In case you missed it, homos are back in the cross hairs of the Republicans. It is two years out from the primary for President and the two mini-Trumps, Florida Governor DeSantis and Texas Governor Abbott, are thinking about running. So they are stoking the anti-gay and anti-trans culture wars into full flame. In both states the anti-education bills (prohibiting CRT) als prohibit teaching of LGBT history. (These are also 2 of the states that are banning books...)
In Florida they passed a bill that specifically outlaws teaching of LBGT topics unless it is "age appropriate". The term is never defined, so any parent can sue any teacher - because, you know, the Supreme Court has accepted paying bounties is totally fine. If they win, it is $5,000 that the teacher must pay. If they lose, they lose.
We should be happy that, at the last moment, a provision was stripped out requiring any school nurse, teacher or counselor to report a child's LGBT tendencies or questions to the parent if the child is suspected of being gay. Many kids get killed by relatives when their status is disclosed and thousands of minors are kicked out of their homes every year. So that bill was just cruel.
In Texas, the Governor and Attorney General (both running for reelection) have now defined ANY gender affirming care as Child Abuse. (LINK) So, if your 16 year old boy wants to transition to a woman AND you as his parent support him emotionally, that is child abuse. Even if you suggest he wait until he is an adult.
If your six year old little girl wants to wear pants to school on a single day and she says - as children often do - "I wanna be a boy today!" and you let her wear pants: Child Abuse.
Bonus Hate
The Supreme Court today put a case on the docket for next year that promises to let businesses discriminate against gays. The case concerns a woman in Colorado who is a Wedding website designer. She sued (and lost) in Colorado because she wants to post a notice on the site that she doesn't do wedding sites for Gays and Lesbians because of her religious beliefs. She lost because Colorado has an anti discrimination law and business are not allowed to discriminate against homosexuals anymore than against minorities.
UNDERSTAND. This woman does NOT have a website creation business yet. Note that this woman does NOT have any customers now or previously. It is a case designed only for litigation. Which means that she should not be allowed to pursue this because she lacks standing. Just as they let the Texas Abortion law stand because no one had been hurt yet and therefore no one had standing. But a possible business having to deal with fags is much more of a civil rights issue than women's autonomy over their own bodies.
Back to the Supremes. They took the case as a case of Freedom of Speech. Is she allowed to state that she will not work for gays for religious reasons? The Supreme Court taking this case and questioning if religious beliefs trump civil rights laws for businesses. If the Supreme Court allows this a Freedom of Speech issue, then signs saying business will not cater to Jews, Hindus, single parents, mixed race couples, etc will also be legal.
And, before you say this can't happen (which I might say). Remember that discrimination by religious public services are already legal in Tennessee. The court originally allowed the only adoption agency in the state, to rule out gays because they are a Christian Adoption Agency. One that is the only tax supported agency in the state. It is a Christian business on the government payroll just happens to get federal and state funds. After that decision that they could discriminate against gays due to their religios beliefs, the publicly funded agency (again the only adoption agency in Tennessee!) has denied jewish straight married couples help, because Christians believe Jews are evil sinners.
Go Team!
Sickening!
ReplyDelete