Society has an obligation to help all it's citizens thrive and achieve happiness. Republican scapegoating of trans children in pursuit of votes is destructive to these children and all of society. Republicans are attacking society's most vulnerable instead of helping them.
Florida has become so anti-LGBTQ under Ron DeSantis that when this annual survey showed escalating suicidal ideation for LGBTQ youth, rather than help these kids, his administration immediately pulled the plug and began pressuring school districts to stop doing the survey.
Melissa Ross: "The @DuvalSchools says it will no longer conduct its Youth Risk Behaviour Survey. The district has compiled data on youth activity since 2009. This week, the survey showed high numbers of Duval kids have contemplated suicide. The DOE has "strongly urged" them to stop the survey."
We knew these stories would start coming out in earnest, and here we are. The Lexington Herald-Leader reports on two Kentucky women who were denied abortion care despite seemingly qualifying for Republicans’ vague and cruel ‘exceptions’. Amy English was 20 weeks pregnant when she found out that her fetus was developing without part of its head and skull.
“No part of me wanted to be pregnant anymore,” Amy said. “Every flutter and kick he gave felt like a literal gut punch reminder that I would never get to take him home.” Strangers were already approaching her at the grocery to ask to touch her stomach. Her patients at work often asked how far along she was. It seemed emotionally unthinkable to continue subjecting herself to a life where, at any moment, she would be forced to repeat that her growing body was nurturing a baby that wouldn’t live, she said.
Still, state law prevented doctors from giving her an abortion. While Kentucky’s ban allows doctors to use “reasonable medical judgment,” it also only allows abortions in cases of medical emergencies—with no exceptions for fetal anomalies. Amy had to travel hours of state for care, and was only able to do so because her sister was a nurse anesthetist whose hospital agreed to help.
Leah Martin, also in Kentucky, was 9 weeks pregnant when she found out that her fetus had a fatal and painful condition. But because her fetus had a heartbeat, doctors were prevented from taking any action. She found herself at an ultrasound appointment hoping that the pregnancy had ended on its own:
“It was such a twisted experience being pregnant with a baby I desperately wanted, lying there hoping its heart had stopped,” she said shakily. “It was horrible to have to wish for that in order to receive care. It just felt so unsafe and cruel.”
Leah was able to get her abortion by a stroke of luck: A judge had issued an inunction on the ban that allowed her to move quickly and get the procedure while the law wasn’t able to be enforced.
I wish I was done, but I’m not.
Another abortion ban horror, this time out of Ohio: After years of undergoing fertility treatments, Beth Long got pregnant. But four months later, she and her husband found out that their baby’s organs were on the outside of its body. The condition is fatal, and was dangerous for Beth—if complications arose, she might need a hysterectomy. Her doctors urged her to terminate the pregnancy “as soon as possible.”
But Beth is employed by the state of Ohio, and the state’s law won’t allow health insurance to pay for abortions unless the pregnant person’s life is in danger. And while her doctors agreed that the risk for fatal complications increased by the day, they were unable to get the procedure covered because her life was not in imminent danger. The out-of-pocket cost? $20,000-$30,000.
It took the Longs three weeks, during which Beth said she was “in mental anguish,” to find a hospital in Pittsburgh that would help her for significantly less money. At that point, she was 21-weeks along and the procedure was more complicated and risky. Beth’s husband wrote a letter to Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine about their experience, saying, “I am a lifelong Republican, but this has turned me into a one-issue voter for those that support reproductive rights.”
All of these experiences get at something I’ve been writing about a lot lately: Suffering. These laws are causing incalculable pain and heartache every single day, something that Republicans are desperate not to talk about. They don’t want people to remember that there are real people, in real pain, because of their legislation.
Remember how conservatives staunchly defended Republican candidate Roy Moore's sexual pursuit of children? Conservatives falsely claim their attacks on lgbt people are about "protecting children" but when children really are under threat they are at best unconcerned and at worst complict:
Wyoming GOP Opposes Bill To Ban Child Marriage
The Wyoming Republican Party is seeking to kill a bill working its way through the state Legislature proposing to raise the state’s legal marriage age to 16, arguing that putting “arbitrary” limits on child marriage interferes with parental rights and religious liberty.
The bill—which already passed the Republican-controlled Wyoming House of Representatives on a 36-25 vote late last month—proposes banning state residents from marrying anyone under the age of 16, while requiring anyone under the age of 18 seeking to get married to receive written consent from their parents under the eye of a competent witness.
Currently, Wyoming is one of just eight states in the country—including California, Michigan, Mississippi, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Washington and West Virginia—without a minimum age requirement for marriage.
Read the full article. Wyoming GOP chair Frank Eathorne [photo] attended the Capitol Riot and is a member of the Oath Keepers. Eathorne was endorsed by Trump after he spearheaded the campaign to unseat Liz Cheney.
Wyoming Republicans are now fighting to kill a bill that would ban marrying children under the age of 16.
Last year Tennessee Republicans tried to get rid of all age limits on marriage entirely until public backlash forced them to back down. https://t.co/69O6KNhAoU
— No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen (@NoLieWithBTC) February 11, 2023
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
In 2018 the so called "involuntarily celibate" man Alek Minassian drove a van onto a Toronto sidewalk, killed 11 and injured many others. Minassian wanted revenge on women for his inability to find a willing sexual partner. The so-called intellectual, Jordan Peterson, defended Minassian and tried to excuse his attack by saying Minassian was "mad at god" over his "incel" status.
It's disingenuous that anyone who believes in a specific god such as Jesus would claim to be an intellectual - clearly a loving and just god who eternally tortures people cannot exist, Jesus as Christians describe him cannot exist, nor can Islam's Allah. If you accept that either of these gods exist as the religions describe you are clearly not applying rational judgement. Anyone who applies intellectual rigor to religion will conclude none of these religions can be real, at best an intellectual might justify being an agnostic or Deist.
If you convince a person like Minassian that a loving, just, all knowing, and all powerful god exists who cares about them and wants the best for them it's no surprise when they aren't happy with their lives that they get angry at this god's failure to help - that's almost inevitable. To paraphrase Einstein, given the evil Jesus allows to go unchecked, "Only god's non-existence could excuse his inaction.". Religion gives people false hope that a god will see that justice is done and when it isn't they are often understandably angry at the god they imagine. People are better adjusted when they understand things often happen for no reason, there is no god pulling all the strings.
Peterson and many religious conservatives greatly exacerbate the frustration incels like Minassian feel by telling them they should feel ashamed to masturbate and should never do so. If Minassian and incels like him had an active sexual fantasy life and regularly experienced the enjoyment of masturbation they wouldn't feel any where near as frustrated over their inability to find someone willing to have sex with them - one can have a very fulfilling sex life just through fantasy and masturbation.
Some people say if these killers were so sexually frustrated they should have hired a prostitute instead of letting their anger and resentment bring them to murder random people for revenge. There's one problem with that, prostitution is illegal almost every where. It's unrealistic to expect incels to meet their needs with a prostitute when attempting to do so could wind up with them in jail, that's just not acceptable to many men. You can't on one hand tell sexually frustrated men to use a prostitute instead of killing and on the other hand tell them prostitution is illegal and they are not allowed to engage in it. Prostitution needs to be legal and available to men obsessed with wanting sex so they see it's a realistic and acceptable way to get it. Instead religious conservatives demand there be no sexual outlet for anyone not in a heterosexual marriage - it's a powder keg waiting to explode.
Blogger Priya Lynn said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
FEBRUARY 12, 2023 3:58 PM
Blogger Priya Lynn said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
FEBRUARY 12, 2023 4:01 PM
Poor, poor W/R/BA, reduced to pretending me deleting a comment is somehow a point in their favour. That's what you resort to when you can't rebut what was said.
I deleted those two comments because the posts I tried to put before them didn't show up and I didn't want the two part comment out of order.
Now that Jim has retrieved the first part of that comment that didn't initially post I'll post the second part that I intended to go with it. These comments are exactly as they were when I first tried to post them.
Many right wing authoritarians like Steve Bannon and Jordan Peterson are making thinly veiled threats of revolution and violence in response to harmless behaviour they don't approve of. It's a natural psychological tendency for a minority of people to want to wage war on others for personal benefit. Our evolutionary psychology primes some men with the desire to take by force what they can't achieve with negotiation, some men want to start a war, kill and rape. If this is what right wing authoritarians like Bannon and Peterson want there is ample evidence from history that this can all too easily be achieved, the minority of right wing authoritarians can drag the majority of peaceful people into war and violence, one dictator after another has done this throughout history.
A significant minority of Americans want to start a race war and cause the collapse of society in the belief that they will inevitably win the resulting civil war and become society's unchallenged rulers, enforcing their beliefs with an iron fist. Donald Trump himself endorsed Geoff Diehl for governor of Massachusetts and promised Diehl would rule their state "with an iron fist". If you're a conservative and a Republican think carefully about whether or not you want your country to become Russia, where a dictator enriches himself and his key supporters by driving everyone else into poverty, where anyone who vocally disagrees with the regime is likely to be imprisoned or disappeared. Don't underestimate the threat of authoritarians like Steve Bannon and Jordan Peterson, if you don't actively reject their movement they will use your acquiescence to create a world of violence and anarchy that will make life much worse for not just liberals, but for almost every American. Don't let their scapegoating of harmless lgbt people be the impetus for an explosion of violence by sexually frustrated angry young men who see these right wing authoritarians as role models and are anxious and uncomfortable with their own latent same sex attractions.
how terribly dreary is the TTFer
so much like frog
burpin' and deletin'
to impress an imagined bog
Forget “America First” for a moment. Any effort to restore American greatness without putting the children first will fail.
If there was any doubt that kids suffer when their own needs are subjugated to the fears and desires of adults, the Covid experience should have cast it out. For years, children en masse were put on the bottom of the priority list. Children are falling behind in education and key developmental milestones, mood disorders and loneliness are up, and suicide ideation has risen dramatically (including during the Covid era). Families are more broken and dysfunctional than in previous decades, and nearly 400,000 children are in foster care.
We should all agree there is no greatness in sacrificing the welfare of the vulnerable, yet where are the children specifically in today’s list of political priorities? If there was ever a political cause that could get us to sacrifice a bit more, to reach more earnestly across the aisle, and to risk our careers, it should be our children.
Here are eight goals for protecting children and improving their well-being that should be prioritized by government, businesses, other organizations, and individuals.
1. Safeguard Children’s Bodies from Irreparable Harm
Protect kids from damaging transgender surgeries and gender ideology that tries to separate them from biological reality while often alienating children from their parents. Giving cross-sex hormones to physically healthy children and cutting off or “reconstructing” perfectly healthy parts of children’s bodies are inherently destructive and should be considered medical malpractice, especially when performed on patients below the age of consent. Even secular medical boards like those in Sweden and Florida have agreed that the science of gender dysphoria is not settled and the quality of evidence presented in favor of medical interventions is low.
We already have several laws that restrict the liberties of the immature, from drinking alcohol to buying handguns to getting married. Banning irreversible and potentially dangerous medical interventions even when children say they want them is likewise responsible. Given the destructive, risky, and permanent nature of transgender (or even “gender nullification”) surgeries, parental consent is woefully insufficient to put a young girl or boy on such a life-altering course that makes them lifelong medical patients.
2. Protect the Preborn
Congress’s failure once again to pass a bill protecting infants born alive after botched abortions is a national disgrace. But protecting our most vulnerable should go much further than that. Children in the womb should be legally protected from willful destruction with laws that deter parents from seeking abortion and outright ban medical providers, including mail-order pharmacies, from providing them. We must also ensure pregnancy centers are unhindered by red tape and protected from vandalism and terrorism so they can assist mothers in need.
On February 2, The Satanic Temple announced via Twitter that it will be opening an online abortion clinic in New Mexico in an effort to aide those living in the area who seek to end their pregnancies.
The clinic, which saw its grand opening on Valentine's Day, is named "The Samuel Alito's Mom's Satanic Abortion Clinic," a pointed reference to Alito's writing the majority opinion that overturned rights established by Roe v. Wade in 1973.
"TST Health is proud to announce the launch of Samuel Alito's Mom's Satanic Abortion Clinic in New Mexico," the Temple tweeted early this month. "TST Health believes in honoring those, like the clinic's namesake, who couldn't choose legal abortion, no matter how much they may have wanted to."
TST Health, which is funded through the support of donors, has also launched a variety of merchandise to go along with the new clinic opening, including teddy bears, t-shirts and magnets.
Information found on the official website for the clinic describes it as "an online clinic that provides religious medication abortion care" issuing "abortion medication via mail to those in New Mexico who wish to perform The Satanic Temple's Religious Abortion Ritual."
The criteria for services stipulate that patients must be at least 17 years old, be in New Mexico at the time of their online screening, have a New Mexico mailing address, and be up to 11 weeks pregnant. The cost of the health services are free, but they estimate the abortion ritual medications as being deliverable at the cost of $90.
"The Satanic Temple, on behalf of its members, objects to government interference with abortion access and contests that laws that impede our faith in bodily autonomy and our ability to perform our Religious Abortion Ritual violate the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act," the TST said in a statement.
In a quote pulled from Charisma News, the TST describes the use of the word "ritual" in relation to their abortion services as meaning a "spiritual experience designed to instill confidence and self-worth in accordance to TST's religious beliefs."
"In 1950, Samuel Alito's mother did not have options, and look what happened," said Malcolm Jarry, a co-founder of The Satanic Temple. "Prior to 1973, doctors who performed abortions could lose their licenses and go to jail. The clinic's name serves to remind people just how important it is to have the right to control one's body and the potential ramifications of losing that right."
The clinic staffs five registered nurses and a nurse practitioner to prescribe medications.
An attorney representing members of the Proud Boys is insisting that the group will get former President Donald Trump to testify at his clients' trial.
As reported by Politico's Kyle Cheney, attorney Norm Pattis told the court on Thursday that "we’re going to ask the government for assistance in serving Mr. Trump" with a subpoena to testify at their trial.
Although it's not clear why members of the gang would want Trump to testify on their behalf, many other January 6th defendants have argued that they broke into the Capitol and violently clashed with police officers because it was what the former president wanted them to do.
Cheney notes that efforts by other Jan. 6th defendants to compel Trump's testimony have so far come up short, although he says that any case involving the Proud Boys -- whom Trump infamously told to "stand back and stand by" -- has a better shot at succeeding than a run-of-the-mill Capitol rioter.
The Proud Boys members are under increased pressure after the government last month won seditious conspiracy convictions against four more members of the Oath Keepers militia, whom prosecutors argued engaged in a plot to block the peaceful transition of power to keep Trump in the White House.
An Australian family belonging to an extreme fundamentalist Christian movement murdered police officers in a bizarre terrorism plot — and the movement has a following in the United States as well, reported The Daily Beast on Thursday.
"Gareth, Nathaniel and Stacey Train died in a stand-off after killing constables Rachel McCrow, 29, Matthew Arnold, 26, and their neighbor Alan Dare, 58, on Dec. 12. They were involved in an extreme religion known as 'premillennialism,' Queensland Deputy Police Commissioner Tracy Linford said Thursday, calling the attack on the officers a 'religious terror attack,'" reported Barbie Latza Nadeau. "Linford said the religious group had a connection to a similar group in the U.S., and that officers had shared information found in text messages with the U.S. police."
Premillenialism is an extremist Christian-identifying movement that believes Christ will reign over the earth for a millennium after a period of extreme earthly suffering. Many of its adherents have ties to the "sovereign citizen movement," a largely U.S.-based extremist movement that posits the federal government is fraudulent, or secretly a corporate entity with no authority, and individual citizens hold lawmaking power.
There is no indication that sovereign citizen groups were involved in this attack, although people who knew the Trains say they referred to law enforcement as "monsters and demons," and they held strong anti-government views — Stacey Train once worked as a high school principal but resigned in response to vaccine mandates.
"The incident happened when four police officers, including the two slain officers, were 'lured' to the Train farm, which had been set up with a sophisticated surveillance system and military-grade training facilities including camouflaged hiding places and dirt mound barriers and mirrors strategically placed on trees" noted the report. "They also found six weapons, three bow and arrows, a collection of tactical knives."
After the officers were killed, survivors summoned backup, leading to a confrontation that killed the Trains.
A GOP political operative was sentenced to 18 months in prison on Friday for his involvement in transferring illegal campaign contributions from a Russian national to former President Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.
A Justice Department release states that Jesse Benton planned with another political adviser to send political contributions from the Russian national, who wanted to meet with and take a picture with Trump, to the campaign. Benton then arranged for the individual to meet with and take a picture with Trump without revealing their nationality to the campaign or Trump, court documents state.
The release states Benton had the individual send $100,000 to Benton’s political consulting firm to make the contribution so they could meet with Trump. Benton created a fake invoice to claim the funds were payment for consulting work.
He contributed $25,000 to the campaign and kept the remaining $75,000 for himself, according to the release.
Benton presented himself as the contributor, according to the department, which it said caused Trump campaign entities to state in their reports to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) that Benton was the source of the contribution instead of the Russian individual.
Benton was convicted for funneling the illegal contributions to the campaign in November.
He has previously worked for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.). He was convicted in May 2016 of campaign finance crimes for paying an Iowa state senator to support Ron Paul in the 2012 presidential election and was sentenced to two years of probation and six months of home confinement. Trump pardoned him in December 2020.
W/R/BA said "Here are eight goals for protecting children and improving their well-being that should be prioritized by government, businesses, other organizations, and individuals. Protect kids from damaging transgender surgeries..."
With rare exceptions children aren't getting any surgeries to affirm a non-traditional gender identity. Republican Ron DeSantis hypocritically says he's standing up for parental rights in education by banning any mention of lgbt people in schools, but he opposes parental rights in making medical decisions that are best for their children. For Ron DeSantis only anti-lgbt parents have rights.
There are about 20 times more teenage girls getting breast implants than there are there are getting breast reductions to fit a male gender identity. Every major American health association says children are harmed by being forced into rigid narrow gender roles when that does not represent their identity. Research consistently shows that children who get health care affirming their firmly held gender identity are happier, healthier and less suicidal. No one is leading or pushing any child to transition, only children who are insistent, consistent, and persistent are allowed to get gender affirming care.
Contrary to W/R/BA's claim, chidlren with gender dysphoria almost never get cross-sex hormones. With parental consent puberty blockers are sometimes used to prevent a child from going through a puberty with permanent secondary sexual characteristic changes they don't want - research shows those with gender dysphoria who get gender affirming care as children do better than those who had to wait until they were adults. In the rare event that a child who didn't identify with their sex assigned at birth changes their minds and doesn't want to continue to transition the puberty blockers can be stopped without significant permanent effects and puberty will then continue from there.
W/R/BA anonymous points to the partisan Florida Medical Board which opposes gender affirming care for children who need it. Scientists who have had their work cited by the Florida Medical Board as supposed evidence against gender affirming care have said their work has been misrepresented and lied about. W/R/BA dishonestly refer to The Florida Medical Board as "secular" when like government agencies and organizations throughout Florida Ron DeSantis has fired the knowledgeable personnel and appointed lackeys to force his right wing religious agenda on parents. The American Medical Association and The American Academy of Pediatrics recommend gender affirming care for children who do not associate with the sex they were assigned at birth.
W/R/Ba said We already have several laws that restrict the liberties of the immature, from drinking alcohol to buying handguns to getting married."
In some U.S. states Republicans are promoting laws to allow unrestricted access to guns for children of any age. Republicans generally are ideologically opposed to there being any limits on gun ownership and want to maximize the number of guns owned by Americans. Republicans recently opposed a bill to stop child marriages. The states that allow child marriages are run by Republicans and every time an attempt has been made to ban child marriages Republicans have scuttled it. Republicans ran candidates for office who advocated for child marriage like Roy Moore. So don't pretend Republicans favour restricting child marriage or access to guns.
W/R/BA said "2. Protect the Preborn Congress’s failure once again to pass a bill protecting infants born alive after botched abortions is a national disgrace.".
This is another right wing myth used to justify forced pregnancy. Abortions almost never happen in the last trimester and then only for the life of the mother or in the case of severe fetal abnormalities. There simply aren't any "botched abortions where infants are born alive". Some current laws banning abortion have exceptions for the life of the mother. The life of expectant mothers is currently being placed in danger time and time again as doctors see a pregnancy gone wrong causing serious harm to the mother but they are afraid to recommend a needed abortion because the mother isn't in immediate danger of dying (yet).
W/R/BA said "4. Protect Kids from Domestic Abuse and Neglect"
Another disingenuous wish. Many parents upon finding out their child is lgbt beat that child or throw them out onto the street. W/R/BA and Republicans would force schools to reveal to parents if a child is lgbt knowing some of those parents will harm and/or abandon that child. Children need to be taught it's okay to be lgbt so when they are parents they won't abuse a child of their own who turns out to be gay.
W/R/BA said "8. Promote Intact Biological Families Being raised by a biological or adoptive mother and father is the most stable environment for children."
For decades now research has consistently shown children raised by same sex parents do as well or better than children raised by opposite sex parents. Many same sex parents are raising children, frequently children who have been abandoned by their heterosexual biological parents. Children deserve the protection and support of society and married parents regardless of whether or not those parents are the same sex. It's time to stop punishing children merely for having same sex parents.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) introduced new legislation on Thursday that would ban transgender people from serving in the military.
The Ensuring Military Readiness Act would disqualify Americans who identify as transgender, have a history of gender dysphoria or who have undergone gender reassignment surgery.
The legislation would force the Defense secretary to issue an updated policy within 90 days of the bill’s enactment into law.
Exceptions include those who have been “stable in their biological sex” for 36 months prior to joining the military, meaning they no longer have a desire to transition and are not struggling with their mental health, and active military members who remain deployable according to the “retention standards” of their sex assigned at birth.
Active service members who experience gender dysphoria on the date of the legislation’s enactment, as well as transgender people without a history of gender dysphoria, would be eligible to serve only under their sex assigned at birth.
Rubio said the military “has strict standards for who can and cannot qualify to serve,” comparing it to Americans with peanut allergies who are rejected from service.
“Biden has turned our military into a woke social experiment. It is a stupid way to go about protecting our nation,” Rubio said in a statement. “We need to spend more time thinking about how to counter threats like China, Russia, and North Korea and less time thinking about pronouns.”
“Trans people need and deserve protection.”
“I believe the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others but are vulnerable.”
“I respect every trans person’s right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them.”
“I feel nothing but empathy and solidarity with trans women who’ve been abused by men.”
These statements were written by J.K. Rowling, the author of the “Harry Potter” series, a human-rights activist and — according to a noisy fringe of the internet and a number of powerful transgender rights activists and L.G.B.T.Q. lobbying groups — a transphobe.
Critics have advocated that bookstores pull her books from the shelves, and some bookstores have done so. She has also been subjected to verbal abuse, doxxing and threats of sexual and other physical violence, including death threats.
Now, in rare and wide-ranging interviews for the podcast series “The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling,” which begins next week, Rowling is sharing her experiences. “I have had direct threats of violence, and I have had people coming to my house where my kids live, and I’ve had my address posted online,” she says in one of the interviews. “I’ve had what the police, anyway, would regard as credible threats.”
This campaign against Rowling is as dangerous as it is absurd. The brutal stabbing of Salman Rushdie last summer is a forceful reminder of what can happen when writers are demonized. And in Rowling’s case, the characterization of her as a transphobe doesn’t square with her actual views.
So why would anyone accuse her of transphobia? Surely, Rowling must have played some part, you might think.
The answer is straightforward: Because she has asserted the right to spaces for biological women only, such as domestic abuse shelters and sex-segregated prisons. Because she has insisted that when it comes to determining a person’s legal gender status, self-declared gender identity is insufficient. Because she has expressed skepticism about phrases like “people who menstruate” in reference to biological women. Because she has defended herself and, far more important, supported others, including detransitioners and feminist scholars, who have come under attack from trans activists. And because she followed on Twitter and praised some of the work of Magdalen Berns, a lesbian feminist who had made incendiary comments about transgender people.
Actually, nothing Rowling has said qualifies as transphobic.
Rowling has just used her platform to sensibly challenge certain claims of so-called transgender ideology — such as the idea that transgender women should be treated as indistinguishable from biological women in virtually every legal and social context.
Joanna Cherry, a Scottish National Party lawmaker who is a lesbian and a feminist, publicly questioned Scotland’s passage of a “self-ID” law that would allow people to legally establish by mere declaration that they are women after living for only three months as a transgender woman — and without any need for a gender dysphoria diagnosis. She reported that she faced workplace bullying and death threats; she was also removed from her frontbench position in Parliament as spokeswoman for justice and home affairs. “I think some people are scared to speak out in this debate because when you do speak out, you’re often wrongly branded as a transphobe or a bigot,” she said.
Phelps-Roper told me that Rowling’s outspokenness is precisely in the service of this kind of cause. “A lot of people think that Rowling is using her privilege to attack a vulnerable group,” she said. “But she sees herself as standing up for the rights of a vulnerable group.”
Rowling, Phelps-Roper added, views speaking out as a responsibility and an obligation: “She’s looking around and realizing that other people are self-censoring because they cannot afford to speak up. But she felt she had to be honest and stand up against a movement that she saw as using authoritarian tactics.”
It may be a sign of the tide turning that along with Phelps-Roper, several like-minded creative people — though generally those with the protection of wealth or strong backing from their employers — are finally braving the heat. In recent months and after silence or worse from some of the young actors whose careers Rowling’s work helped advance, several actors from the “Harry Potter” films, such as Helena Bonham Carter and Ralph Fiennes, have publicly defended the author.
In the words of Fiennes: “J.K. Rowling has written these great books about empowerment, about young children finding themselves as human beings. It’s about how you become a better, stronger, more morally centered human being,” he said. “The verbal abuse directed at her is disgusting. It’s appalling.”
A small number of influential journalists have also begun speaking out in her defense. Caitlin Flanagan of The Atlantic tweeted last year, “Eventually, she will be proven right, and the high cost she’s paid for sticking to her beliefs will be seen as the choice of a principled person.”
In Britain the liberal columnist Hadley Freeman left The Guardian after, she said, the publication refused to allow her to interview Rowling. She has since joined The Sunday Times, where her first column commended Rowling for her feminist positions. Another liberal columnist for The Guardian left for similar reasons; after decamping to The Telegraph, she defended Rowling, despite earlier threats of rape against her and her children for her work.
Rowling could have just stayed in bed. She could have taken refuge in her wealth and fandom. In her “Harry Potter” universe, heroes are marked by courage and compassion. Her best characters learn to stand up to bullies and expose false accusations. And that even when it seems the world is set against you, you have to stand firm in your core beliefs in what’s right.
Defending those who have been scorned isn’t easy, especially for young people. It’s scary to stand up to bullies, as any “Harry Potter” reader knows. Let the grown-ups in the room lead the way. If more people stood up for J.K. Rowling, they would not only be doing right by her; they’d also be standing up for human rights, specifically women’s rights.
They’d also be standing up for the truth
Right-wing pundit and commentator Ann Coulter voiced her disapproval of former President Donald Trump once again on Friday, this time calling him "narcissistic" and "profoundly stupid."
In a video that was posted to Twitter by PatriotTakes on Saturday, Coulter made an appearance on the podcast Timcast IRL where she spoke about the former president.
"The one thing I didn't know when I wrote In Trump We Trust is how profoundly stupid he is. I made very clear in the book the only thing he could do; we will forgive him for anything, and I defended him the day after the Access Hollywood *****grabbing tape came out," she said. "...I was pedal-to-the-metal defending him. I said we'll forgive him for anything unless you betray us on immigration. Guess what? He did."
Coulter, previously a loyal supporter of Trump, has readily criticized the former president since he was still serving in the White House. Meanwhile, the right-wing pundit's criticism has continued in the wake of the 2022 midterm elections.
"To Trump: You had your chance, with a Republican House and Senate. You handed domestic policy to your son-in-law and Gary Cohn. You handed foreign policy to your son-in-law and a country that gave your son-in-law $2 billion. Shut the **** up, forever," Coulter said.
Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has generated a storm of controversy after calling for a “national divorce” separating red and blue states, with some interpreting the statement as a call for a second Civil War.
“We need a national divorce,” the Republican legislator wrote on Twitter on Monday. “We need to separate by red states and blue states and shrink the federal government. Everyone I talk to says this. From the sick and disgusting woke culture issues shoved down our throats to the Democrat’s (sic) traitorous America Last policies, we are done.”
The statement elicited condemnation from some Democrats, media figures, and anti-Trump Republicans alike.
The Independent has contacted Ms Greene’s office for comment.
“Let’s review some of the governing principles of America,” former GOP representative Liz Cheney wrote on Twitter. “Our country is governed by the Constitution. You swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Secession is unconstitutional. No member of Congress should advocate secession, Marjorie.”
“This is a member of the House Homeland Security Committee advocating for Civil War,” added Democratic strategist Kurt Bardella.
Others took a more historical view of the comments.
“The last time we tried this it ended up with Sherman burning her state Capitol,” Stuart Stevens of the Lincoln Project wrote on Twitter in a reference to the Civil War. “We need more AP history, not less.”
“The conservatives who scream loudest about the ‘anti-Americanism’ of the left turn out to be the most anti-American of all,” MSNBC’s Mehdi Hasan wrote on Twitter. “Surprise! Every accusation is a confession.”
Meanwhile, some took a more comic approach to their responses.
Speaking of the “national divorce,” comedian Jon Stewart asked: “But we get to keep the name right?”
The Georgia Republican’s views are representative of a larger current in US political thought.
According to a 2021 poll, support is growing for secession across the country, particularly among southern Republicans.
In the South, 37 per cent of respondents to a Bright Line Watch/YouGov poll said they had a “willingness to secede”.
not enough talk about how the gay agenda has screwed up our transportation infrastructure
Buttagieg has overseen one disaster after another
supply network problems, airline meltdowns, train derailments not cleaned up, et al...
I know what you're thinking
his failures aren't because he's gay
and you're right
but the reason an inexperienced mayor of a small Indiana town was given this job was so Biden could check off his gay agenda box
the town he ran had one bus station
not a lot experience was gained
the gay agenda is responsible for yet another catastrophe!
It must have been cold comfort to the residents of East Palestine, Ohio, who awoke on President's Day morning – some coughing, others spotted with rash, or wrestling nausea and headaches – to see their president… in Ukraine.
Still wracked by unanswered questions about the cause of and response to a potentially deadly, toxic train wreck in their small and largely forgotten Rust Belt town, they must have watched Biden on a tour of Kyiv and wondered why hardly anyone from the White House has come to see them too.
It's been 18 days since the crash, and not only has Biden not deigned to survey the damage himself, but the mayor of East Palestine claims it took two weeks for the White House to even reach out to him.
Biden's disgraceful Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg couldn't be bothered to mention the rail calamity for 11 days and then only mustered up the cowardly condescension of a tweet.
He, too, still hasn't shown up.
So, why the hell not?
Residents in East Palestine aren't seeing a helping hand from Biden and Buttigieg so much as a middle finger.
On Tuesday, in a powder puff interview with Democratic operative-turned-ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos, Buttigieg said he'll go to East Palestine - eventually.
'I am planning to go,' he told Stephanopoulos before immediately segueing into spin. 'I do want to stress – the NTSB [the National Transportation Safety Board] needs to be able to do this work independently.'
For the record, this is a stinking pile of garbage. No one expects Buttigieg to be sorting through the rubble himself. He's not taking soil samples. We're not worried about him trampling over a crime scene.
The people of East Palestine, one of whom shouted in a townhall meeting last week, 'Where's Pete Buttigieg? Where's he at?' want to know that you - at the very least – give a damn.
The NTSB investigation can go forward whether Pete is there or not. And how this sickeningly lame dodge was allowed to go uncontested on a nationally broadcast TV interview is an insult to the audience's intelligence.
Mayor Pete told Stephanopoulos that there are just two kinds of politicians who show up to disasters; those who get things done and those who get their pictures taken.
It was a valiantly shameless effort at obfuscation. But this time – as our TVs show the split-screen of a smoldering American town on one side, and a smiling Biden, striding under the bright blue skies of Kyiv on the other – it's nearly impossible to ignore the insult.
The people of Ukraine are worth the presidential photo-op, but the people of East Palestine are not.
This whole situation screams, 'America Last.'
A wave of Republican criticism of the Biden administration’s handling of a train derailment that launched toxic chemicals into the air in East Palestine, Ohio, is set to culminate on Wednesday when former President Donald Trump visits the disaster-stricken village of 4,000.
So far, however, the broadsides have not turned into anything resembling action that could prevent crashes or break the GOP’s arm-in-arm embrace of the railroad industry, which relentlessly and successfully pushed to cut costs and roll back regulations during Trump’s four years in office.
“A lot of the folks who seem to find political opportunity there are among those who sided with the industry time and time again,” Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said on a conference call with reporters Monday night when asked about Trump’s visit. “They have fought safety regulations on trains and hazmat tooth and nail.” (Buttigieg did not mention Trump by name, which would violate the Hatch Act limits on what federal employees can say about politics.)
Republican Sens. Marco Rubio, J.D. Vance and Ted Cruz have all criticized Buttigieg’s handling of the derailment, but none responded on Tuesday when asked if they would support a set of rail safety measures Buttigieg rolled out or if they had alternative proposals.
Rep. Bill Johnson (R-Ohio), a vocal Biden critic who represents East Palestine, on Tuesday dismissed immediate calls for stricter rail regulations, saying actions toward accountability will hinge on the findings of a National Transportation Safety Board investigation into the derailment.
“That will dictate whether there are laws, regulations that need to be changed, whether there were rules that were violated,” he said during a news conference in East Palestine. “We don’t know any of that yet, and we won’t know that until NTSB releases its report.”
The silence on actual safety proposals shows how GOP officials ― even those who claim to want to lead the party in a more populist direction, such as Rubio and Vance ― are reluctant to step back from the rail industry’s battle against additional safety measures, even in the wake of a significant disaster that has terrified East Palestine residents.
The nearly 2-mile Norfolk Southern train that derailed and caught fire on Feb. 3 was carrying toxic and flammable materials, including hundreds of thousands of pounds of vinyl chloride, a common organic chemical used in the production of plastics. Fearing a catastrophic explosion, authorities conducted what they described as a “controlled burn” of the vinyl chloride three days after the crash — a controversial decision that has left area residents to fear potential long-term health and environmental risks.
Indeed, Trump’s visit appears aimed more at criticizing President Joe Biden and Buttigieg and capitalizing on senior administration officials’ delayed public response to the crisis ― Buttigieg took 10 days to publicly acknowledge the derailment ― rather than offering any sort of assistance or policy proposal. (Trump could receive a heroes’ welcome. Columbiana County, where East Palestine is located, gave him more than 70% of its vote in the 2020 election.)
“You have a president going to Ukraine, and you have people in Ohio that are in desperate need of help,” Trump said at an event at a Hilton Hotel not far from his Mar-a-Lago social club in Florida.
The former president’s swooping in to politicize the disaster is unsurprising, especially now that he’s launched his bid for a second term as president. Nevertheless, Trump’s legacy of gutting regulations, including rail safety rules, and botching and politicizing federal disaster responses while in the White House makes any advice he might provide on the Ohio disaster ironic.
“The Trump administration rolled back and killed some regulations we had been working on; in many cases, they just stopped working on regulations altogether,” said Sarah Feinberg, head of the Federal Railroad Administration in the final years of Barack Obama’s administration. “The impression that the safety apparatus got was that what industry wanted, industry got.”
In 2018, at the urging of railroad giants and industry lobbyists, the Trump administration repealed an Obama administration rule that required electronically controlled pneumatic brakes — an advanced braking technology — on trains hauling a certain amount of crude oil and certain other hazardous materials. (The Obama-era brake rule, which came in the wake of several fiery train accidents, would not have applied to the train that derailed in East Palestine, but rail experts told the investigative news outlet The Lever that the Ohio accident would have been less severe if the train had the upgraded brakes.)
The industry also successfully lobbied the Trump administration to block an Obama-era effort to require at least two crew members on most trains.
In comments submitted to the Obama administration’s Transportation Department in 2017, Norfolk Southern Corp., the company whose train derailed Feb. 3, highlighted rules that it argued “should be repealed, replaced, suspended, or modified” and wrote that “the future of railroads and railroad safety is rooted in technological innovation — if the regulatory regime does not stifle but encourages it.”
Buttigieg’s proposals include increasing the amount the Department of Transportation can fine railroads for violations, requiring at least two crew members on every train as a safety measure — the industry’s has fought crew size mandates — and reinstating a 2025 deadline for railroads to adopt safer tank cars. Most of the changes will require congressional action, and many have been bitterly opposed by the rail industry.
As for growing calls for it to reinstate the Obama-era brake rule that Trump repealed, Biden’s Transportation Department has said legislation passed in 2015 handcuffs the agency from doing so.
“Republicans in the House and Senate required a cost-benefit analysis that allowed the Trump administration to repeal the rule in 2017, which now makes it very challenging to reinstate the rule,” a Transportation Department spokesperson recently told HuffPost. That cost-benefit analysis ultimately concluded that the costs of the electronic brake rule outweighed the benefits — a finding that essentially forced Trump’s DOT to rescind the rule.
The Biden administration remains under fire for its initially low-profile response to the crisis, with Rubio insisting Buttigieg was “MIA” on the derailment as part of a back-and-forth with the transportation secretary, who on Monday night blasted Rubio for previously signing on to a letter closely mirroring industry talking points.
“He lies to media claiming my 2021 letter calling for more track inspections was a letter calling for deregulation,” Rubio wrote on Twitter. “He is an incompetent who is focused solely on his fantasies about his political future & needs to be fired.”
In a letter sent last week, Rubio and Vance zeroed in on “precision scheduled railroading,” a hyper-efficient style of rail transportation adopted by major rail companies at the instance of Wall Street. Unions and left-leaning industry critics have long said PSR, as it’s known, increases safety risks.
“Current and former rail workers, industry observers, and reform advocates have pointed to precision-scheduled railroading (PSR), by which rail companies such as Norfolk Southern increase efficiency and drive down costs by moving more freight with fewer workers, as a potential contributor to the accident,” the pair wrote to Buttigieg.
Since then, however, neither has suggested additional reforms that might challenge the industry.
But it’s clear the administration has decided to directly take on the railroads, traditionally a powerful but low-profile lobby in Washington.
“Rail companies have spent millions of dollars to oppose common-sense safety regulations,” Biden wrote Tuesday night on Twitter. “And it’s worked. This is more than a train derailment or a toxic waste spill ― it’s years of opposition to safety measures coming home to roost.”
The American Association of Railroads, which represents the country’s largest commercial railroads, suggested new policy proposals should wait until after the NTSB investigation.
“The NTSB’s independent investigators continue their work to identify the accident’s root cause and contributing factors,” AAR President Ian Johnson said. “That investigation must continue unimpeded by politics and speculation so NTSB’s findings can guide what additional measures may have prevented this accident.”
The AAR president himself is evidence of the revolving door between the rail industry and Congress: From 2009 to 2013, he was a top staffer for Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), who chaired the committee with oversight of the railroads.
At least one Republican close to the Ohio disaster and who has benefited from railroad industry donations has expressed shock, even outrage, that more regulations aren’t on the books to protect communities from the kind of rail disaster that has upended life in rural eastern Ohio.
Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine (R) called it “absurd” that the Norfolk Southern train did not qualify as a “high-hazard flammable train” — a federal classification that triggers speed limits and other safety requirements. He has called on Congress to take action to address regulatory shortfalls.
Of the 50 train cars that either derailed or were damaged in the resulting fire, 20 contained hazardous material, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, which is now in charge of the cleanup. [As you may recall, the EPA is an angency Republicans perennially call to defund or abolish in the name of "job creation."]
"There is something fundamentally wrong when a train like this can come into a state and the current law, despite what they were hauling, does not require them to notify the state or local officials,” DeWine said Tuesday at a news conference. [Indeed, but doing that would require "job-killing regulations!"]
The incident “reinforces the importance that train safety takes a higher priority than it has in the past,” DeWine added “We have to look at train safety."
A month before the derailment, Norfolk Southern gave DeWine $10,000 — the maximum amount — to help fund his inauguration activities, WSYX-TV in Columbus, Ohio, reported.
WASHINGTON (AP) — A former Proud Boys member who pleaded guilty to plotting with group leaders to violently stop the transfer of presidential power from Donald Trump to Joe Biden told jurors Tuesday that he viewed their far-right extremist organization as “the tip of the spear” after the 2020 election.
Jeremy Bertino, who is testifying against former Proud Boys national leader Enrique Tarrio and four lieutenants as part of a cooperation deal with federal prosecutors, recalled feeling stunned and then excited when Trump told the Proud Boys to “stand back and stand by” during his first debate with Biden.
After the election, Bertino viewed the Proud Boys as leaders of the conservative movement, a perspective fueled by his regular viewership of the conspiracy theory-promoting Infowars website.
“I believed we were supposed to be the leaders of the country, of the right-wing,” Bertino said. “The tip of the spear.”
Bertinio, 43, of North Carolina, is the only member of the far-right extremist group who has pleaded guilty to a seditious conspiracy charge stemming from a mob’s attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. The five Proud Boys associates on trial are charged with the same felony count, a Civil War-era offense punishable by a maximum of 20 years in prison.
The trial is scheduled to resume Wednesday with more testimony by Bertino. The trial recessed Tuesday before a prosecutor began questioning Bertino about the Jan. 6 attack.
Bertino is the second former Proud Boys member to testify at the trial. The first, Matthew Greene, testified in January that group members were growing increasingly angry about the outcome of the 2020 presidential election and were expecting a “civil war.”
Jurors have heard over a month of testimony by government witnesses in the trial of Tarrio, a Miami resident, and co-defendants Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs, Zachary Rehl and Dominic Pezzola.
Nordean, of Auburn, Washington, was a Proud Boys chapter president and a member of the group’s national “Elders Council.” Biggs, of Ormond Beach, Florida, was a self-described Proud Boys organizer. Rehl was president of a Proud Boys chapter in Philadelphia. Pezzola was a Proud Boys member from Rochester, New York.
Bertino said he believed the election had been stolen from Trump and was hoping the U.S. Supreme Court would overturn the election results. He wasn’t in Washington when the Capitol riot erupted. He was stabbed during an altercation in downtown Washington after a Proud Boys march on Dec. 12, 2021, and was still recovering from his injuries on Jan. 6.
Bertino said he became increasingly angry after hearing that his alleged assailant had been freed on bail. He directed much of his anger at police, feeling they had “abandoned” the Proud Boys.
“I felt like they were not on our side anymore,” he testified. “And basically if you were not with us, you were against us.”
Bertino said Tarrio, Nordean and Biggs shared his anger toward police after his stabbing. Bertino added that many Proud Boys began referring to police as “coptifa,” a twist on the term “antifa,” which refers to antifascist activists.
The indictment in Tarrio’s case alleges that the Proud Boys held meetings and communicated over encrypted messages to plan for an attack in the days leading up to Jan. 6. On the day of the riot, Proud Boys dismantled metal barricades set up to protect the Capitol and mobilized, directed and led members of the crowd into the building, according to prosecutors.
Tarrio wasn’t in Washington on Jan. 6, either. Police arrested him in Washington two days before the Capitol riot and charged him with vandalizing a Black Lives Matter banner at a historic Black church during a December 2020 protest. Tarrio heeded a judge’s order to leave the city after his arrest.
Bertino joined the Proud Boys’ Charlotte chapter in 2018 after seeing videos of group members fighting with antifascist activists. He said he enjoyed the comradery with men who shared his right-wing political views. He viewed their enemy as “pretty much anybody who didn’t vote the same way we did.”
Bertino said he became “very close” to Tarrio and was friendly with Biggs, Nordean and Rehl, but he only recalls meeting Pezzola once. He met Tarrio in person at a Proud Boys convention in Las Vegas and later at a January 2020 gun rights rally in Virginia, where he said they bonded over their escape from a confrontation with “armed opposition.”
Proud Boys members describe their group as a politically incorrect men’s club for “Western chauvinists.” Bertino said there was tension within the Proud Boys ranks between “rally boys” who relished fighting with antifa in public forums and “party boys” who preferred to drink together.
Bertino recalled his growing anger in the summer of 2020, as protests erupted across the country in response to George Floyd’s killing in police custody. He blamed violence and rioting on antifa, calling them the “foot soldiers of the left wing.”
“I thought we should have gone out there and stopped them, to restore order,” he said.
Bertino pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy in October 2022 and agreed to cooperate with the Justice Department’s investigation of the role that Proud Boys leaders played in the mob’s attack on the Capitol. He hasn’t been sentenced yet.
The House committee that investigated the Jan. 6 insurrection featured video testimony by Bertino at its first hearing last year. The committee showed a clip of Bertino saying that the group’s membership probably tripled after then-President Trump’s comment during a debate with Biden that the Proud Boys should “stand back and stand by.”
In his trial testimony, Bertino recalled feeling stunned and then excited by Trump’s remark. “I just couldn’t believe the president was talking about our club,” he said. “I thought it was going to grow the club exponentially at that point.”
Bertino joined Tarrio at a bar in Washington on the night of the 2020 presidential election. He said he became a “fourth-degree” member of the Proud Boys — the group’s highest rank — after intervening in a bloody altercation that night.
Jurors saw text messages that Bertino and Tarrio exchanged four days after the election, as news outlets declared a victory for Biden.
“They called it. Now we have to mobilize. Should we roll out to the state houses?” Bertino asked.
“Yes,” Tarrio responded.
Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg is too busy taking walks to address the unfurling environmental and health crises caused by a train derailment and subsequent hazardous chemical burn in Ohio earlier this month.
At least, that’s what he told the Daily Caller’s Jennie Taer when asked if he had anything to say to the people in East Palestine, Ohio, who are “suffering right now” after a train carrying toxic chemicals veered off the tracks. The train cars were later deliberately set ablaze, which disseminated a noxious plume of black smoke that was spotted from miles away.
“I’m not going to have that conversation just walking down the street here,” Buttigieg said.
After Taer once again pressed Buttigieg to offer a message to Ohioans, the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, made it clear he was not interested in addressing crises that fall under his jurisdiction while off the clock.
“I’m taking some personal time and I’m walking down the street,” Buttigieg insisted.
What Buttigieg didn’t mention in the brief sidewalk conversation, however, is that he didn’t speak up about the calamity until nearly three weeks after the initial derailment. By then, residents all over Ohio had complained of contaminated air and water sparking sickness that rapidly spread through their families, friends, and pets, and killed the surrounding wildlife.
In his first public comments since the Feb. 3 disaster, Buttigieg admitted on Monday that he “could have spoken out sooner.” Yet he still failed to share specific plans on how he will help the locals affected by the derailment or when he will visit the site of the transportation calamity.
“I am very interested in getting to know the residents of East Palestine, hearing from them about how they’ve been impacted and communicating with them about the steps that we’re taking,” Buttigieg said on a conference call with the press. “When the time is right, I do plan to visit East Palestine. I don’t have a date for you right now.”
Despite repeated calls from Ohioans and the mayor of East Palenstine for the transportation secretary to visit the afflicted site and address residents’ ongoing concerns, Buttigieg once again confirmed on Tuesday that he has not set a date for a trip.
“Are you going down there at all?” Taer asked during their exchange.
“Yep, I am,” Buttigieg replied.
“When are you going?” Taer pressed.
“I’ll share that when I’m ready,” Buttigieg said.
Train derailments in Ohio and other states are just one of the many scandals plaguing the cabinet member, who seemingly got the job under Biden’s affirmative-action hiring model based on his sexual preferences, not his transportation experience.
During the peak of the nation’s supply-chain woes in the fall of 2021 and negotiations over a trillion-dollar infrastructure package, Buttigieg was nowhere to be found. Instead of taking any responsibility to respond to the crises that fall under his job title, Buttigeg ducked important calls and meetings, using his eight-week-long paternity leave as an excuse. When the taxpayers who fund his salary complained about his prolonged absence, Buttigieg and his husband Chasten called it “old news” and characterized the criticism as unfair.
W/R/BA asked "who is more intolerant radical Islamics or transgenders?"
It's a prejudicial scourge to think you can judge an individual's morality or tolerance based on any one characteristic. However when you look at the religious texts that Christianity and Islam are based on, they are as intolerant as it gets.
From a very young age we innately understand some basic principals of justice, like proportionality. For example, we don't execute people if their parking meter expires and if someone kills an innocent person we don't issue them a $15 fine and let it go at that. One of the pillars of justice is that the punishment should be proportional to the crime. If the Justice system executes people if their parking meters expire that in itself then becomes a crime and a far more serious one than the parking violation it is punishment for.
The problem with Christianity and Islam is that they are based on the evil idea that justice is done by meting out infinite punishment for finite and even trivial "crimes", like not believing in particular god when there is no evidence that it is "Allah" rather than "Jesus" or vice versa. This is not a good starting point from which to produce a guide to morality, it is counterproductive to that goal.
I, as a trans person, believe the essence of morality is "Do whatever you want but harm no one" - that is very tolerant of others and forms a good, the best, starting point from which to develop moral guidance. To have the best possible society everyone's highest priority has to be maximizing the happiness for all in an equal and fair way. That's not a controversial idea, it's something everyone should find easy to agree with regardless of their religion or lack thereof. This is the only basis upon which the world can be united, clearly it can never be united by belief in one religion. If this reality was the consensus amongst Christians and Muslims I wouldn't be so strongly opposed to, and critical of, religion.
People from different religions are often certain theirs is true but there is no more reason to believe one is true and not another. Such certainty is common amongst both Muslims and Christians - clearly being certain your religion is correct is not evidence that it actually is. The only rational and workable framework from which to unite and rule the world is one based on fairness and equality.
Ron DeSantis clearly does not believe in fairness and equality, he is an authoritarian like Trump. He is using the force of law to prevent any mention of injustices minorities face and to block any efforts to mitigate them. He bans the teaching of Critical Race theory (and in effect any mention of racism) without an appraisal of it's truth and justifies that under the guise of keeping white children from feeling guilty about slavery and other wrongs whites visited upon blacks. Similarly, Republicans are passing laws that effectively ban any mention of lgbt people in schools. The goal is to use the force of law to prevent any acknowledgement of inequalities and unfair treatment minorities experience and make it illegal to make efforts to mitigate them. Republicans disparage acknowledging and mitigating wrongs being done to minorities as "identity politics", essentially asserting it's immoral to entertain the idea that any group in society might be unfairly treated and something should be done about it. They disingenuously assert "I don't see colour"- a sad acknowledgement they ignore disparities black people experience.
In Germany they teach schoolchildren about the evils and horrors the Nazis inflicted upon the world. Those school children express surprise when someone asks if they feel guilty about this, they can't imagine why anyone would think they might or should feel guilty about things they didn't do. This conservative idea that we must remain silent about racism lest white children feel bad about it is wholly unjustified and immoral. Black people, lgbt people, religious minorities all have an inherent right to an equal and fair society. If you "don't see colour or sexual orientation" and you oppose "identity politics" you aren't open to the possibility that minorities are being unfairly treated and a moral society would want to do something about it.
So don't disingenuously, dishonestly, and prejudicially ask whether Muslims or trans people are more intolerant - the intolerance in American society is overwhelmingly from white religious conservatives. Fairness and equality are the foundation of a good and moral society. Tolerant people don't oppose teaching about racism or that harmless lgbt people deserve equal opportunity to openly pursue happiness.
One union of rail workers has questioned declining maintenance standards following the Feb. 3 Norfolk Southern derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, which forced the evacuation of the 5,000-person town earlier this month.
A device that can play a role in preventing derailments is the wayside hot-box detector. It uses infrared sensors to detect bearings, axles or other components of a rail car that are overheating, then uses radio signals to flag rail crews of any overheated components.
The rail car that initiated the derailment had an overheated wheel bearing, according to a Tuesday report from the National Transportation Safety Board. The NTSB is still investigating the cause of the derailment and will publish a preliminary report in two weeks.
Wayside hot-box detectors are typically placed every 25 miles along a railroad, according to a Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) report. Their use has contributed to a 59% decrease in train accidents caused by axle- and bearing-related factors since 1990, according to a 2017 Association of American Railroads study.
Declining head counts have led to these mechanisms receiving less preventative maintenance, according to an official from the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen union.
The FRA has no regulations requiring the use or maintenance of hot-box detectors.
[Gee, I wonder how that happened.]
A hot-box detector in East Palestine notified the crew moments before the train derailed, according to the NTSB’s report.
It’s unclear if any hot-box detector prior to East Palestine notified crews. A surveillance video shared on Facebook from an industrial facility in Salem, Ohio, about 20 miles from East Palestine, suggests the train’s axle was already on fire.
Norfolk Southern did not respond to a request for comment, and the FRA declined to comment on the record.
From 5 ‘electronic leaders’ to zero in derailment region
Specialized signalmen called “electronic leaders” specialize in maintaining devices like hot-box detectors.
As recently as three years ago, Norfolk Southern employed five electronic leaders in the area of its rail network that includes East Palestine. Today, it employs zero, according to Christopher Hand, director of research at the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen.
Hand said electronic leaders know hot-box detectors “inside out.” But the position, which typically requires years of experience and higher pay, has become less common at railroads across the country. Electronic leaders also taught newer signalmen how to operate devices like the hot-box detectors.
After that position was eliminated in Norfolk Southern’s Division B, Hand said its responsibilities were likely transferred to a signal maintainer. Their main role is to keep up with government-mandated tests of equipment — and hot-box detectors aren’t under federal regulations.
“Once they eliminated that position, it fell to the signal maintainers who had no knowledge, no training or very, very little training on these hot-box detectors,” Hand said in an interview with FreightWaves.
Across the rail industry, Hand said most signalmen are exclusively spending time on these government-mandated tests, rather than doing preventive maintenance, like cleaning and greasing.
“There used to be something called ‘maintenance’ and it was routinely maintaining your apparatus — not just strictly going there when you have a regulated test,” Hand said.
It’s the responsibility of the railroad to maintain the track and locomotives by which railcars move. However, these derailed cars were possibly owned by a leasing company or the actual shipper of the chemicals inside the railcar.
Lobbying efforts to scale back maintenance saved railroads hundreds of millions
Federal regulators have rolled back other rail safety rules.
For years, the federal government required railroads to conduct a type of brake test on rail cars that had not been operated for four or more hours. As of 2020, rail operators may wait up to 24 hours to conduct this test.
The Association of American Railroads, an industry association that includes Norfolk Southern, lobbied for this change starting in 2017, according to the Federal Register. The FRA estimated that changing this rule would save the rail industry nearly $600 million over a 10-year period.
[Seem like the rail industry should use that savings buy out all the affected East Palistine citizens with enough cash to buy themselves new homes in a safer area.]
The Association of American Railroads was also key in rolling back Obama-era legislation that would have required railroad companies to update their braking systems from a 19th-century design to an electronic one.
[Ya don't day. Why would we need new break designs when we could use ones from the 1800's? Sounds like another job-killing regulation to me.]
In a reckless and corrupt move Republican Kevin McCarthy has given 44,000 hours of Capitol security video to the notorious liar at Fox "News" Tucker Carlson. This will reveal the entire layout of the capital, location of security cameras and sensitive locations, it's a gigantic security breach that threatens everyone in the Capitol should right wing extremists get ahold of it and stage another attempted coup there.
Fox News promoted the big lie that the election was stolen from Trump by Dominion voting machines despite in their private communications after Jan 6. saying that was all nonsense that threatened the country. Tucker Carlson did a special on how it wasn't really Trump supporters who attacked the Capitol, it was a "false flag" operation by liberals to make conservatives look bad. Put aside the absurdity of the idea that opponents of Trump would try to make conservatives look bad by aiding his attempt to overthrow the government and become dictator and think about the argument Fox "News" offered in defence of the suit Dominion voting systems brought against them for slander - their lawyers said Dominion voting systems was not slandered by Tucker Carlson's lies about their voting machines being rigged to fraudulently give the election to Biden because no rational person would think anything Tucker Carlson said on his show was the truth, that all his viewers are well aware that what Tucker fabricates his claims all the time.
Now Tucker Carlson will go through the hours of security video and edit together cherry-picked clips to support his false narrative that the election was stolen from Trump and it was really Biden supporters who tried to overthrow the government and install Trump as dictators.
Tucker claimed conservatives are the "moral superiors" of liberals - moral people aren't utterly unconcerned with the truth in pursuit of power and authority over others.
'I, as a trans person, believe the essence of morality is "Do whatever you want but harm no one" - that is very tolerant of others and forms a good, the best, starting point from which to develop moral guidance. To have the best possible society everyone's highest priority has to be maximizing the happiness for all in an equal and fair way."
Here, we have a person with classic split personalities. One says, Ayn Rand style, the essence of morality is do whatever you want
The other says the essence of morality is maximize the happiness of everyone
Aside from the fact the fact that "happiness" is not easily defined, these two statements are contradictory
apparently, though, this person feels you must agree with the transgender worldview to be truly happy, which is how transgenders must justify their intolerance
they are just doing what's for their victim's own good
by whatever means necessary, they will seek to impose their worldview on others
so their victims can be "happy" too!
it's the view of cult figure in history
J.K. Rowling, the author of the “Harry Potter” series, is a human-rights activist and — according to transgender rights activists — a transphobe.
Critics have advocated that bookstores pull her books from the shelves, and some bookstores have done so. She has also been subjected to verbal abuse, doxxing and threats of sexual and other physical violence, including death threats.
Now, in rare and wide-ranging interviews for the podcast series “The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling,” which begins next week, Rowling is sharing her experiences. “I have had direct threats of violence, and I have had people coming to my house where my kids live, and I’ve had my address posted online,” she says in one of the interviews. “I’ve had what the police, anyway, would regard as credible threats.”
This campaign against Rowling is as dangerous as it is absurd. The brutal stabbing of Salman Rushdie last summer is a forceful reminder of what can happen when writers are demonized.
Joanna Cherry, a Scottish National Party lawmaker who is a lesbian and a feminist, publicly questioned Scotland’s passage of a “self-ID” law that would allow people to legally establish by mere declaration that they are women after living for only three months as a transgender woman — and without any need for a gender dysphoria diagnosis. She reported that she faced workplace bullying and death threats; she was also removed from her frontbench position in Parliament as spokeswoman for justice and home affairs. “I think some people are scared to speak out in this debate because when you do speak out, you’re often wrongly branded as a transphobe or a bigot,” she said.
but it's just tough love
trans just want to make Rowling and Cherry "happy"
WASHINGTON (AP) — The number of U.S. mass killings linked to extremism over the past decade was at least three times higher than the total from any other 10-year period since the 1970s, according to a report by the Anti-Defamation League.
The report, provided to The Associated Press ahead of its public release Thursday, also found that all extremist killings identified in 2022 were linked to right-wing extremism, with an especially high number linked to white supremacy. They include a racist mass shooting at a supermarket in Buffalo, New York, that left 10 Black shoppers dead and a mass shooting that killed five people at an LGBT nightclub in Colorado Springs, Colorado.
“It is not an exaggeration to say that we live in an age of extremist mass killings,” the report from the group's Center on Extremism says.
Between two and seven domestic extremism-related mass killings occurred every decade from the 1970s to the 2000s, but in the 2010s that number skyrocketed to 21, the report found.
The trend has since continued with five domestic extremist mass killings in 2021 and 2022, as many as there were during the first decade of the new millennium.
The number of victims has risen as well. Between 2010 and 2020, 164 people died in ideological extremist-related mass killings, according to the report. That’s much more than in any other decade except the 1990s, when the bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma City killed 168 people.
Extremist killings are those carried out by people with ties to extreme movements and ideologies.
Several factors combined to drive the numbers up between 2010 and 2020. There were shootings inspired by the rise of the Islamic State group as well as a handful targeting police officers after civilian shootings and others linked to the increasing promotion of violence by white supremacists, said Mark Pitcavage, a senior research fellow at the ADL’s Center on Extremism...
“They feel that they can take advantage of us because we are a smaller town," a resident of East Palestine, Ohio, told CBC News. "What rolls through on those trucks is of more value than the lives of the residents in this community.”
The words of this American capture the perspective of East Palestine residents who are living in an apocalyptic landscape because of the derailment of a train carrying toxic chemicals.
In any functional society, the wreck of a massive, 150-car train and the emergence of a black cloud that threatens thousands of U.S. citizens would prompt an immediate, comprehensive response from government officials and the rail firms responsible.
In President Joe Biden’s America, the people of East Palestine were left scrambling in the dark, with, until Thursday, an absentee Transportation secretary, a struggling Environmental Protection Agency and industry representatives who won’t answer basic questions.
The consequences should be swift and severe. This winter, we’ve seen disaster after disaster strike our national transportation system – from crippling flight cancellations and delays in January to multiple near misses on airport runways across the country to the derailment outside East Palestine.
Buttigieg waited 17 days to visit East Palestine
It was an opportunity for Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who nearly three weeks after the derailment visited East Palestine on Thursday, to claim responsibility and demonstrate his ability to reinstate safety and security. Instead, he laughs about his failures, blames the Trump administration and gives speeches about racism in transportation rather than adequately addressing immediate concerns.
That is unacceptable. If this secretary won’t do his job, President Biden should find someone else who will.
W/R/BA said "One says, Ayn Rand style, the essence of morality is do whatever you want"
Liar!
This is a typical example of W/R/BA's bad faith argumentation and dishonesty - they omit a critical part of what has been said to create an entirely false impression of it.
I never said "The essence of morality is do whatever you want.", I said "The essence of morality is do whatever you want, BUT HARM NO ONE".
The habitually dishonest W/R/BA excluded the last four words when they "quoted" me, which make all the difference in the world. They've done this before too. Their excuse when I called them out on it that time? "Well, gee Priya I don't really seen any difference between the two.". Really? You don't see any difference between harming people and not harming people? Bullsh*t. You are very clear on the difference, you just want to lie about what I said because you can't rebut it with truth.
W/R/BA said "[She] says the essence of morality is maximize the happiness of everyone"
Another lie about what I said. What I said was to have the best possible society everyone's highest priority has to be to maximize the happiness of all in an equal and fair way.
W/R/BA said "these two statements are contradictory".
The statements you falsely attributed to me are contradictory, what I actually said is not.
No one is morally obligated to participate in society or to improve the lot of anyone beyond themselves, if they want to strike out on their own they are welcome to as long as they don't hurt others or expect anyone to help them. However, if you want the best possible society, if you want to go beyond merely not hurting others your highest priority has to be maximizing the happiness for all in an equal and fair way. To anyone who doesn't want to have the best possible society I'd say it's in your best interest to aid in, or at least not oppose this because we can accomplish more good cooperating with each other than not and your life will be the better for it as well.
W/R/BA said "apparently, though, this person feels you must agree with the transgender worldview to be truly happy".
What are you talking about? There is no "transgender worldview" beyond the idea that people should not be forced or coerced into narrow rigid gender roles and expressions which may prevent them from maximizing their happiness.
W/R/BA said "which is how transgenders must justify their intolerance they are just doing what's for their victim's own good"
What intolerance? What victim?
We are happy to let you live however you want as long as you don't hurt us - we just ask for reciprocity - come back into compliance with the social contract.
Us opposing your efforts to harm us is not intolerance, your efforts to harm and coerce us in the first place are the intolerance. Not being allowed to discriminate against harmless people is NOT discrimination against you.
You are no more harmed by me having a sex change operation, wearing a dress, or using the women's bathroom than you are if I wear forest green clothes and that colour evokes an unpleasant memory for you. It is no real imposition on you for you to refer to me as "the woman Priya", this is no different than referring to a black person as "black" rather than "n*gger" when they tell you they prefer that.
W/R/BA said "by whatever means necessary, they will seek to impose their worldview on others"
We aren't passing laws to prevent you from wearing clothes of you own choosing, you are doing that to us. We are not banning any mention of heterosexuality in schools to indoctrinate children into believing it's bad to be heterosexual and you deserve to be rejected and punished for it, you are doing that to lgbt people.
As far as J.K. Rowling goes, I condemn anyone making threats of violence towards her, one can never justify responding to words with physical violence. As to so-called "verbal abuse" of Rowling it's not abuse to tell her she's wrong, she is lying about the research, and that she's promoting hatred of harmless trans people that encourages violence against us. Hate crimes against lgbt people are way up since Trump was elected and keep growing.
They don't come much more hypocritical than Rowling who absurdly asserts she opposes discrimination against trans women and wants us to "live your best lives" while she puts great effort into justifying and encouraging discrimination against us and preventing us from living as women. This is what outrages me most about J.K. Rowing - if she wants to be a bigot promoting the oppression of innocent trans women that's her right, but for god's sake don't think you're then entitled to then be seen as someone who isn't opposed to us.
President Joe Biden said that he "can't recall" whether he's spoken to the mayor of East Palestine, Ohio, while refusing to answer a question about a potential visit to the site of a nearby toxic train derailment
"I was hoping the gay guy would go,,," Biden trailed off.
"What intolerance? What victim?"
Critics have advocated that bookstores pull J.K. Rowling's books from the shelves, and some bookstores have succumbed to their bullying and done so. This victimizes both Rowling and those who would like to purchase her books.
She has also been subjected to verbal abuse, doxxing and threats of sexual and other physical violence, including death threats.
Rowling has sharing her experiences. “I have had direct threats of violence, and I have had people coming to my house where my kids live, and I’ve had my address posted online,” she says. “I’ve had what the police, anyway, would regard as credible threats.”
This campaign against Rowling is as dangerous. The brutal stabbing of Salman Rushdie last summer is a forceful reminder of what can happen when writers are demonized by extremists elements of society, such as radicalized Islamics or transgenders.
Rowling's crime: she dared to suggest there is a difference between those who were born into a gender and those who decide they don't want to be the gender they were born as.
Joanna Cherry, a Scottish National Party lawmaker who is a lesbian and a feminist, reported that she faced workplace bullying and death threats; she was also removed from her frontbench position in Parliament as spokeswoman for justice and home affairs. “I think some people are scared to speak out in this debate because when you do speak out, you’re often wrongly branded as a transphobe or a bigot,” she said.
Cherry's crime: she dared to publicly questioned Scotland’s passage of a “self-ID” law that would allow people to legally establish by mere declaration that they are women after living for only three months as a transgender woman — and without any need for a gender dysphoria diagnosis.
They had to suffer because then they might be bullied into acquiescing to the transgender worldview and achieve long-term happiness.
Every cult figure in history had this view of people that disagree with them.
"The essence of morality is do whatever you want, BUT HARM NO ONE"
The essence of this self-contradictory statement is that no one has any obligation to others beyond not harming them. Do whatever you want as people starve and civilizations are bombed by amoral dictators. As long as you didn't cause the harm, ignore their plight!
Do you simply turn your head and look the other way? Well, the world turns
"Another lie about what I said. What I said was to have the best possible society everyone's highest priority has to be to maximize the happiness of all in an equal and fair way."
Oh, I see. It was a lie to say that supporting the best possible society has anything to do with morality. Makes sense if you think that doing whatever you want is "the essence of morality." Got it
"We are happy to let you live"
the mentally ill always suffer delusions of grandeur
here Priya adopts the practice of a royal, speaking as plural
nut houses are filled with Napoleons and dauphins
"We are happy to let you live"
what a relief!
the all-powerful Priya is happy to let someone else live
not that there is any moral obligation to do so
do whatever you want
that's the essence of morality
like, WHATEVER!
New research from the Anti-Defamation League’s Center on Extremism shows that all of the 25 extremism-related murders in the United States last year were linked to right-wing extremists. The annual report, released Thursday by the organization that tracks hate groups, also finds that 15 of the 25 extremist-related murder victims were killed in one of two mass shooting sprees. Ten were murdered in the May 2022 massacre at a grocery store in a predominantly Black neighborhood in Buffalo, N.Y., and the other five were killed in the November mass shooting at Club Q in Colorado Springs, Colo.
In the case of Club Q, largely patronized by the LGBTQ community, prosecutors in the murder trial of the shooting suspect, Anderson Lee Aldrich, said he was motivated by “aversion to the LGBTQ community.” Aldrich ran a neo-Nazi website and used antigay and racist slurs online, according to police. In the case of the Buffalo shooting, the 18-year-old suspect said he “had to commit this attack” because he cared for “the future of the White race,” according to court documents.
“There are no hypotheticals here,” Mark Pitcavage, senior research fellow with the ADL's Center on Extremism and author of the report, told Yahoo News. “The report really starkly lays out the human cost of extremism, and we have to pay attention to that. Those numbers are telling us something, and those numbers should be a red flag. They're a warning, and especially the numbers for the mass killings. It should be a wake-up call.”
The report, which has tracked extremist-related killings since 2015, explains and analyzes these types of murders. For 2022, Pitcavage said, the researchers were committed to taking a deeper dive into extremist-related mass killings, because of how the category has “dominated the casualty totals.” The report defines mass killings as incidents that include four or more deaths, as well as attempts to kill large numbers of people that succeed in killing at least one.
Extremist-related murders are defined as any murder committed by an extremist, not necessarily those with a political motive. Only 18 of the 25 extremist-related murders were apparently committed for ideological motives, according to the ADL.
“I think the most surprising thing was from the 1970s through the 2000s, so that's like 40 years, there were about five extremist-related mass killing incidents a decade. That’s what the average is,” Pitcavage said. “But in just the past 12 years, we've had 26 more. We had 21 in the 2010s, and already just in 2021 and 2022 we've had five more. So the increase in these numbers has just been alarming.”
...The report found that white supremacists had committed 335 domestic extremist-related murders over the past 10 years, accounting for 73% of all such murders. According to the report, 21 of the 25 murders in 2022 were linked to white supremacists, with the most victims dying in mass shootings. The report highlights a new set of beliefs arising in the ranks of some segments of the white supremacy movement, called the “accelerationist propaganda,” as contributing to some of the extreme acts of violence.
“What they argue is, and what they try to tell other white supremacists or other people is, ‘You're never gonna be able to reform society to turn it into a white supremacist society. You're never gonna be able to use the normal political and social processes to change society to the way we want it,’" Pitcavage explained. “So the only thing left to do is to actually destroy society and build a new white-supremacist-oriented society from the ashes.
“So for accelerationist white supremacists, anything that will hasten the end of society or destabilize it is actually a good thing,” he continued. “This includes mass acts of violence against innocent civilians. So they actually openly encourage those sorts of attacks and provide guidance on how to commit them.
“When people do commit those acts, like Buffalo or the El Paso shooter, they glorify them and promote them, hoping that those people will inspire even more people to follow in their footsteps and also be glorified,” Pitcavage added, referring to the 2019 shooting at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, that left 23 dead. Patrick Crusius, who pleaded guilty, allegedly posted a manifesto with white nationalist and anti-immigrant rhetoric on the online platform 8chan about 20 minutes before the attack. (Many of the victims of his shooting were Latino.)
Domestic extremists are defined in the report as “extremists who are U.S. citizens or longtime permanent residents” determined to “commit murders to further their causes, using deadly force against perceived enemies.” Right-wing extremists include white supremacists, antigovernment extremists and right-wing conspiracy theorists, like the man who shot up a Washington, D.C., pizzeria because he believed a false online rumor that it was being used by Democratic politicians to abuse children. Murders by extremists in the U.S. have also been committed by people on the political left, such as Black nationalists, anarchists and domestic Islamist extremists.
The report also revealed that almost all the mass killings in 2022 (93%) were committed with firearms.
“The lack of adequate gun control is also playing a role,” Pitcavage said. “The vast majority of all of the recent mass killing incidents, all but around three, have been with firearms. You also had the Boston Marathon bombing and a couple of vehicular attacks, but a lot of them have done so with assault-style weapons like AR-15s. In the 1970s and 1980s, an extremist, if they wanted to kill a bunch of people, would think about constructing a bomb. Well, that's difficult and dangerous. But now if you want to commit mass carnage, it's easy to kill someone with an AR-15, and it doesn't require any expertise. So you have people like accelerationist white supremacists urging people to kill, and at the same time you have very deadly weapons easily available.”
The hypocrisy of Republicans knows no bounds. They are trying to blame Pete Buttigieg for the train disaster in Ohio when, had they been in power, they wouldn't have done anything differently themselves to prevent this, in fact they would have done things to lower train safety.
Republicans blindly oppose and rescind regulations as a matter of party policy. Their crude and destructive view of the world is that regulations are necessarily bad things always best avoided altogether. Their unwillingness to spend time developing regulations for the use of artificial intelligence is a grave and growing threat.
When Trump was president he rescinded a rail line safety measure the Obama administration put in place requiring some trains to run higher quality brakes. Democrats believe that sometimes regulations are necessary and good. At any point in time Democrats are more likely to implement safety regulations than Republicans who blindly oppose them. The idea that if Republicans had been in power they would have prevented this from happening is clearly false. If Republicans hadn't blindly opposed Democratic rail safety measures over the decades this train might well have been required to have higher quality brakes and to follow other safety measures that could have prevented this disaster.
Ron DeSantis says Florida is where "woke goes to die" and he means it. To be woke is to be aware of and considerate of the difficulties faced by people not like you. DeSantis is doing everything in his power to make sure the government gives no consideration to any injustices minorities face and to prevent it from attempting to study or mitigate them. If half of a city's population is black, 95% of city employees are white and 95% of people stopped by the police are black Ron DeSantis is perfectly happy with that and intends to keep it that way.
DeSantis loudly boasts his latest target is business and government efforts to enhance diversity, equity, and inclusion. Diversity, equity, and inclusion are all features of a fair, just, and equal society. Ron DeSantis and Republicans like him are opposed to fairness and equality and any attempts to bring them about. Ultimately democracy is about fairness and equality, it's no surprise that Republicans like DeSantis are attacking it with actions like restricting voting and "justifying" that with false claims of widespread voter fraud. In the mid-term elections voter turnout by black people was 8% lower than it should have been compared with the percentage of white people who voted. Republicans wanted this and brought it about to gain an unfair advantage in elections.
Republicans around the country are proposing and passing laws that make it illegal for someone assigned male at birth to wear makeup, feminine clothes, or to present as feminine in any way. Trump bragged that the Republican candidate for Massachusetts governor would "rule your state with an iron fist". Trump, now seeing DeSantis promote making it illegal to be trans has tried to one-up him by promising all sorts of draconian measures to punish and erase trans people if he becomes president. Republicans like them hate freedom and dearly want to force people they don't like to live according to their dictates.
Say what you will about trans women, but for me living as a woman has greatly improved my life and happiness, it's been a big success. Conservatives like W/R/BA are opposed to my marriage to my husband and if they had their way they'd force us to end our romantic relationship under the guise of our relationship being bad for us. Far from being a bad thing, my living as a woman and marrying my husband has been a positive thing for us and society.
It's hard to say which Republicans hate worse, lgbt people or those receiving welfare benefits. Prior to marrying my husband I lived alone supported by welfare provided by the government. Now he supports me and the government no longer pays to keep me alive - this is a net win for everyone, it's crazy for anyone to oppose it. After moving in with my husband I on occasion literally jump for joy, I am far, far happier than I was living alone. Society and I are better off because of this relationship. Now you might argue that my husband would be financially better off without having to support me but so far he appears to feel the cost to him is a trade-off he's happy to make. Yet conservatives blindly oppose our romantic relationship and want to coerce us to end it - it seems they do hate lgbt people more than they hate people living on welfare.
Religious conservatives often go on about "god's design for sex" and talk about the allegedly inherent "complementarity" that exists between males and females that supposedly same sex couples don't have. They don't accept that I'm a woman and assert therefore my husband and I are somehow incompatible or unsuited for each other. Nothing could be further from the truth. My previous love was with a woman I was more sexually attracted to than my husband. However I feel much more emotionally compatible with him than I did with her, this housewife role with him in charge that conservatives claim is most likely to result in a happy opposite sex marriage suits me very well - there is a great deal of "complementarity" between us, he is the love of my life. Either there is no inherent advantage in "complementarity" for opposite sex couples, or I really am a woman and that's why our relationship is such a success. Either way some hard core conservative beliefs must be wrong.
We all know from experience that whatever inherent "complementarity" there may be between males and females solely on the basis of gender is woefully insufficient to ensure a successful marriage - there are so many other more important factors in determining how compatible two people are with each other, we all know opposite sex couples that are a disaster and same sex couples that work wonderfully together. Society best give people the freedom to pursue happiness as they wish instead of counterproductively trying to force everyone to either have an opposite sex mate or be single. No rational person can look at the relationship I have with my husband and honestly say this love shouldn't be welcomed and valued by society.
"Republicans around the country are proposing and passing laws that make it illegal for someone assigned male at birth to wear makeup, feminine clothes, or to present as feminine in any way"
really?
I wasn't aware of that
could you point to some examples?
"DeSantis promotes making it illegal to be trans has tried to one-up him by promising all sorts of draconian measures to punish and erase trans people if he becomes president"
really?
I wasn't aware of that
could you point to some examples?
"Society best give people the freedom to pursue happiness as they wish"
society does do that
you just want to force society to validate your odd view with a marriage certificate
that's not freedom, it's imposition on society
"really?
I wasn't aware of that
could you point to some examples?"
Someone certainly could, as it's happening in several states.
But why give you any ideas? You harass enough people in MoCo as it is.
It's only a matter of time before local anti-LGBT groups get wind of them, copy them, and then try and get them passed here.
"But why give you any ideas? You harass enough people in MoCo as it is."
alas, Priya has already posted the idea
now, we're just waiting to see any proof of the scurrilous accusation
but, let's face it
there will be no proof
it was a lie
there is no one making it illegal for someone assigned male at birth to wear makeup, feminine clothes, or to present as feminine in any way
"It's only a matter of time before local anti-LGBT groups get wind of them, copy them, and then try and get them passed here."
well, it's going to happen much sooner now that blabby Priya divulged secrets of the agenda
Priya will probably be court-martialed by the High LBGT Council!
but, not to worry, there's always the insanity defense
swirly time!
chirp..chirp..chirp..chirp....
News Corp Chairman Rupert Murdoch said under oath that several Fox News hosts touted false conspiracy theories that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from former President Donald Trump, according to court documents released Monday.
Murdoch made the statements as part of an ongoing $1.6 billion defamation suit against Fox by Dominion Voting Systems. The company sued the news giant in 2021 after several hosts promoted wild and unfounded claims that its voting machines were used to deny Trump the election, including lies that the devices could be rigged to switch votes for one candidate to another.
There is no evidence to support those claims. Trump lost the election to President Joe Biden by more than 7 million votes.
When pressed by Dominion lawyers during a deposition last month, Murdoch said Fox News hosts Sean Hannity, Lou Dobbs, Maria Bartiromo and Jeanine Pirro all endorsed the notion that the election was stolen.
“Yes,” Murdoch said in his deposition, “They endorsed.”
He stressed that the false statements came from the hosts, but did not say that Fox as an entity endorsed those statements. Still, the revelations will likely bolster Dominion’s evidence as it seeks to recover vast damages it says it suffered after the attacks.
“I would have liked us to be stronger in denouncing it in hindsight,” Murdoch added about the false election claims.
Fox defended itself in a fiery statement after the deposition was released.
“Dominion’s lawsuit has always been more about what will generate headlines than what can withstand legal and factual scrutiny, as illustrated by them now being forced to slash their fanciful damages demand by more than half a billion dollars after their own expert debunked its implausible claims,” a company spokesperson said.
Dominion maintained it would continue with the suit on Monday.
“The damages claim remains,” a company spokesperson said. “As Fox well knows, our damages exceed $1.6 bil.”
The New York Times reported the latest court filing by Dominion’s lawyers also included a plea from former GOP House Speaker Paul Ryan. Ryan said under oath that he reached out to Murdoch and his son, Lachlan Murdoch, that Fox “should not be spreading conspiracy theories” and should “move on from Donald Trump.”
A separate legal filing earlier this month revealed a slate of text messages between key Fox News hosts and network executives. The missives repeatedly bashed two key architects of the election lie conspiracy — Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani — and expressed concern with Trump’s falsehoods about his loss.
Fox attorneys have maintained the hosts’ comments are protected under the First Amendment, arguing coverage of Trump and his conspiracies was newsworthy.
“A reasonable viewer would have readily understood that hosts were not espousing the President’s allegations themselves, but were providing a forum for the principal architects of those legal challenges,” the company’s lawyers said in a brief this month.
Unfortunately for Fox, their audience has never been "reasonable viewers."
"STOP THE STEAL!!!"
W/R/BA claims trans people aren't victims, rather bigots like JK Rowling, who demonize and spread damaging misinformation about trans people, are the "real" victims. They rant on and on about how bigots like JK Rowling have been "verbally abused" but are utterly unconcerned with the actual attacks and killings of lgbt people bigots like Rowling encourage and provide specious justification for. They are utterly unconcerned with the myriad of death threats innocent election workers have been getting since Trump and Republicans started promoting the big lie that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump. The effort to destroy American democracy by intimidating election workers is of no consequence, but don't let anyone call Rowling a bigot for promoting the hatred of innocent trans people!
They then quote her telling one of her common lies “I respect every trans person’s right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them.”.
To me, this is the worst part of Rowling's anti-trans campaign of hate. She goes around demanding that trans women be prevented from doing the very things that allow us to live the way that feels authentic and comfortable to us, like using the women's public bathrooms or domestic violence shelters and then absurdly claims she loves and supports us. If Rowling wants to be a bigot promoting the harm of trans people that's her right, but for gods' sake don't then have the audacity to then falsely claim you actually support us.
W/R/BA said "Joanna Cherry, a Scottish National Party lawmaker...“I think some people are scared to speak out in this debate because when you do speak out, you’re often wrongly branded as a transphobe or a bigot,” she said.
People who seek to deny trans people the harmless things that allow us to live freely and happily don't then get to complain about being called bigots and transphobes.
I posted "The essence of morality is do whatever you want, BUT HARM NO ONE"
W/R/BA said "The essence of this self-contradictory statement is that no one has any obligation to others beyond not harming them. Do whatever you want as people starve and civilizations are bombed by amoral dictators. As long as you didn't cause the harm, ignore their plight!"
How ironic of you to say given that Republicans like Marjorie Taylor Green are demanding that the United States ignore amoral dictators like Putin bombing and starving the innocent people of Ukraine. Morality means doing whatever you want, but harming no one so of course this means the harm people like Putin cause others is unacceptable.
W/R/BA again dishonestly partially quoted me - "We are happy to let you live" and then said "what a relief! the all-powerful Priya is happy to let someone else live not that there is any moral obligation to do so".
What I really said was "We are happy to let you live however you want as long as you don't hurt us - we just ask for reciprocity" but they couldn't let that innocuous statement stand as is so they created the false impression that I'm some sort of monster asserting I have the right to decide who lives and dies.
Then, as they often do, they childishly repeated their lie about my position by posting "do whatever you want that's the essence of morality" and excluding the mandatory - "but harm no one". Obviously it's immoral and destructive to misrepresent my position this way, but they do it again and again because they can't dispute what I actually said. They then excuse this malicious dishonesty by absurdly claiming "Golly Priya I don't really see a difference [between harming and not harming people]".
I posted "Republicans around the country are proposing and passing laws that make it illegal for someone assigned male at birth to wear makeup, feminine clothes, or to present as feminine in any way"
W/R/BA posted really? I wasn't aware of that could you point to some examples?"
Certainly. Bills in at least eight states seek to restrict drag performances as part of a broader rightwing backlash against LGBTQ+ rights
Most of the proposed bills include defining a drag performer as someone performing while using dress, makeup and mannerisms associated with a gender other than the one assigned to them at birth. License to bully laws putatively limit discussion of sexual orientation in schools to that which is "age appropriate" but the broad wording effectively bans any mention of lgbt people or issues as there is always some anti-lgbt parent who will assert it is "inappropriate". Similarly, the broad wording of the laws putatively only banning drag queens effectively make illegal any feminine expression by one assigned male at birth.
W/R/BA misquotes me (as usual) as supposedly saying "DeSantis promotes making it illegal to be trans has tried to one-up him by promising all sorts of draconian measures to punish and erase trans people if he becomes president".
What I actually said was "Trump, now seeing DeSantis promote making it illegal to be trans has tried to one-up him by promising all sorts of draconian measures to punish and erase trans people if he becomes president."
W/R/BA said "really? I wasn't aware of that could you point to some examples?"
Certainly. Trump said his Department of Justice will investigate hospitals that treat transgender kids, and threatened schools that support trans students.
I posted "Society best give people the freedom to pursue happiness as they wish"
W/R/BA said "society does do that"
The many laws Republicans propose to ban drag performances would make it illegal for anyone assigned male at birth to express femininity through dress or makeup.
W/R/BA said "Priya...swirly time!"
W/R/BA stupidly claim the people promoting hate and oppression of lgbt people are the victims rather than lgbt people themselves and yet here they are again advocating for my head to be forced into a toilet filled with urine and feces because I'm trans.
W/R/BA said "you just want to force society to validate your odd view with a marriage certificate that's not freedom, it's imposition on society"
Any "imposition" on people caused by the gay couple down the street getting married are trivial or inconsequential in that the bigots are not being asked to engage in a marriage or sexual activity they consider objectionable.
"Republicans around the country are proposing and passing laws that make it illegal for someone assigned male at birth to wear makeup, feminine clothes, or to present as feminine in any way"
well, Priya choked up a desperate attempt to cover this lie but pointing to laws against drag shows and protect kids in public schools from transgender propaganda
so, that settles it
a guy can engage in the bizarre practice of dressing like a girl and putting on make-up
no one will arrest him because there is no law against doing it
priya just lied, and that's the truth
You say that as if you (or any of your comrades) could actually tell the difference between a trans woman and a drag queen.
W/R/BA, no school in Florida, no teacher is making any mention of lgbt people but the law says theoretically students can be taught "age appropriate" material. The law has no definition of what is "age appropriate" information on gender identity or sexual orientation, it's up to the parents to decide. We both know there will always be conservative parents who don't consider any mention of lgbt people age appropriate. The law sends the message to all school children that lgbt people are bad people who deserve to be punished and oppressed. The law prevents any teacher from intervening when a child is being bullied for being lgbt because they can't say it's wrong to bully people for being lgbt, that some people are inevitably lgbt.
It's the same problem with the laws supposedly only banning drag. There is no definition of what is a "public performance" of drag, there is no reason why under these laws they couldn't decide if I go into a mall to shop wearing makeup that that is a public performance of drag and I should be thrown in jail for six years. If the law can be used that way by lgbt hating republicans it most certainly will be at some point.
W/R/BA, you've got a lot of complaints about my philosophy of morality, what do you have that's better?
If you're debating in good faith, you don't hide your motives, like why you want society to punish lgbt people.
Far-right Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) called for a “safe space” for Republicans and drew instant blowback on Twitter.
Critics mockingly dubbed Greene a “snowflake” and suggested her comment was “beyond parody,” given how the idea of safe spaces has long been ridiculed by her fellow GOP extremists.
“We want our own safe space and we deserve it,” Greene told Fox News’ Sean Hannity during an interview about her “national divorce” idea.
Greene’s proposal would involve separating the country “by red states and blue states,” with Americans who move from blue to red temporarily stripped of their voting rights. The idea has been interpreted by some as a call for secession.
But talking to Hannity, Greene said she wasn’t talking about separate countries or secession, or trying to start a civil war, but “reducing the size of our federal government, and giving more power and control to our states to be the identity that they want to be, whether it’s blue or red” because “the division in our country has gotten to a dangerous point.”
“We are fed up with Democrat policies, we’re fed up with the woke ideology being shoved down our throat and we’re tired of our children being brainwashed with these ideas,” she ranted. “We want our own safe space and we deserve it.”
"If you're debating in good faith"
no one's debating with you, Priya
just educating you
this forum is not sufficient for a debate on this topic
I know you are desperately trying to find a moral construct that transforms your desires into an imperative
sign up at your local college for a course in the philosophy of ethics and consider Kant
Hi Priya,
Here are some links you may find helpful when debating this particular poster:
Link 1
Link 2
Link 3
Link 4
Link 5
Have a nice day.
The Florida Democratic party would not exist if a new Senate bill is passed and signed into law.
Spring Hill Republican Senator Blaise Ingoglia has filed SB 1248, which would be called "The Ultimate Cancel Act."
While it does not mention the Democratic party's name, it would direct the Florida Division of Elections to "immediately cancel the filings of a political party, to include its registration and approved status as a political party, if the party’s platform has previously advocated for, or been in support of, slavery or involuntary servitude."
Southern Democrats advocated for slavery during the Civil War.
Under the Bill, registered Democrats would be automatically re-registered as having "no party affiliation." The Democratic party officers could reorganize, but only under a substantially different name.
"For years now, leftist activists have been trying to "cancel" people and companies for things they have said or done in the past. This includes the removal of statues and memorials, and the renaming of buildings. Using this standard, it would be hypocritical not to cancel the Democrat Party itself for the same reason," explained Sen. Ingoglia.
The Florida Democratic Party issued this statement response, “Presenting a bill that would disenfranchise 5 million voters is both unconstitutional and unserious. Under Ron DeSantis, Senator Ingoglia is using his office to push bills that are nothing more than publicity stunts instead of focusing on the issues that matter most to Floridians, such as reforming property insurance, addressing housing affordability, and combating climate change.
“The sooner DeSantis and his puppets in the legislature learn that Florida is a Democratic Republic and not a Banana Republic, the better it will be for all Floridians.”
Former Democratic State Representative Carlos Guillermo Smith told WESH, "Republicans in Florida are so drunk with power that they are expanding their censorship agenda to even include abolishing the Democratic Party of Florida. If Floridians are not alarmed by what is coming out of Republican leadership in Tallahassee then they are not paying enough attention."
"Here are some links you may find helpful when debating this particular poster"
Hi anonymous,
You aren't helping Priya at all.
it's a very easy dodge to just say anyone who points out your faulty thinking is just a narcissist.
It basically "works" for every situation.
But it's a hollow gesture.
Ending ignorance will be a bigger help.
Accusations of narcissism is the last refuge to which the scoundrel clings.
The Florida Democratic party would not exist if a new Senate bill is passed and signed into law.
SB 1248, which would direct the Florida Division of Elections to "immediately cancel the filings of a political party, to include its registration and approved status as a political party, if the party’s platform has previously advocated for, or been in support of, slavery or involuntary servitude."
Democrats advocated for slavery during the Civil War.
And Jim Crow in the 1920s.
And segregated schools in the 1950s.
And a crime bill that locked up a generation of young black men in the 1990s.
And defunding the police that protect the inner city black communities during the pandemic.
And the elimination of school choice for inner city blacks in the 21st century.
"Accusations of narcissism is the last refuge to which the scoundrel clings."
All this time you've been telling us you don't click on links.
Interesting.
"All this time you've been telling us you don't click on links.
Interesting."
well, I did this time
the things that pass for interesting, I don't understand
"it's a very easy dodge to just say anyone who points out your faulty thinking is just a narcissist."
Looking above, no one said that.
"It basically "works" for every situation."
You mean like accusing LGBT people "groomers," or trans people "mentally ill"?
Only among the gullible and uninformed.
"Accusations of narcissism is the last refuge to which the scoundrel clings."
No one did that. They just provide background information that might help the debate.
Why are you so defensive?
With a fight over the federal debt limit looming in Washington, President Biden and Republican leaders have been sparring over possible cuts to Medicare and Medicaid. Together, the two health programs constitute the largest share of the federal budget, but as the partisan back-and-forth has shown, slashing benefits is probably politically impossible. It is also not the best way to address health care budget challenges.
Instead of simply cutting, Congress should reshape how health providers, and especially hospitals, are paid. An ongoing experiment in Maryland shows how this can be done.
Maryland’s approach is known as global hospital budgeting. It is based on a recognition of how federal (and private) health dollars are really spent.
The actual breakdown of health spending may be surprising to many Americans. As of 2021, the two largest categories of spending are hospitals, at 31 percent of national health expenditures, and physician and clinical services, at 20 percent. No other category — prescription drugs, nursing care, medical equipment, home health care, insurance costs — accounts for more than 9 percent.
For Medicare, the numbers are even starker: almost 39 percent of spending on hospitals and almost 25 percent on physician and clinical services. Medicaid is similar, albeit with lower spending on physicians, at 13.5 percent.
Put quite simply, more than half of health spending, and more than two-thirds of Medicare spending, is accounted for by the nation’s providers: hospitals, doctors and other medical professionals.
This creates a difficult challenge for policymakers. Providers, especially large hospital systems, have significant power to demand higher prices from commercial insurance payers. As a result, major hospital systems often have annual revenues in the billions of dollars. With this economic weight comes considerable political power, as cuts to hospital payments threaten not only key health services, but also jobs.
Here, the problem becomes especially tricky: Medicare and Medicaid already pay providers less than commercial insurers do. Cutting rates further will push financially troubled hospitals into insolvency while incentivizing physician practices to sell out to large health systems — increasing the market power of those systems and pushing commercial insurance prices even higher.
Maryland’s global budget experiment offers a possible way out. It has shown promise of reducing Medicare’s rate of cost growth without devastating the health care industry.
Maryland was one of about 30 states that established hospital rate setting systems in the 1970s, but it alone retained its system when other states dropped theirs due to performance issues and a wave of enthusiasm for managed care and deregulation during the 1990s and 2000s.
Overseen by an independent state agency, the Health Services Cost Review Commission (HSCRC), Maryland’s system set uniform payment rates for each hospital based on historical costs and patient mix. All payers, including commercial insurers, self-insured employers, self-paying patients and, crucially, Medicare and Medicaid, reimbursed hospitals at those specified rates. This approach achieved considerable success in lowering the cost of an average hospital admission, but it had a crucial weakness: hospitals could grow their total revenues by increasing the number of patients admitted and services delivered, driving overall costs higher. This became especially problematic after a 2000 change in the rate-setting formula.
The global budget experiment addresses this problem while keeping the positive features of the old system.
In 2014, Maryland negotiated a new federal waiver that added “global budgets” to the HSCRC’s all-payer system. This means that every hospital in the state receives a predetermined amount of revenue for the year, with payment rates adjusting as needed so that actual revenues reach the promised budget figure. With this constraint in place, hospitals no longer have an incentive to increase the volume of services, because revenues will not increase. Additional incentive structures reward hospitals with extra funds if they reduce readmissions and complications or meet other quality-of-care measures.
Critically, the waiver specifies that global budgets are set so that per capita hospital revenue growth over a decade will be no more than 3.58 percent, which is 1 percent lower than the projected rise in Maryland’s per capita gross state product. Increases in hospital spending per Medicare recipient in the state are capped at a level below the national rate of growth, generating savings that compensate for the higher Medicare rates paid under Maryland’s all-payer structure — and that compound in future years.
Early results for the global budget system are promising. Between 2014 and 2018, this approach saved $1.4 billion in Medicare hospital spending in Maryland, with a growth rate 8.74 percent below the national average. Overall hospital revenues grew by just 1.92 percent, well below the 3.58 percent target. Reductions in hospital-acquired conditions and rates of readmission all exceeded targets as well.
The all-payer, global budget system also increases equity by stabilizing the revenues of rural and urban hospitals with high numbers of low-income patients. It does this by factoring the cost of uncompensated care into payment rates for individual hospitals, which spreads those expenses across all payers. During the COVID-19 pandemic, global budgeting meant that hospitals in Maryland did not experience the massive revenue falloffs that plagued hospitals in other states.
In 2019, Maryland extended the program to primary care and non-hospital providers such as nursing homes and home health care agencies through a “Total Cost of Care” initiative.
The new system had one larger effect: It pushed hospitals toward cooperating, not competing. As one hospital official told an interviewer, “I think it was not just the HSCRC, but also the concept of collaboration. That you could set a statewide goal, and everyone could work on it. … You were building on a base of trust. In other places, people are vicious competitors.” This represents a partial but significant step toward treating hospitals like social institutions rather than market actors.
By paying hospitals based on the population they serve and the quality of the care they deliver, rather than on the number and price of the services they perform, global hospital budgeting creates potentially transformative changes in American health care. Congress could incentivize the expansion of Maryland-style global budget programs to other states, and with it, the promise of lower health care costs in coming decades.
Adopted widely, the global budgeting strategy provides an out for both Democrats and Republicans from the dilemmas of Medicare politics. More importantly, it could make the U.S. health care system cheaper and more effective for all Americans.
A Texas lawmaker who authored a bill that would restrict drag performances appears to have dressed in drag himself while a student.
A video that surfaced on Twitter and TikTok this week appears to show Texas state Rep. Nate Schatzline, a Republican, skipping, running and dancing in a park while donning a black sequined dress and a red eye mask. At the end of the roughly 90-second video — which plays over the song “Sexy Lady” by Javi Mula — the four participants are named, including Schatzline, whose character is called “The Virgin.”
“Nate Schatzline has made his entire personality attacking the LGBTQ community, trans especially children, and vowed to ban drag shows in Texas,” the Twitter user, who did not respond to a request for comment, wrote. “Here is Nate… in drag.”
Michelle
@LivingBlueTX
Nate Schatzline has made his entire personality attacking the LGBTQ community, trans especially children, and vowed to ban drag shows in Texas.
Here is Nate… in drag. #txlege #iToldYouSo
10:29 PM · Feb 27, 2023
Schatzline, a first-term state representative and former pastor, did not immediately respond to NBC News’ request for comment. However, in a tweet shared Tuesday, he appeared to confirm his participation in the video.
“Y’all really going crazy over me wearing a dress as a joke back in school for a theatre project? Yah, that’s not a sexually explicit drag show… lol y’all will twist ANYTHING,” he wrote.
[Reminds me of Peter Spring, the ex-gay advocate.]
While Schatzline’s performance in the video would meet most dictionary definitions of “drag,” it is unclear whether it would be prohibited under the legislation Schatzline introduced in January.
The legislation, HB 1266, seeks to amend Texas’ Business and Commerce Code to define a venue that hosts a “drag performance” and “authorizes on-premises consumption of alcoholic beverages” as a “sexually oriented business.” Such businesses, according to the state code, “may not allow an individual younger than 18 years of age to enter the premises of the business.”
The measure defines a drag performance as “a performance in which a performer exhibits a gender identity that is different than the performer’s gender assigned at birth using clothing, makeup, or other physical markers and sings, lip syncs, dances, or otherwise performs before an audience for entertainment.” It also states that sexually oriented businesses can be categorized as “a nightclub, bar, restaurant, or other commercial enterprise that provides for an audience of two or more individuals a drag performance.”..
The emergence of Schatzline’s video came several days after an image of what appears to be Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee dressed in drag as a high school student was shared on Reddit and Twitter. Lee’s press secretary, Jade Cooper Byers, did not confirm whether it is Lee in the yearbook photo, previously telling NBC News in an email that “any attempt to conflate this serious issue with lighthearted school traditions is dishonest and disrespectful to Tennessee families.”...
The video of the Texas lawmaker also comes about a month after an image emerged on social media that appeared to show embattled Republican Rep. George Santos of New York in drag. At the time, Santos told reporters as he walked through a New York airport: “No, I was not a drag queen in Brazil, guys. I was young and I had fun at a festival. Sue me for having a life.”
WASHINGTON (AP) — Former President Donald Trump can be sued by injured Capitol Police officers and Democratic lawmakers over the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, the Justice Department said Thursday in a federal court case testing Trump’s legal vulnerability and the limits of executive power.
The department wrote that although a president enjoys broad legal latitude to communicate to the public on matters of concern, “no part of a President’s official responsibilities includes the incitement of imminent private violence. By definition, such conduct plainly falls outside the President’s constitutional and statutory duties.”
The brief was filed by lawyers of the Justice Department’s Civil Division and has no bearing on a separate criminal investigation by a department special counsel into whether Trump can be criminally charged over efforts to undo Democrat Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 presidential election ahead of the Capitol riot. In fact, the lawyers note that they are not taking a position with respect to potential criminal liability for Trump or anyone else.
The Justice Department wrote that it also takes no view on a lower court judge’s conclusion that those who sued Trump have “plausibly” alleged that his speech caused the riot. Nevertheless, the department said that an appeals court should reject Trump’s claim that he’s immune from the lawsuits.
The Justice Department cautioned that the “court must take care not to adopt rules that would unduly chill legitimate presidential communication” or saddle a president with meritless lawsuits.
“In exercising their traditional communicative functions, Presidents routinely address controversial issues that are the subject of passionate feelings. Presidents may at times use strong rhetoric. And some who hear that rhetoric may overreact, or even respond with violence,” the department wrote.
Trump is appealing a decision by a federal judge in Washington, who last year rejected efforts by the former president to toss out the conspiracy civil lawsuits filed by lawmakers and two Capitol police officers. U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Trump’s words during a rally before the violent storming of the U.S. Capitol were likely “words of incitement not protected by the First Amendment.”
The lawsuits, filed by Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., officers James Blassingame and Sidney Hemby, and later joined by other House Democrats, argue that Trump and others made “false and incendiary allegations of fraud and theft, and in direct response to the Defendant’s express calls for violence at the rally, a violent mob attacked the U.S. Capitol.”
The suits cite a federal civil rights law that was enacted to counter the Ku Klux Klan’s intimidation of officials. They describe in detail how Trump and others spread baseless claims of election fraud, both before and after the 2020 presidential election was declared, and charge that they helped to rile up the thousands of rioters before they stormed the Capitol.
"No one did that. They just provide background information that might help the debate.
Why are you so defensive?"
Actually, you did do that but was I being defensive?
I Was only suggesting you not provide Priya with a rationalization. It doesn't help that poor soul deal with reality.
Here's a great idea to form a better society:
A newly introduced Texas House bill proposes property tax cuts for couples who get married, and have lots of children. There’s a catch though. In order to qualify for the tax benefit, couples need to be heterosexual, and their children born or adopted after their date of marriage. LGBTQ couples will not qualify for full benefits.
H.B. 2889 would provide qualifying couples with a 40 percent property tax reduction if they have four children, with the tax break increasing for every additional child. Couples with 10 or more children would pay no property tax at all. Just getting started? A couple that meets the requirements laid out by the bill gets a 10% reduction even before they have children.
“Supporting Texas means supporting Texas families,” said Rep. Bryan Slaton, who introduced the bill. “Texas will start saying to couples, ‘Get married, and be fruitful and multiply.”
In his press release outlining the contents of the bill, Slaton suggested that the proposal had been modeled after laws implemented in Hungary and Poland, which provide a virtually tax-free existence to large heterosexual families.
With both Texas’ House and Senate under Republican control, the bill should pass.
Concern over tax cuts has been brewing in the Texas statehouse for weeks now. State legislators voiced concern that Governor Greg Abbott’s proposed budget didn’t take advantage of the state’s immense budget surplus. This tax cut would use the tax surplus to promote heterosexuality.
"This tax cut would use the tax surplus to promote heterosexuality."
with all the bad news roiling around these days, it's nice to hear some happy news for a change
"H.B. 2889 would provide qualifying couples with a 40 percent property tax reduction if they have four children, with the tax break increasing for every additional child."
Interesting.
40% reduction in property tax.
That's great for people who own homes, not so great for renters.
Let's see how this breaks down by race:
https://www.texastribune.org/2015/11/08/texas-minorities-underrepresented-among-homeowners/
White: 51.5% of occupied households, 58.8% of home ownership
Hispanic: 30.6% of occupied households, 27.7% of home ownership
Black: 12.5% of occupied households, 8.3% of home ownership
It looks like the Conservative Texas legislature has found another way to privilege white people over minorities, without ever having to mention race.
Sneaky little buggers.
More great news - Biden joins Republicans in stopping a DC pro-crime bill!
President Joe Biden won't veto a Republican-led measure making its way through the Senate that would strike down a newly passed law overhauling Washington's century-old criminal code and reduce the penalties for some crimes, he told Senate Democrats on Thursday.
The decision not to veto the legislation deals a major blow to local pro-crime Democratic lawmakers in Washington, D.C., who urged congressional Democrats and Biden to vote against the measure in order to help criminals operate more freely. Biden told Senate Democrats of his decision during the party's weekly luncheon, noting it was a pushback on some of the provisions in the updated code.
"I don’t support some of the changes D.C. Council put forward," Biden tweeted. "If the Senate votes to overturn what D.C. Council did — I’ll sign it."
“This is news to me," House Del. Eleanor Norton (D-DC) whined. "I’m very disappointed in it."
Other congressional Democrats expressed disappointment in Biden's decision, calling it a loss for DC's thriving criminal community.
The Senate GOP is hoping to force a vote next week on the updated code, which softens the punishment for homicide, robberies, and carjackings, opening Democrats up to attacks of being soft on crime should they choose to oppose the GOP's repeal. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is unable to block the measure despite Democrats controlling the upper chamber, making the vote a rare opportunity for the GOP to put senators in battleground states on record on the issue.
The bill had earned support from Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), all but guaranteeing its passage in the Senate, where Democrats have lost their majority with the absences of mentally ill Sens. John Fetterman (D-PA) and elderly Dianne Feinstein (D-CA). Both are currently out of office due to serious health concerns
Recent years have seen a concerted effort to overthrow the longstanding scientific consensus that “male” and “female” represent two real, discrete biological categories in humans. The Oxford philosopher Amia Srinivasan, for instance, rejects the notion that biological sex is “natural,” “pre-political,” or “objective,” claiming instead that it is “a cultural thing posing as a natural one.” UC–Riverside’s Gender and Sexualities Chair, Brandon Andrew Robinson, openly claims that we “should stop teaching that sex is biological” because we “assign meaning to certain things . . . because of dominant gender ideologies.” In this view, categorizing people as male or female is not only biologically incorrect but also harmful and oppressive.
Early attempts at debunking the two-sex model sought to expand the number of sexes beyond two. Consider Brown University professor Emerita Anne Fausto-Sterling, who claimed in the 1990s that the “two-party sexual system” in humans was “in defiance of nature,” and that there were instead “at least five sex categories, and perhaps even more.” However, the additional “sexes” she proposed simply corresponded to various intersex conditions, not new sexes akin to the functional reproductive roles of producing either sperm or ova that define males and females universally across all taxa.
More modern attempts to debunk the binary nature of sex have moved away from trying to discover new sexes. Instead, they call for the elimination of sex categories entirely in favor of viewing sex as a continuous, though perhaps bimodal, spectrum consisting of many traits. Such ideas have found refuge in the pages of Nature and popular-science magazines like Scientific American.
Because the sex binary has been so thoroughly stigmatized as inherently “oppressive” and invalidating of transgender and “non-binary” identities and experiences—cardinal sins of our age—this effort has started an arms race among activist scientists to create the least binary model of sex imaginable. Since the “bimodal spectrum” concept still entails two of something, it must be abandoned. After all, the bimodal distribution of sex-related traits may problematically stem from an underlying property that remains fundamentally binary.
In pursuit of this goal, a “Multimodal Sex literature survey team” composed of researchers from UC–Berkeley and Loyola University Chicago has been assembled to “re-imagine a more inclusive framework for biological sex.” On January 27, 2023, the team produced their first pre-print paper, titled “Multimodal models of animal sex: breaking binaries leads to a better understanding of ecology and evolution.” The paper argues that sex is best viewed as “a constructed category operating at multiple biological levels” rather than bimodal or binary.
In saner times, such a paper would perhaps bring a small chuckle from a journal editor before issuing a swift rejection. But current times are far from sane, and the quick ascendance of fashionable pseudoscience in academia on the biology of sex is ample reason to worry that this paper will not receive the withering review it deserves.
Time and again, the paper argues with ideological opponents who simply don’t exist. Take the authors’ baseless but repeated claim that the binary model of sex necessarily requires that any and all measurable genetic, hormonal, morphological, or behavioral difference observed between the sexes must also be a strict binary (i.e., these traits will have no overlap):
‘Sex’ is often semantically flattened into a binary model, for which individuals are classified as either ‘female’ or ‘male.’ A more expansive definition of sex is bimodal—with most individuals falling within one of two peaks of a trait distribution. However, even a bimodal model is an oversimplification, since ‘sex’ comprises multiple traits, with variable distributions. Individuals may possess different combinations of chromosome type, gamete size, hormone level, morphology, and social roles, which do not always align in female- and male-specific ways or persist across an organism’s lifespan. Reliance on strict binary categories of sex fails to accurately capture the diverse and nuanced nature of sex.
The authors then quote renowned transgender biologist Joan Roughgarden, who similarly fails to grasp the meaning of the sex binary: “the biggest error in biology today is uncritically assuming that the gamete size binary implies a corresponding binary in body type, behavior, and life history.” I am not aware of any biologist having ever made this claim, but this (perhaps willful) misunderstanding leads the authors to believe that if they’re able to locate a sex-related difference that does not conform to an absolute binary, then they will have successfully refuted the claim that only two sexes exist.
When biologists speak of sex being “binary,” we mean something very straightforward. There exist only two sexes, which are fundamentally rooted in the binary classification between sperm and ova. Males have the function of producing small gametes (sperm), and females large gametes (ova). Other measurable sex differences beyond gametes (which include genetic differences, hormone levels, and average morphological and behavioral differences) are either a cause or consequence of this fundamentally binary and definitional distinction between males and females, and they need not be binary. Put simply, not all sex differences are differences of sex.
The authors then present three “case studies” that they claim demonstrate how the multiple “independent levels of sex” surveyed in the previous sections can be integrated “in a multimodal framework.” Every example intended to undermine the binarity of sex actually reinforces it. For instance, the first case study looks at several “sex role reversed” species that “defy ‘traditional’ expectations of social sex roles,” such as “male competition and female parental care.” But the simple fact that the authors are capable of identifying a system where females and males behave in ways that are not “traditional” demonstrates that being male or female is something entirely separate from possessing behavioral traits like competition or parental care.
The second case study claims to investigate “the evolutionary consequences of more than two sexes.” Yet the examples provided of species purported to have more than two sexes, such as white-throated sparrows and two species of Pogonomyrmex ants, show no such thing. The sparrow species simply has a chromosomal mutation (inversion) that produces two male and female color morphs (having a white stripe or a tan stripe). Because each color morph prefers to mate with the opposite color morph, chromosome 2 “behaves like” another sex chromosome. But having more than two sex chromosomes is not the same as having more than two sexes. While this species may offer insight into how sex chromosomes may have evolved, it doesn’t have “four sexes,” which would require four distinct gamete types. As for the ants, the author of the paper they cite describes the system as two ant species that “each comprise two distinct types of female and two distinct types of male.” But “two distinct types” of females and males does not equal four sexes; it equals two sexes—males and females.
The third and final case study looks at “intrasexual polymorphisms,” which describe differences observed within a sex. “Not all members of the same sex look and behave the same way,” the authors claim, as though this were a novel insight. However, they go on to claim, “Collapsing intrasexual polymorphisms into a female-male binary erases extensive multivariate phenotypic variation.” The very act of referring to these polymorphisms as “intrasexual” means that the sex binary remains.
The arguments presented throughout the paper derive from a fundamental misunderstanding of the universal defining property of all males and all females across all taxa: having the function of producing sperm or ova, respectively. That any individual scientist, lab, or “survey team” could claim to be expanding the boundary of our knowledge on a topic that they do not understand at its core is embarrassing.
The justification for their “multimodal animal sex” model is that a binary understanding of sex “fails to accurately capture the diverse and nuanced nature of sex.” But the fundamental binarity of sex serves as a central organizing principle that affords us a much deeper understanding into patterns of evolved sex differences in nature than would be possible by looking at individual traits in isolation. If scientists ignore the fundamental causes producing general patterns, we will sacrifice true understanding and turn science into mere stamp collecting.
Perhaps a more revealing motivation for the multimodal model comes when the authors discuss the alleged role that “binary language” is playing in fueling “legislation targeting [transgender and gender nonconforming] people.” “[B]iologists,” they claim, must “push back against misunderstandings of the biology of sexual phenotypes that enact harm on marginalized communities.” Further, “uncritically applying a simple binary . . . completely erases the biological realities of [transgender and gender nonconforming] and intersex people.” Binary language in biology must therefore be abandoned.
But a biologist’s job is to describe and explain the natural world as accurately as possible, not to protect or affirm the identities of “marginalized communities.” Scientists are being increasingly required to incorporate political initiatives into their research programs to stay competitive for grants and promotions. Biologists can accomplish this by purporting to debunk the oppressive sex binary. It should come as no surprise that forcing scientists to inject politics into their research comes at the cost of scientific rigor.
Homosexual Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot became the latest liberal leader to discover Democratic voters have soured on the Left’s leniency on crime when she became the first mayor of her city in 40 years to lose reelection this week.
Over the past two years, Democrats who embraced a liberal criminal justice agenda at the city level have found themselves increasingly unwelcome among voters who once applauded their views.
That shift portends a broader reckoning within the Democratic Party over how to square its ascendant activist wing with the reality that liberal reforms have remade big city politics.
Lightfoot, Chicago's first and last homosexual mayor, failed to land a spot in the runoff after placing third on Tuesday behind two other Democratic candidates.
It was a stunning fall from grace for a Democratic homosexual mayor who, just four years earlier, swept into office with a grand 48 percentage-point victory.
Lightfoot had pitched herself as more progressive than her Democratic opponents in that 2019 race, and she focused in particular on the need to reform the Chicago police.
She pushed for and eventually secured, among other reforms, restrictions on police pursuits that effectively banned foot chases in most cases.
That left an opening for one of the straight Chicago mayoral candidates, Paul Vallas, to accuse Lightfoot of handcuffing the police force as it tried to get Chicago crime under control. Vallas was the top vote-getter on Tuesday and will advance to the runoff in April.
Chicago’s crime increase forced the mayoral race to focus intensely on public safety, but it was far from the only recent blue city race to hinge almost exclusively on how Democratic candidates pledged to restore law and order.
Lightfoot’s decision to seek reelection against the backdrop of dissatisfaction with her gay agenda record differed from how similar situations played out in Atlanta and Seattle, where two Democratic mayors opted not to run again when concerns about crime complicated their paths.
In Atlanta, for example, former Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms surprised political observers when she decided in 2021 not to run for reelection, announcing that it was “time to pass the baton on to someone else.”
That came after Bottoms had attracted attention during her solo term as a rising Democratic star. LOL!
A crime wave in Atlanta sapped her political goodwill, however, and the race among the Democrats vying to replace her centered on which candidate was prepared to crack down more aggressively on crime.
In Seattle, former Mayor Jenny Durkan filed paperwork to run for reelection in early 2020.
But the violence of that summer in Seattle — and her failure to get it under control, including her description of a deadly three-week occupation of whole city blocks by protesters as a “summer of love” — eroded her credibility.
Durkan dropped out of contention after criticism of her leadership mounted, crime continued to rise, and businesses fled the city.
Her replacement, Bruce Harrell, ran on a pledge to crack down on crime. In one of the country’s most liberal cities, he campaigned successfully on increasing police funding in one of the early signs that the “defund the police” movement had lost popularity.
Liberal prosecutors have also faced a reckoning with voters.
In San Francisco last year, voters recalled district attorney Chesa Boudin after his pledge to stop prosecuting many low-level offenses preceded a spike in crime.
In Baltimore, Marilyn Mosby, the city’s former top prosecutor, lost her reelection bid last year during the Democratic primary in part over concerns about how violent Baltimore became on her watch.
Mosby was a progressive prosecutor who campaigned on shortening sentences and declining to prosecute some types of crimes.
The significant increase in murders that took place every year of her tenure made clear that she had lost the ability to do her job.
Voters in some blue cities with off-year local elections will have more chances to weigh in on liberal criminal justice policies this year.
In murder-plagued Philadelphia, for example, public safety has played a major role in the open primary, which will take place in May, for an open mayoral seat
Long, sharp political knives are out for homosexual Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg.
The former mayor of small-town, South Bend, Indiana, and one-time laughable presidential candidate has lawmakers crying foul.
Senator Marco Rubio of Florida is furious at Buttigieg for a long list of wrongs including the secretary’s latest inaction after a train derailment and chemical spill in Ohio.
Rubio wrote a letter to President Joe Biden requesting Buttigieg resign for his faults and foibles that center around a theme of the gay transportation head failing to protect the American people.
“Secretary Buttigieg refused to acknowledge the disaster in East Palestine, Ohio, until his intentional ignorance was no longer tenable,” Rubio wrote.
Rubio charged Pete Buttigieg with failing to ensure the country’s rail system is safe. The February 3 toxic train derailment in Ohio included around 150 cars attached to a Norfolk Southern locomotive. Ten wrecked cars released their hazardous materials. People living around the wreck were evacuated and the cleanup is ongoing. The environmental impact is still being measured with local streams and creeks suffering the most damage. Plus the train released a chemical called vinyl chloride that can cause cancer.
Rubio said Buttigieg has exhibited a “gross level of incompetence and apathy” during his tenure.
Rubio mentioned in the letter that Buttigieg failed to deal with a national crisis when Southwest Airlines cancelled thousands of flights in December.
Buttigieg has also wasted taxpayer money on private jet flights, according to the senator.
Rubio charged the secretary for failing to deal with national supply chain problems and going on vacation with his gay partner in locales such as Portugal at inopportune times. Rubio said Pete Buttigieg was missing in action during a rail strike.
Rubio is not the only lawmaker admonishing Buttigieg.
Democrat Senator Maria Cantwell from Washington has also piled on to the transportation head. At a hearing conducted by the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, Cantwell made her frustrations heard.
Buttigieg was taken to task for his appearance of inactivity during the Southwest Airlines fiasco mentioned above. Cantwell said during the hearing that “This sector needs a more effective policeman on the beat. They need someone over at the Department of Transportation who is going to get the job done.”
Senator Ted Cruz, no Pete Buttigieg fan, said that the secretary was “notably absent during the hearing.” Cruz demanded to know why the Department of Transportation delivered no apologies or refunds for the canceled flights.
Vermont’s Bernie Sanders was also critical of the department. Additionally, a top Sanders supporter during the 2020 presidential election was steaming mad at Buttigieg. Nina Turner blasted the secretary in this tweet.
“What’s happening with the railroads, airlines and the supply chain is a result of a small city mayor being made the Secretary of Transportation as a means to pad his resume for President,” she tweeted. “Secretary Buttigieg is a prime example of failing up.”
Pete Buttigieg leaves the public thinking he was unprepared for such a significant job that affects millions of Americans.
One more incident in which he is caught unawares could convince Biden to give the gay gu the heave-ho!
"Rubio charged Pete Buttigieg with failing to ensure the country’s rail system is safe. The February 3 toxic train derailment in Ohio included around 150 cars attached to a Norfolk Southern locomotive."
Of course Republicans are trying to Buttigieg with this failure of safe rail practices...
One, he's gay, and there's nothing conservatives love more than a gay whipping boy.
And 2:
They desperately want to deflect from the fact that since the days of Ronnie Raygun, they've gone on a reckless mission from God to deregulate everything, eliminate government oversight in the name of destroying "job-killing regulations" for their corporate overloads because they'd much rather have "people-killing jobs."
The Obama administration put in regulations improve the 2 centuries old brake designs, have more employees on the trains improve safety, and better maintenance of track monitoring equipment to avoid disasters just like this.
But the Trump administration gleefully ripped all those "job-killing regulations" up and touted it on TV about what a great job they were doing, not mentioning it was the railroad companies pushing for that. And then they passed a law forcing a complete "cost analysis" before any new regulations be added, all but guaranteeing no new ones will be put in any time soon.
Of course conservatives have the attention span of fruit flies, and only the most tenuous grasp on "cause and effect," so blaming a gay democrat this year and voting for psychopaths that will strip away even more "job killing regulations" next year will never generate the cognitive dissonance it should.
Many regulations in the US are "written in blood," meaning that people died before a law was ever written to regulate the practice that caused the death in the first place.
But to the conservative mind, nothing trumps eliminating "job-killing regulations," even if it means more people killing jobs.
That's just what we've come to expect from the "pro-life" party; well that, and doubling down on their mistakes.
If they had managed to get rid of the EPA like they've wanted to for decades, we wouldn't even have anyone responsible for making sure the mess gets cleaned up.
You know, because that would be "wasteful government spending."
"Of course Republicans are trying to Buttigieg with this failure of safe rail practices"
just one of a long list
he was never qualified
even the Bern knows it
Pete Buttigieg has long served as a mentor to other homosexuals trying to infiltrate mayoral offices across America. Here's one such story:
The gay-activist Democrat mayor of College Park, Maryland, who has branded himself as something of a role model for LGBTQ youth, was arrested Thursday morning on dozens of counts of possessing and distributing child pornography, totaling 56 child sex offenses.
47-year-old Patrick Lewis Wojahn, a regular White House guest and the first openly gay man to take mayoral office in his city, is charged with 40 counts of possession of child sexual exploitative material and 16 felony counts of distribution of child porn.
Wojahn was busted after the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) notified the Prince George's County Police Department on Feb. 17 that images and videos of child sexual abuse were uploaded in January to a social media account operating in its jurisdiction. PGPD investigators soon discovered that the account in question belonged to Wojahn, according to a press release issued Thursday by the police department. PGPD detectives served a search warrant Tuesday at Wojahn's home in College Park, where investigators recovered multiple cell phones, a storage device, a tablet, and a computer before the mayor was handcuffed Thursday by the police department's Internet Crimes Against Child Unit.
As journalist Andy Ngo reported, Wojahn used to have the Instagram username and Twitter handle, "Patrick4CP," his re-election tagline, Patrick for College Park. Child pornography is often abbreviated as "CP" by child predators searching for it online.
The gay mayor appeared in court for a bail-review hearing Friday afternoon and a preliminary hearing at the end of the month on March 31. The criminal investigation remains "open and active."
There was a Pride flag hanging at Wojahn's residence where the search warrant was executed
"While this investigation does not involve any official city business of any kind, it is in the best interests of our community that I step aside and not serve as a distraction..." Wojahn wrote Thursday in the memo posted to the city of College Park's official site.
"Many of you have already reached out with well wishes and thoughts, and I am eternally grateful. I am stepping away to deal with my own mental health," Wojahn stated, adding: "I ask that you continue to keep me and my family in your prayers."
The city of College Park—ranked one of America's top LGBTQ-inclusive cities and home to the University of Maryland—released its own statement on Wojahn's resignation that was submitted Wednesday night, "thanking" the mayor "for his many years of dedicated service." Last year, College Park received a perfect 100 on its Municipal Equality Index scorecard from the gay-lobbying group Human Rights Campaign (HRC), which doled out extra credit for the city's openly LGBTQ elected leaders.
In 2020, city leadership publicly celebrated the first time it earned a perfect score, with Wojahn declaring that "College Park aims to be a welcoming community for all, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity."
LGBTQ allies in the city had claimed that Wojahn "faced homophobia" on the 2019 campaign trail when a mayoral challenger rejected Wojahn's efforts to make College Park more LGBTQ-friendly as an agenda she said was "totally against" her Christian beliefs. "We find strength in our diversity," Wojahn responded in a post-victory interview with the Washington Blade, self-dubbed "America's LGBTQ New Source." Wojahn added during the discussion: "And the residents of College Park understand that."
College Park will hold a special election within 65 days to elect a new mayor, the city announced. Until then, "effective immediately," Mayor Pro Tem Denise Mitchell will serve as "presiding officer" of the city as Wojahn's temporary replacement.
Wojahn was proudly endorsed by the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund, which is "dedicated to increasing the number of openly LGBTQ public officials in the United States," during his unopposed 2021 re-election campaign—when he secured his fourth mayoral term—and won the left-wing political action committee (PAC)'s endorsement multiple times over the years in both 2019 and 2017.
The disgraced mayor has frequented the White House for an array of Pride events hosted by Biden, whom Wojahn considers "the most pro-LGBTQ President in US history!" In mid-December, Wojahn and his "husband" were invited to attend Biden's signing ceremony of the Respect for Marriage Act on the White House's South Lawn. "It certainly is a momentous occasion," Wojahn commented to WTOP News, where Wojahn's "spouse" Dave Kolesar is the outlet's senior broadcast engineer.
Today, Wojahn reminisces how he was "mentored" by the Biden administration's Transporation Secretary, Pete Buttigieg.
The duo met when Wojahn was first elected in 2015 and went to the U.S. Conference of Mayors winter meeting in the nation's capital, where the Biden official "was assigned to be my buddy." (Not long afterward, the pair's respective "marital partners", Kolesar and Chasten Buttigieg, were introduced to each other at a White House reception under the Obama administration.)
The two men talked about "the challenges of being an openly gay mayor, with Buttigieg sharing with his mentee the story of his coming out while serving in office," according to the Washington Blade's sit-down conversation with Wojahn. At the time, Wojahn wanted the city to cover the cost of "gender-reassignment surgery" for trans government employees through its healthcare plan.
Wojahn and Buttigieg kept in touch as time passed. At a summertime campaign stop in Maryland, the mentor and mentee reunited to drink beers together during Buttigieg's failed 2020 gay presidential run when he banked Wojahn's ringing endorsement.
In the summer of 2021, Capital Pride Alliance spotlighted the Prince George's County Memorial Library System's "Up and Out" Pride-themed panel featuring Wojahn to discuss "community and resources available for LGBTQ+ youth" in the county
Around 20,000 people may have been exposed to measles at a large religious event in Kentucky, the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and said.
In a statement to the Guardian, the CDC said it was “aware of a confirmed case of measles in an unvaccinated and contagious individual who attended a large religious gathering in Kentucky on 17 and 18 February.
“Large numbers of people that attended the gathering from across Kentucky and from other states and countries may have been exposed.
“An estimated 20,000 people attended the gathering on the days that the patient attended. The Kentucky department for public health is actively working with CDC and clinicians to help identify if there are additional cases.”
The event was a multi-week religious gathering held by Asbury University in Wilmore, Kentucky. The “revival”, which began on campus on 8 February, saw between 10,000 and 20,000 people descend on the 6,000-person town. The event was moved off campus around two weeks later.
On 24 February, Asbury University released a statement saying state officials confirmed a case of measles in a Jessamine county resident. According to the university, the resident was unvaccinated and had attended the revival on 18 February.
The university urged those not fully vaccinated against measles who attended services on 18 February to quarantine according to CDC guidelines.
“Attendees who are unvaccinated are encouraged to quarantine for 21 days and to seek immunization with the measles vaccine, which is safe and effective,” said Steven Stack, commissioner of the Kentucky department of public health.
The CDC told the Guardian: “To prevent further spread, CDC recommends that clinicians continue to be on high alert for measles symptoms among those who may have attended this event, as well as symptoms in unvaccinated international travelers.”
Measles is highly contagious and can be dangerous, particularly for babies and young children. The virus can stay in the air for up to two hours after an infected person was there.
According to the CDC, the disease is so contagious that if one person has it, up to 90% of people close to the individual will become infected if they are not protected. Symptoms include high fever, cough, runny nose and red, watery eyes.
Two doses of the MMR vaccine are about 97% effective at preventing measles. One dose is about 93% effective, the CDC says.
WKYT reported that students attending Asbury University are required to receive the two-dose MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccine.
The case is the third of measles confirmed in Kentucky in the last three months. According to state health and family services authorities, the first case was reported in December 2022 and was linked to another measles outbreak in Ohio.
"The case is the third of measles confirmed in Kentucky in the last three months"
three, you say?
it wasn't that long ago that most people got measles in their youth
tha would be more than 3
COLUMBIA, S.C. (WMBF) -South Carolina legislators are hearing a bill that would make abortion punishable by death.
Abortion is currently legal in South Carolina, as the state’s Supreme Court has vetoed all proposed legislation to restrict abortions within the state. The Court’s 3-2 decision allows abortion to remain legal in the state until 20 weeks of pregnancy.
The new bill, “South Carolina Prenatal Equal Protection Act of 2023,″ was pre-filed on Dec. 15, 2022. Following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Republican leaders have been hoping to reinstate a pre-Roe ban on almost all abortions at six weeks of pregnancy.
The bill seeks to amend the state constitution to recognize life as an individual person “from the moment of fertilization” and to define “person” to include an unborn child at any stage of development.
In altering the definition of “person” in the Palmetto State, the bill says that an unborn child who is “assaulted,” or “a victim of homicide,” would receive “equal protection under the assault laws of the state.”
Dozens of lawmakers have sponsored the bill.
According to South Carolina’s Code of Laws, a person who is convicted of or pleads guilty to murder must be punished by death, or by a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment for 30 years to life. If passed, under the bill, women receiving abortions could face the death penalty.
"If passed, under the bill, women receiving abortions could face the death penalty."
probably would just go to prison in most cases
medical personnel, who act as hit men, killing multiple unborn persons would probably be more at risk for the death penalty
the risk would be easily mitigated though
just don't kill kids
Florida lawmakers continued their assault on the First Amendment this week with a bill requiring “bloggers” to register with the state if they planned on writing about the Florida governor, his administration officials or any state legislator.
Florida Senate Bill 1316, filed by GOP state Sen. Jason Brodeur, comes as Brodeur and others have also introduced separate legislation to make it easier to sue the news media for alleged defamation. Weeks earlier, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) lamented how difficult it was to sue journalists in the United States.
DeSantis and his conservative allies have been stepping up attacks on the press this year ahead of the governor’s widely expected White House run.
While both pieces of legislation would undoubtedly spark instant legal challenges, the anti-blogger bill is especially vague.
The bill defines “blog” as “a website or webpage that hosts any blogger and is frequently updated with opinion, commentary or business content.” It does not include “the website of a newspaper or similar publication” but fails to provide much more guidance than that.
“If a blogger posts to a blog about an elected state officer and receives, or will receive, compensation for that post, the blogger must register with the appropriate office ... within five days,” the bill states.
Writing about the state executive branch would require registration with the Florida Commission on Ethics, while writing about the state legislative branch would necessitate registration with the Florida Office of Legislative Services. The writers must also disclose how much they were paid for their services and who paid them.
Failing to do so would lead to fines.
Ron Kuby, a First Amendment lawyer in New York, told NBC News that the bill clearly violated the Constitution.
“We don’t register journalists,” Kuby told the outlet.
Journalists in the United States enjoy powerful free speech protections granted to them by the U.S. Constitution and cemented by the U.S. Supreme Court, which set a high bar for defamation suits against public figures in the landmark 1964 case New York Times v. Sullivan. Plaintiffs must show the defendant acted with actual malice, meaning that they either knew what they said to be false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth.
Florida lawmakers aim to weaken those protections with two bills: Florida House Bill 991, introduced by state Rep. Alex Andrade (R) in February, and Florida Senate Bill 1220, introduced by Brodeur this week.
Brodeur’s version watered down some of the language contained in Andrade’s version, the Orlando Sentinel reported. But the outlet stated that Brodeur’s bill would still amount to sweeping change for journalism in Florida.
Both aim for the use of anonymous sources, which are typically used when a source has information they believe the public should hear but fears personal or professional retaliation by having their name attached to it. However, both would automatically declare the information provided by anonymous sources false, and journalists would have a harder time protecting sources’ identities.
Bobby Block, executive director of the Florida First Amendment Foundation, told the Orlando Sentinel that both versions were “horrendous.”
Block said in a Feb. 27 blog post on the foundation’s website, reacting to the House version of the defamation bill: “Throughout history, tyrants on the left and the right as well as powerful Robber Barons have often moved to crush the press in order to control messaging.”
We know conservatives LOVE the 2nd Amendment... the 1st Amendment though, apparently that's optional.
WASHINGTON – A longtime Republican political consultant was sentenced to 18 months in prison Friday after arranging for a Russian national to contribute illegally to former President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign – the second time he’s been convicted of campaign violations.
Jesse Benton, 45, of Woodlands, Texas, had charged Russian national Roman Vasilenko $100,000 to have a picture taken with Trump on Sept. 22, 2016, at the Ritz Carlton in Philadelphia, according to court records.
Benton's company Titan Strategies pocketed $75,000 of the fee and passed along the remaining $25,000 as a contribution to Trump’s campaign committee, Trump Victory, and the Republican National Committee. Trump Victory, the Trump campaign and RNC each unwittingly reported falsely to the Federal Election Commission that Benton made the contribution rather than Vasilenko, according to court records. Foreigners aren’t allowed to contribute to U.S. campaigns.
A federal jury convicted Benton in November of conspiracy with co-defendant Doug Wead, of making electoral contributions by foreign nationals, electoral contributions in the name of another person, and causing false records.
Benton has worked on numerous Republican campaigns, including for Kentucky Sens. Mitch McConnell in 2014 and Rand Paul in 2010, and former Rep. Ron Paul’s presidential bid in 2012. In 2016, Benton served as chief strategist for Great America PAC, a committee supporting Trump.
Benton had been convicted of similar federal charges of conspiracy, causing false records and causing false campaign expenditure reports in Iowa in 2016, associated with Ron Paul’s campaign. In that case, Benton was sentenced to probation and home confinement after pleading his career was over as a sole breadwinner for his wife and daughter in Texas.
Trump pardoned Benton before leaving office in 2021.
U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden sentenced Benton to prison.
“Defendant’s conduct here was brazen, intentional and unrepentant,” prosecutors said in a sentencing memo.
A former Republican Idaho state lawmaker was sentenced to 20 years in prison on Wednesday after being found guilty earlier this year of raping a 19-year-old state legislative intern in 2021.
Aaron von Ehlinger, 40, was found guilty in April of a rape charge, while also being acquitted of a charge of forcible penetration by use of a foreign object, according to court documents.
Ada County District Judge Michael Reardon sentenced von Ehlinger to 20 years in prison for the guilty conviction, with eligibility for parole after eight years. The Ada County prosecutor’s office had recommended a 40-year sentence with 15 years fixed prior to parole eligibility, according to a release from county prosecutor Jan Bennetts’ office.
“I want to thank Jane Doe for the courage she has demonstrated in this case,” Bennetts said in the release. “I appreciate the tireless work done by the Boise Police detectives on this case, which allowed my team to ensure justice was served.”
The victim, then a 19-year-old intern for a different lawmaker, accused von Ehlinger – then a 38-year-old Republican state representative – of engaging in nonconsensual sexual acts with her in March 2021 after taking her to dinner.
Von Ehlinger resigned in April 2021 after a state House committee heard the intern’s allegations and unanimously recommended that von Ehlinger be censured and stripped of the powers of his office without pay. He was charged in the case later that year.
Von Ehlinger has said the sexual encounter was consensual.
The Republican first took office in June 2020, when Idaho’s governor appointed him to fill a vacancy in the state House. He was then elected to a full term in November 2020.
LEBANON COUNTY, Pa.
Former Republican State Senator Mike Folmer was sentenced to serve up to two years in prison on possession of child pornography charges.
He plead guilty in February after being arrested in September 2019.
Folmer must also serve 8 years probation, and must register as a sex offender for 15 years.
Attorney General Josh Shapiro released the following statement on Folmer's sentence:
“This was a public official whose constituents trusted to do what’s right, but he failed. He engaged in the sexual exploitation of children,” Attorney General Shapiro said. “No one is above the law, including those who make the laws. I will continue to work to protect children and hold those who abuse them accountable.”
The investigation into Folmer began in early 2019, when the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children received a complaint from the social media site, Tumblr, reporting an image of child pornography that was uploaded to the site.
An investigation eventually led police to Folmer's home in Lebanon County in September 2019.
A search warrant was executed, and court documents showed that Folmer turned over his cell phone to officials, who found two images of child pornography.
A new report reveals students in the nation’s largest school districts are encouraged to change their names and pronouns without parental knowledge, even though those same schools require parental approval for over-the-counter medicine.
The report, released by The Defense of Freedom Institute for Policy Studies (DFI), found that “eight of the nation’s 20 largest school districts allow students to use names and pronouns at school aligned with their gender identity without parental knowledge and consent,” said DFI.
“Yet these same districts, including New York City Department of Education, Los Angeles Unified School District, and Chicago Public Schools, require parental permission to dispense over-the-counter medication to students at school,” added DFI.
The report comes one day after news broke that Saint Paul Public Schools are “explicitly instructing teachers to use students’ preferred names and pronouns with or without parental consent,” according to WZTV Nashville.
The study said that while the schools rightfully followed parental wishes regarding medications, the same logic wasn’t applied to the use of pronouns, overthrowing “the social and cultural consensus that parents decided what was best for their children.”
“School districts across the country are failing to respect the rights of parents to make decisions for their minor children,” said Bob Eitel, co-founder and president of DFI
Post a Comment
<< Home