All Things LGBTQ+ (1 Viewer)

[Farb]

Didn't really see a place for this so I thought I would start a thread about all things LGBTQ since this is a pretty hot topic in our culture right now

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/17/sup...y-that-refuses-to-work-with-lgbt-couples.html

• The Supreme Court on Thursday delivered a unanimous defeat to LGBT couples in a high-profile case over whether Philadelphia could refuse to contract with a Roman Catholic adoption agency that says its religious beliefs prevent it from working with same-sex foster parents.
• Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in an opinion for a majority of the court that Philadelphia violated the First Amendment by refusing to contract with Catholic Social Services once it learned that the organization would not certify same-sex couples for adoption.

I will admit, I was hopeful for this decision by the SCOTUS but I was surprised by the unanimous decision.

While I don't think there is anything wrong, per se, with same sex couples adopting and raising children (I actually think it is a good thing as it not an abortion) but I also did not want to see the state force a religious institution to bend to a societal norm.

 

[Optimus Prime]

 

[SystemShock]

Yet again, my consensus transphobic arse has to comment and disagree with Rep. Eskamani.

The law does not BAN gender pronouns. What it does, it removes the requirement to use them, which is a different thing. Now, many will decry transphobia, and I am sure there is plenty of that among Florida lawmakers, but there is also the part where it removes businesses' liability for someone suing a business because someone had a slip and used the wrong pronoun (which, as I said before, I think it is dumb as you don't use pronouns when talking to someone).

I've told the story before, about me working with 3 trans people. 2 of them just went about their business, but there was one who was a bit confrontational about it, always reminding everyone about being transgender, in a not so friendly manner, to the point that this person made others uncomfortable. People actually consulted to HR, and HR told them "just steer clear".

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

it's funny the Right always gives the employer the right to force employees to do what ever they want. you can fire them for anything you want, you can force them to work for less than minimum wage, you can force them to work unpaid overtime, but we draw the line to forcing pronouns .. lol

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Yet again, my consensus transphobic arse has to comment and disagree with Rep. Eskamani.

The law does not BAN gender pronouns. What it does, it removes the requirement to use them, which is a different thing. Now, many will decry transphobia, and I am sure there is plenty of that among Florida lawmakers, but there is also the part where it removes businesses' liability for someone suing a business because someone had a slip and used the wrong pronoun (which, as I said before, I think it is dumb as you don't use pronouns when talking to someone).

I've told the story before, about me working with 3 trans people. 2 of them just went about their business, but there was one who was a bit confrontational about it, always reminding everyone about being transgender, in a not so friendly manner, to the point that this person made others uncomfortable. People actually consulted to HR, and HR told them "just steer clear".

It does. It both prohibits employees from providing them:

"An employee or a contractor may not provide to an employer his or her preferred personal title or pronouns if such preferred personal title or pronouns do not correspond to his or her sex."

And prohibits employers from asking:

"An employee or a contractor may not be asked by an employer to provide his or her preferred personal title or pronouns or be penalized or subjected to adverse personnel action for not providing his or her preferred personal title or pronouns."

 

[Optimus Prime]

For five months this year, homosexuality was prohibited in a Tennessee college town.

In June, the city council of Murfreesboro enacted an ordinance outlawing “indecent exposure, public indecency, lewd behavior, nudity or sexual conduct”. The rule did not explicitly mention homosexuality, but LGBTQ+ people in the town quickly realized that the ordinance references 21-72 of the city code, which categorizes homosexuality as an act of indecent sexual conduct.

The ordinance was essentially a covert ban on LGBTQ+ existence.

Erin Reed, one of the first and only national journalists to cover the ordinance earlier this year, noted that Murfreesboro isn’t “the only community that has these old archaic bits of code that target homosexuality”.

Earlier this month, following a legal challenge from the ACLU of Tennessee, the government of Murfreesboro removed “homosexuality” from the list of acts defined as “public indecency” by the city code. The small victory came after officials repeatedly refused to issue permits for the BoroPride Festival, citing the new ordinance.

Despite the ACLU’s recent win, advocates warn that the story of Murfreesboro represents a new frontier in anti-LGBTQ+ lawmaking. Republican state and local leaders across the US south are reviving vague, sometimes decades-old rules on “indecency” and “obscenity” as a bludgeon against queer life.

Kasey Meehan, the program director of the Freedom to Read program at PEN America, said the organization has seen “several threats to free expression all under the guise of obscenity prevention” in “Tennessee and Florida especially”.……

‘Archaic’: the Tennessee town that made homosexuality illegal

Republican lawmakers in the US are leaning into outdated definitions of obscenity to outlaw drag and ban books too

www.theguardian.com

 

[Optimus Prime]

Another Christmas is around the corner, and preparations are already in motion for many people, but love isn’t the only thing in the air.

Outrage spreads across America over Target’s new collection of woke Christmas items. From the look of things, the top retailer might be in for some less-than-merry and likely busier-than-ever Christmas celebration.

Target started trouble for itself when it rolled out its Christmas range of decorative items. Notable among the items are toys of Santas representing various races, Pride Santa, Santa in wheelchairs, figurines draped in rainbow colors, same-sex couples, and Muslim families celebrating Christmas.

While many praise the company’s decision to be more inclusive this festive period, there has been a loud uproar over the retailer’s actions. Most of the angry crowd are conservatives who have branded the items as “woke” and “anti-christmas.”

Equally as loud as the criticisms are the repeated calls to boycott Target. Hashtags such as #BoycottTarget and #NotMyChristmas have spread across the internet alongside angry posts from customers. “This is just another example of Target trying to shove its liberal agenda down our throats,” read one comment from an X user.

“I will not be shopping there. Haven’t for quite some time and certainly don’t plan to any time soon! You would think they would have learned by Bud Lights mistake,” said another user.

But there are also tweets in support of the company’s new direction. One such tweet read, “They should do something about those mean and aggressive Target clerks who are holding guns to the heads of those conservatives, forcing them to buy those things.” .............

MSN

 

[coldseat]

Another Christmas is around the corner, and preparations are already in motion for many people, but love isn’t the only thing in the air.

Outrage spreads across America over Target’s new collection of woke Christmas items. From the look of things, the top retailer might be in for some less-than-merry and likely busier-than-ever Christmas celebration.

Target started trouble for itself when it rolled out its Christmas range of decorative items. Notable among the items are toys of Santas representing various races, Pride Santa, Santa in wheelchairs, figurines draped in rainbow colors, same-sex couples, and Muslim families celebrating Christmas.

While many praise the company’s decision to be more inclusive this festive period, there has been a loud uproar over the retailer’s actions. Most of the angry crowd are conservatives who have branded the items as “woke” and “anti-christmas.”

Equally as loud as the criticisms are the repeated calls to boycott Target. Hashtags such as #BoycottTarget and #NotMyChristmas have spread across the internet alongside angry posts from customers. “This is just another example of Target trying to shove its liberal agenda down our throats,” read one comment from an X user.

“I will not be shopping there. Haven’t for quite some time and certainly don’t plan to any time soon! You would think they would have learned by Bud Lights mistake,” said another user.

But there are also tweets in support of the company’s new direction. One such tweet read, “They should do something about those mean and aggressive Target clerks who are holding guns to the heads of those conservatives, forcing them to buy those things.” .............

MSN

So stupid.

If you like the shirt that Target has, then buy it. If you don't like it, don't buy it. I don't give a flying fork what anybody does either way, but stop telling us how upset it makes you. Dumbasses.

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

So stupid.

If you like the shirt that Target has, then buy it. If you don't like it, don't buy it. I don't give a flying fork what anybody does either way, but stop telling us how upset it makes you. Dumbasses.

yea, they have become the real Snowflakes they cried about...

 

[Optimus Prime]

So stupid.

If you like the shirt that Target has, then buy it. If you don't like it, don't buy it. I don't give a flying fork what anybody does either way, but stop telling us how upset it makes you. Dumbasses.

And they aren't replacing white Santas with Black Santas, or Wheelchair Santas or Pride Santas

They'll still be able to find exactly whatever it is they are looking for (in abundance)

I hate the people who scream "they're shoving their agenda down our throats" just because alternatives exist and are available

 

[SamAndreas]

 

[Farb]

So stupid.

If you like the shirt that Target has, then buy it. If you don't like it, don't buy it. I don't give a flying fork what anybody does either way, but stop telling us how upset it makes you. Dumbasses.

Does this libertarian attitude also apply to right wing companies and people?

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

Does this libertarian attitude also apply to right wing companies and people?

but thats the thing. Taget has both. they aren't telling you that you have to get Pride Santa or no Santa. they are just simply giving options. You want a white santa, here you go, you want a black santa, here you go, you want a wheelchair santa, here you go. where the right wing companies are like we only have white santa's and if you are woke if you want anything else...

 

[coldseat]

Does this libertarian attitude also apply to right wing companies and people?

It does for me. I've never told a right wing company what to do. I just don't ever associate with them. I don't complain about them either. Honestly I'd have to go looking for them to find them.

 

[SystemShock]

Target started trouble for itself when it rolled out its Christmas range of decorative items. Notable among the items are toys of Santas representing various races, Pride Santa, Santa in wheelchairs, figurines draped in rainbow colors, same-sex couples, and Muslim families celebrating Christmas.

Huh?

 

[MT15]

Huh?

Well, I just looked it up and apparently some Muslims do celebrate, however most do not. It seems to be allowed as a personal preference in some parts of Islam.

 

[Optimus Prime]

 

[Optimus Prime]

This is the same guy who asks "Why there isn't a White Entertainment Television?"
================================

A father is suing Colarado’s largest school district after he alleges that a school refused to let his children display “straight flags”.

Nathan Feldman alleges that his two children have been denied their First Amendment rights at the K-8 Slavens School in Denver.

He says that a “straight flag” would represent his children’s beliefs and should be allowed to be hung and displayed on campus the same way LGBTQ+ flags are.

Feldman’s lawyer, Michael Yoder, has blamed equality, diversion and inclusion policies in Denver for the “overt sexualisation of content in elementary schools nationwide”.

He said that books focused on gender identity led to inappropriate topics being discussed in the classroom.

“If we had more parents like [Feldman], then these policies would never have been rolled out in the first place, and they'd be teaching kids about math and science,” Yoder said.

“They wouldn't be talking about sexual orientation and homosexuality and having this flamboyant breeding ground for inappropriate content.”

However, a spokesperson for LGBTQ Colorado said the symbol of a pride flag was meant to be inclusive for everyone.

LGBTQ Colorado issued the following statement in response to the lawsuit: “A Pride flag is not meant to be exclusive – it is designed to be inclusive...........

MSN

 

[bird]

This is the same guy who asks "Why there isn't a White Entertainment Television?"
================================

A father is suing Colarado’s largest school district after he alleges that a school refused to let his children display “straight flags”.

Nathan Feldman alleges that his two children have been denied their First Amendment rights at the K-8 Slavens School in Denver.

He says that a “straight flag” would represent his children’s beliefs and should be allowed to be hung and displayed on campus the same way LGBTQ+ flags are.

Feldman’s lawyer, Michael Yoder, has blamed equality, diversion and inclusion policies in Denver for the “overt sexualisation of content in elementary schools nationwide”.

He said that books focused on gender identity led to inappropriate topics being discussed in the classroom.

“If we had more parents like [Feldman], then these policies would never have been rolled out in the first place, and they'd be teaching kids about math and science,” Yoder said.

“They wouldn't be talking about sexual orientation and homosexuality and having this flamboyant breeding ground for inappropriate content.”

However, a spokesperson for LGBTQ Colorado said the symbol of a pride flag was meant to be inclusive for everyone.

LGBTQ Colorado issued the following statement in response to the lawsuit: “A Pride flag is not meant to be exclusive – it is designed to be inclusive...........

MSN

Judas K. Priest. These people…there is no oversexualization of content in elementary schools. There are just whining, scared little snowflakes.