|
Post by sunny225 on Mar 3, 2024 15:05:29 GMT
Don't you just KNOW that Russia, China and Iran are quaking in fear after seeing/hearing this??
|
|
|
Post by Ozarks Tom on Mar 3, 2024 21:31:10 GMT
Hey Lt Col, if you want respect, get treatment for your mental disorder, conquer it, and act like a man. Maybe then people won't look at you and immediately think "freak".
ETA: Oh, and lose that phony feminine lilt to your voice, nobody believes it.
|
|
|
Post by sunny225 on Mar 14, 2024 0:41:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by farmrbrown on Mar 14, 2024 1:54:49 GMT
I wasn't sure whether to put this here or in the Politics section. Since this is one of our "leaders". Ok, it makes more sense in this thread (I didn't watch the video). When it said 'bottom surgery" I was thinking along the lines of colonoscopy, etc. Not THAT! I guess I'm officially an out-of-date dinosaur because not more than 2 or 3 people would ever know if I had a normal surgery below my waist and you'd read my obituary long before there was a public announcement about any crazy stuff like that!
|
|
|
Post by themotherhen on Mar 14, 2024 14:45:30 GMT
I wasn't sure whether to put this here or in the Politics section. Since this is one of our "leaders". Ok, it makes more sense in this thread (I didn't watch the video). When it said 'bottom surgery" I was thinking along the lines of colonoscopy, etc. Not THAT! I guess I'm officially an out-of-date dinosaur because not more than 2 or 3 people would ever know if I had a normal surgery below my waist and you'd read my obituary long before there was a public announcement about any crazy stuff like that! farmrbrown, I figured the poor guy had hemorrhoid surgery and I wondered why he was telling everyone about it. Ah well.
|
|
|
Post by sunny225 on Mar 22, 2024 16:18:23 GMT
resistthemainstream.com/state-to-teach-lgbtq-history-in-all-public-schools/Washington State To Make LGBTQ+ History Mandatory Curriculum For All Public Schools In 2025 The new bill Senate Bill 5462 requires that educators develop a curriculum that includes the history and contributions of people from the LGBTQ movement. The curriculum must also include the history of persons from different racial, ethnic, and religious backgrounds, per KPTV. The Post Millennial reports the bill was passed by the Democrat-controlled legislature. It was originally introduced in 2023 to expand “inclusive learning standards and instructional materials.” The bill’s ultimate goal is to eliminate bias in regards to the topic of LGBTQ history. more at link
|
|
|
Post by Ozarks Tom on Mar 23, 2024 14:35:41 GMT
Well, there are indeed some firsts that can be attributed to the alphabet people. For instance, Jeffery Dahmer was the first known homosexual cannibal. Maybe Washington State will introduce "Dahmer Day".
|
|
|
Post by sunny225 on Mar 31, 2024 20:08:47 GMT
This could have been posted in the Politics forum also. I chose here. www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/how-mike-johnson-infuriated-the-anti-trans-right/ar-BB1kPjSO?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=96c3ed9ccd7f4c01a7024c2af0eb134d&ei=14How Mike Johnson infuriated the anti-trans right Over the last couple years, trans people in the U.S. have been beaten down by anti-trans conservative state legislation, with dozens of states heavily restricting trans life, particularly for the youth. With President Joe Biden in office and Democrats narrowly holding the Senate, trans people in the U.S. have at least had a reprieve at the federal level. That break, however, was recently put into question. At the state level, restricting trans life has become one of the chief conservative policy goals, alongside restricting access to abortion, and some Republicans in Congress were hoping for their first big policy win federally. In negotiations over the massive $1.2 trillion budget deal that just passed Congress, Republicans pushed hard to add dozens of anti-trans riders. Their proposals included everything from barring federal funds from going to hospital systems that give puberty blockers to minors (essentially banning such blockers nationwide) to blocking federal funding for any form of gender-affirming care at any age. These bans would have rolled trans health care back several decades. Fortunately, only one rider, a ban on using federal funds to fly Pride flags at U.S. embassies and military installations, successfully found its way into the final version of the bill. Some LGBTQ advocates were disappointed in the Biden administration and Democrats for giving in on the flag ban rider during negotiations. But with many likely worse proposals on the line, the compromise should be seen as a win overall for queer, and especially trans, people in the U.S. Flying Pride flags at overseas government facilities has typically been a way for the U.S. to signal its openness to queer lives to the world, especially in countries that still criminalize LGBTQ lives (often with political funding from American evangelicals). Many queer and trans people in those countries dream of immigrating or getting asylum to the U.S. so that they can live relatively free of the persecution and violence they face at home. It is definitely a loss for queer people everywhere that our country’s foreign offices will no longer fly the symbol of queer freedom. But in the face of much tougher proposals, Biden chose the least impactful measure to compromise on. Hard-line anti-trans Republicans, on the other hand, were incensed to see so many of their core propositions fail. When Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene filed a motion to vacate Speaker Mike Johnson, she specifically cited his failure to pass most of the budget riders that would have further persecuted trans people. more at link
|
|
|
Post by sunny225 on Apr 3, 2024 1:55:44 GMT
www.libertystorch.info/2024/04/01/from-tolerable-to-intolerable/From Tolerable To Intolerable… …can be a very short journey indeed. Whether it’s possible depends on whether the State decides the protection and promotion of some human aberration would serve its interests. Buckle your seat belt and fold your tray-tables; this ride could get bumpy. *** I’ve ranted before about how the politicization of transgenderism has transformed it from something most people could safely ignore into a fearsome threat. I return to this as frequently as I do because it’s a near-perfect “demonstrator.” That is, as a category of human oddity it perfectly exemplifies the venomous power of the State. If I may quote myself: I’ll say it once more: There have been transgenders for several decades. (Does anyone else remember Renee Richards and Tula Cossey?) When transgenders were willing to live quietly, without trumpeting their condition and demanding that it be honored by others, they weren’t a social or political problem. But that ceased to be the case a few years ago. But transgenderism is not the first such oddity. *** Do the Gentle Readers of Liberty’s Torch remember the old movie The Boys In The Band? It was a pretty good flick, with a good script and good performances, but I doubt it’s shown in the “art houses” today. It depicts a group of homosexual friends at their extremes: their best and their worst. It also includes language that implicitly describes homosexuality as a condition to be regretted and, if possible, escaped. That’s because it was made before homosexuality became a political movement. Now that homosexuality is an explicit political force – one that commands deference from heterosexuals regardless of their preferences – such a movie is unacceptable. The homosexuals themselves would see to it with mass protests and monkey-wrenching. The State would protect the disruptors from any consequences, as homosexuals and their movement have proved useful to the State. Before the politicization of homosexuality, heterosexuals – 97% of the population of the United States – largely tolerated homosexuals. Yes, there were exceptions, some of which were horrifying and deserved to be punished. But the prevailing attitude was of tolerance and the maintenance of a certain distance. In social and sexual matters, homosexuals constituted a separate society. If they weren’t perfectly comfortable with that status, nevertheless they found it bearable…as did the heterosexual majority. Things are not better now. *** If you can stand a sharp turn to a subject few persons are willing – or able – to discuss rationally, let’s talk for a moment about race. One might say, with a modicum of justice, that the legal status of slavery is at the base of all our troubles with race. Certainly, it was protected by State power in the “slave states.” After the Civil War / War Between The States / Late Unpleasantness and the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution, that was no longer the case. One could have hoped that the enslavement of Negroes – funny, people seldom address the populations of white slaves from that time, whose numbers were not insignificant – was a subject that had been sufficiently dealt with. For nearly a century, that was approximately the case. Yes, many whites were uneasy around blacks, and in some parts of the country blacks were treated unfairly. But those decades were far more tolerable than the conditions of today, especially for the 87% of us who are not black. The degeneration from an acceptable degree of social peace to near-constant disruptions and violence proceeded from what originally appeared an innocent thing: the drive for racial integration, which had the power of the State behind it. Are you beginning to see a pattern here, Gentle Reader? more at link
|
|
|
Post by Txsteader on Apr 3, 2024 10:50:13 GMT
Have y'all heard/read about the new Hate Crime Act in Scotland? You can go to prison for "stirring up hatred". As some here in the US have speculated, mis-gendering someone could be considered "stirring up hatred". www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-68703684
|
|
|
Post by wildhorseluvr on Apr 3, 2024 11:20:49 GMT
Have y'all heard/read about the new Hate Crime Act in Scotland? You can go to prison for "stirring up hatred". As some here in the US have speculated, mis-gendering someone could be considered "stirring up hatred". www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-68703684From the above article: “The bar for this offence is lower than for the other protected characteristics, as it also includes “insulting” behavior, and as the prosecution need only prove that stirring up hatred was “likely” rather than “intended.” “We do anticipate that there will be a lot of malicious complaints, a lot of rather trivial complaints and potentially people who are investigated will see their lives upended.” And right on cue: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13267075/Police-Scotland-hit-4-000-complaints-two-days-new-hate-crime-laws.htmlWhat’s to stop anyone from making false accusations against someone they don’t like…an ex, an annoying neighbor, a coworker…in order to “upend” their lives?
|
|
|
Post by Txsteader on Apr 3, 2024 20:18:11 GMT
Have y'all heard/read about the new Hate Crime Act in Scotland? You can go to prison for "stirring up hatred". As some here in the US have speculated, mis-gendering someone could be considered "stirring up hatred". www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-68703684From the above article: “The bar for this offence is lower than for the other protected characteristics, as it also includes “insulting” behavior, and as the prosecution need only prove that stirring up hatred was “likely” rather than “intended.” “We do anticipate that there will be a lot of malicious complaints, a lot of rather trivial complaints and potentially people who are investigated will see their lives upended.” And right on cue: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13267075/Police-Scotland-hit-4-000-complaints-two-days-new-hate-crime-laws.htmlWhat’s to stop anyone from making false accusations against someone they don’t like…an ex, an annoying neighbor, a coworker…in order to “upend” their lives?Exactly. One woman being interviewed made that point, saying that she personally knows people who intend to do just that. William Wallace must be spinning in his grave.
|
|
|
Post by Ozarks Tom on Apr 3, 2024 23:51:36 GMT
I just can't imagine a Western county passing a law that would be much more appropriate in a very strict communist county. What's next, killing fields?
Let's say a tall man walks into a supermarket aisle rather quickly. A rather short person who's aggravated at being so short is just around the corner. Does that short person have a grievance to pursue against the tall person for making them feel "unsafe"? Or, a morbidly obese person is standing in an aisle looking at labels, another customer says "excuse me", and asks her to move slightly out of the way. Was there an affront to the fat lady that should be immediately addressed by the police as an insult to being obese (fat shaming)?
Scotland is shortly going to become the quietest country in the world.
|
|