Bronc

You could just say I dont believe in natural rights or the right of free speech, have no actual evidence to support the necessity to catastrophize and/or restrict this particular speech, and save yourself the virtue signaling and overwrought script of straw men.

No one is arguing to force people to attend a drag story hour. Or host them at venues that don't want to host them.

Just like no one is forcing someone to take a kid to some crazy arse Jesus Camp, or participate in creepy arse children's beauty pageants. But in a country with freedom of speech as a natural right, people can do all sorts of shite I don't agree with as long as they do not lead to imminent lawless action or create certain forms of harm.

Then again, in good ole Louisiana, cant help but impose their morality and ignore the separation of church and state....
LINK

quote:

---

The Drag Queen story hour is simply a tool in the bag of tricks used to perpetuate an ideology to young children that it is absolutely normal for a man to dress, act and believe as they are a woman. Whether that man is Right or Wrong is a different argument. We are talking societal normalcy.

---

You not wanting a form of dress or performance to be normalized is not sufficient reason to silence a type of non-compulsory speech. Or evidence that there is any intrinsic harm toward the person or any of its audiences. You preferring society to not accept that men can wear dresses is not an argument.

And again drag =/= trans. Why the incessant need to conflate?

Drag refers to a type of performance art where individuals, typically men, dress up in exaggerated and often gender-nonconforming clothing and makeup for entertainment purposes.

Transgender refers to a person whose gender identity differs from the sex they were assigned at birth.

interracial marriage, gay marriage, left-handedness, all of those things were also considered non-normal, societally bad. Something being considered non-normal does not mean it is bad. You need actually evidence for that....which you still arent providing.

quote:

---

I prefer people realize how hateful these progressives really are.

---

Tell me more about how trans people are subhuman again? How they are all pedos and anyone that defends their right to exist free from an atmosphere of dehumanization and vitriol are groomers?

quote:

---

you insist that there is some benefit to the additional effort and cost of recruiting and coordinating men dressed as women to come read the book.

---

I never insisted this, not once.

What I have said is that we do not exist in a society or country where speech is a reverse onus right.

It is not up to me or anyone else to prove they have the right to any particular form of speech, be it a man in a dress reading a book or a youth pastor starting a summer camp or preaching to kids. That right of speech is the default. Therefore it is on you, not me, to prove that such speech should be restricted and why.

So far, you have not offered a single reason or piece of evidence for that.

quote:

---

Every kid there is being groomed.

---

You seem to misunderstand what the word "evidence" means

Your feelings =/= evidence

quote:

---

Let's assume that I sympathize with these marginalized members of society. That still doesn't explain why children should be exposed or subjected to what - at best - amounts to an unproven, experimental therapy program. Why should they? Who exactly is drag queen storybook hour designed for? The kids or the drag queens?

---

There is nothing to answer, you are the one attempting to claim there is some sort of harm brought on by a man with makeup and a dress reading Clifford to a room of kids. You are the one that wants the state to step in and restrict that speech.

The onus is on you to prove that is justifiable and sound reasoning backed by evidence.

quote:

---

I’m not sure what motivates you to peruse a website with people you despise, but you unironically wishing death via cancer to one of the members here should be a pretty slam dunk case to have you banned.

And on a personal level, it gives me high confidence that you are a bad person.

---

I didn't wish, I said the world would be a better place without him filling it with his vitriol and stochastic terrorism toward trans people and anyone that has the audacity to push back from labeling trans people as subhuman and pedophiles.

You are apparently the type that finds more fault with someone making such an observation in response to repeated declarations of vitriolic dehumanization toward marginalized members of society, than the expressions of unrelenting hate that provoked the response...Not shocking.

Nor is the call to ban me in defense of the perpetuators of that sort of inciteful rhetoric

quote:

---

As an atheist, I can say with absolute certainty I would prefer my kid going on a church retreat over drag queen story hour. Why? Because I know if something were to happen, myself, other parents, etc, would go after that person with everything they had. If the higher ups in the church chose to protect them, then that's on those monsters. Point being, I have yet to meet a single Christian that supports what those priests did. Every single one wants them punished. Unlike the left, who not only wants it to continue, but will cancel anyone who dares fight against it.

The level of depravity on the left is something to behold. Just vile, disgusting individuals.

---

Sure thing pal :rotflmao:



I'll give you three guesses what people in his church and vocal fellow members of the "Christian Faith" have said?

And just in the last month:




Now on the other hand there is not a single documented case of sexual assault being committed at a drag story hour, but conservatives have nothing but excuses for the church and pastors, and want to impose the full force of the state on the former.

If I heard half as much consternation about the crisis of Christian grooming and pedophilia, I wouldn't clearly think this is entirely about punishing social deviance you don't like.

quote:

---

I have yet to meet a single Christian that supports what those priests did. Every single one wants them punished. Unlike the left, who not only wants it to continue, but will cancel anyone who dares fight against it.

---

Cool, though as the above shows, that's not always the case. But lets turn it around, the rampant abuse of children at the hand of the church should mean the church should be criminally banned from proselytizing or interacting with kids through church activities. Fair?

....Im guessing you wont be cool with that. And neither would I

quote:

---

Since we're not the ones trying to change the paradigm it only makes sense that the burden of proof falls in the opposite direction.

---

Most states do not have laws against men in feminine attire or makeup reading books to kids. Hence all the laws and ordinances attempting to now ban it. Proud Boys showing up to try and intimidate people they do.

I'm not the one claiming that men in dresses reading Clifford does harm to children and trying to ban it, you are.

quote:

---

GRTiger

---

So literally what I said, you want to use the state to impose your POV on everyone, by force if necessary. Thanks for at least being honest.