Jump to content

What do you think of the Disney debacle?  Are you on Disney’s or DeSantis side?


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Scott Mayers said:

Isn't ANY place that specifically favors 'family', especially children, more likely than not to eventually have apparent issues involving violations of children regardless? Maybe we should penalize the churches for IMPOSING adult-related biases upon them in isolation of their 'free choice' to choose what they want to become independently?

Personally, it is more likely than not that someone LIKE that DiSantis to BE of the type to abuse children in the first place. They know just how to 'appear' as though they are child-friendly as the very pedophiles that use the same methods to appeal to children as 'friends' most predominantly.

No, in that it isn’t more likely, and it shouldn’t be more likely for ‘violations of children’ to occur in institutions that cater to kids/families.

Any such crimes should be prosecuted vigorously, 100% of the time.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

1.  2. 3. What are you talking about ?  The CBC article BACKS UP your claim !
 

Yes, the single paragraph which quotes the wording of the bill backs up my claim, but the entire rest of the article throws shade.

The photo below is the top 1/4 of the page. Anyone who just casually glances at the article gets a eyeful of "homophobia", and that's a large percentage of our population. 

Then there's a sub-heading that looks exactly like this:

Quote

Law will have 'chilling effect'

There's this quote:

Quote

"The bill's intentionally vague language leaves teachers afraid to talk to their students and opens up school districts to costly and frivolous litigation from those seeking to exclude LGBTQ people from any grade level," said state Rep. Carlos G. Smith, a Democrat who is gay. "Even worse, #DontSayGay sends a hateful message to our most vulnerable youth who simply need our support."

That's what the CBC and CTV do when they want to skew opinions - they give all of the oxygen in the room to the people who are telling the most emotional lies which support their narrative. That woman's voice didn't need to be heard, she's a lying idiot. But she's the lying idiot with the right message.

Screen Shot 2022-04-26 at 9.22.58 AM.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

1. Yes, the single paragraph which quotes the wording of the bill backs up my claim, but the entire rest of the article throws shade.

2. That's what the CBC and CTV do when they want to skew opinions - they give all of the oxygen in the room to the people who are telling the most emotional lies which support their narrative. That woman's voice didn't need to be heard, she's a lying idiot. But she's the lying idiot with the right message.

Screen Shot 2022-04-26 at 9.22.58 AM.png

1. I was only looking to substantiate the details you posted so once I got the facts I didn't read the rest.
2. They quote people against the bill.  That's how journalism works.  You CAN fault the CBC for misreporting facts but as I already pointed out - they agreed with you on the facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Luz P. said:

The ludicrousness of it all reached a peak when they removed the “Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls” greeting from some of its fireworks shows to be more inclusive. Now, the greeting is "Good evening, dreamers of all ages." Which I like and fail to see the big whoop, yet conservatives denounced it and were against the new greeting.

I agree that the new greeting is just fine, and if they would have just switched it without fanfare then that would have been fine too, but they chose to use that moment as their coming out woke party, which was a real wakeup call to parents who use the words mom, dad, boy and girl and who aren't interested in changing their vocabulary to conform to woke stupidity. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I was only looking to substantiate the details you posted so once I got the facts I didn't read the rest.
2. They quote people against the bill.  That's how journalism works.  You CAN fault the CBC for misreporting facts but as I already pointed out - they agreed with you on the facts.

The facts in that article are a tiny nugget of worthwhile information that's awash in a sea of emotionally charged lies and propaganda. 

For real, if you redacted that one paragraph, all that's left is propaganda. 

Look:

Quote

'Don't Say Gay' bill becomes law in Florida, banning sexual orientation instruction from K-3

Social Sharing  (links removed)

Law, which critics say marginalizes LGBTQ people, lets parents sue over violations

The Associated Press · Posted: Mar 28, 2022 1:54 PM ET | Last Updated: April 21
 
florida-same-sex-silencing.jpg
Demonstrators gather in front of the Florida State Capitol on March 7. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed legislation, dubbed by opponents as the 'Don't Say Gay' bill, into law on Monday. It forbids discussions of sexual orientation and gender identity in kindergarten to Grade 3. (Wilfredo Lee/The Associated Press)

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a bill on Monday that forbids instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity in kindergarten through Grade 3, a policy that has drawn intense national scrutiny from critics who argue it marginalizes LGBTQ people.

The legislation has pushed Florida and DeSantis, an ascending Republican and potential 2024 presidential candidate, to the forefront of the country's culture wars, with LGBTQ advocates, students, Democrats, the entertainment industry and the White House denouncing what critics have called the "Don't Say Gay" bill.

 

DeSantis and Republicans have repeatedly said the measure is reasonable and that parents, not teachers, should be broaching subjects of sexual orientation and gender identity with their children.

"We will make sure that parents can send their kids to school to get an education, not an indoctrination," DeSantis said before he signed the bill into law. He and other speakers stood at a podium affixed with a placard reading "Protect Children/Support Parents."

Critics say the bill is so vaguely worded that speech could be muzzled throughout public schools.

 
usa-lgbt-florida.JPG
High school students in Tampa, Fla., protest the bill on March 3. The bill was signed into law on Monday, over criticism that it marginalizes LGBTQ individuals. (Octavio Jones/Reuters)

***********REDACTED 1 paragraph********

DeSantis signed the bill after a news conference held at the Classical Preparatory School in Spring Hill, about 75 kilometres north of Tampa. The school was founded by Anne Corcoran, wife of Florida Education Commissioner Richard Corcoran, according to The Gainesville Sun.

Disney wants law repealed or struck down

Public backlash began almost immediately after the bill was introduced, with early criticism lobbed by Chasten Buttigieg, the husband of U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, and condemnation from LGBTQ advocacy groups. Democratic President Joe Biden called it "hateful."

As the bill moved through the legislature, celebrities mobilized against it on social media and criticized it at the Academy Awards on Sunday. Florida students staged walkouts and packed into committee rooms and statehouse halls to protest the measure, often with booming chants of "We say gay!"

 
disney-walkout.jpg
A Disney employee holds a sign to protest the company's stance on LGBTQ issues in Glendale, Calif., on March 22. Advocates who work for the company criticized CEO Bob Chapek for what they said was his slow response to speaking out against the bill. The company said on Monday it wants the law to be repealed or struck down in the courts. (Jae C. Hong/The Associated Press)

The Walt Disney Company, a powerful player in Florida politics, suspended its political donations in the state, and LGBTQ advocates who work for the company criticized CEO Bob Chapek for what they said was his slow response speaking out against the bill. Some walked off the job in protest.

After DeSantis signed the measure, the company released a statement saying, "Our goal as a company is for this law to be repealed by the legislature or struck down in the courts, and we remain committed to supporting the national and state organizations working to achieve that."

Throughout debate in the Republican-controlled statehouse, Democrats have said the bill's language — particularly the phrases "classroom instruction" and "age appropriate" — could be interpreted so broadly that discussion in any grade could trigger lawsuits and create a classroom atmosphere where teachers would avoid the subjects entirely.

"The bill's intentionally vague language leaves teachers afraid to talk to their students and opens up school districts to costly and frivolous litigation from those seeking to exclude LGBTQ people from any grade level," said state Rep. Carlos G. Smith, a Democrat who is gay. "Even worse, #DontSayGay sends a hateful message to our most vulnerable youth who simply need our support."

Andrew Spar, president of the Florida Education Association, said the bill amounts to a political wedge issue for Republicans because elementary schools, especially in kindergarten through Grade 3, do not teach about these subjects and have state curriculum standards guiding classroom lessons.

"This bill is based on a falsehood, and that falsehood is that somehow we're teaching kids inappropriate topics at an early age, and clearly we're not," Spar said.

Law will have 'chilling effect'

The bill's sponsor, Republican Rep. Joe Harding, has said it would not bar spontaneous discussions about sexual orientation or gender identity in schools but would prevent districts from integrating the subjects into official curriculum.

During the bill's early stages, Harding sought to require schools to inform parents if a student came out as LGBTQ to a teacher. He withdrew the amendment after it picked up attention online.

"Nothing in the amendment was about outing a student. Rather than battle misinformation related to the amendment, I decided to focus on the primary bill that empowers parents to be engaged in their children's lives," he said in a statement.

At the bill signing ceremony on Monday, several young children accompanied DeSantis and other politicians near the podium, with some holding signs bearing the governor's "Protect Children/Support Parents" slogan. DeSantis gave the children the pens he used to sign the bill.

The White House, which has sparred with the DeSantis administration over a range of policies, has issued statements against the law.

"My Administration will continue to fight for dignity and opportunity for every student and family — in Florida and around the country," Biden tweeted on Monday.

U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona recently held a call with LGBTQ students in Florida and said in a statement issued Monday that his department "will be monitoring this law upon implementation to evaluate whether it violates federal civil rights law."

For teachers in Florida, the bill has caused some confusion over what is allowed in the classroom, as well as concerns over frivolous lawsuits, said Michael Woods, a special education teacher in Palm Beach County with about three decades of experience.

"From the start, I thought it was a solution in search of a problem, and the sad part about it is, I think it's going to have a chilling effect on making sure that young people, students, have a safe learning environment," he said.

So that's what a CBC article looks like once you strip it of the tiny nugget of truth.

Honestly dude, just within the last couple of days you wrote a post which chastised conservatives for disregarding the CBC and other MSM outlets, then you posted this link which is a perfect example of why anyone with any brains would completely disregard those disinformers out of hand.

 

Mods - my post wouldn't have made sense without copying & pasting the entire article. I was just showing how much of it was vile filth. FWIW CBC is state owned, so we actually own part of that clown car - that means that it's not really 'plagiarism' in my books. If they didn't want their article used as proof of their own worthlessness then they should have done better.

Edited by WestCanMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

The facts in that article are a tiny nugget of worthwhile information that's awash in a sea of emotionally charged lies and propaganda. 

They reported both sides.  

Now here's the FOX version - "Democrats claim XYZ" followed by no response from the Demns.

Is that better ?  

I haven't read both of them thoroughly - just an honest question to consider.

The principle SHOULD be: report the facts, then the opinions of major stakeholders on both sides.  That's the principle journalism should wear.

So - CBC and FOX - who wore it better ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

They reported both sides.  

Now here's the FOX version - "Democrats claim XYZ" followed by no response from the Demns.

Is that better ?  

I haven't read both of them thoroughly - just an honest question to consider.

The principle SHOULD be: report the facts, then the opinions of major stakeholders on both sides.  That's the principle journalism should wear.

So - CBC and FOX - who wore it better ?

I read most of the Fox article and the vast majority of what I see is facts, not emotional lies, which is good imo. I don't see anything misleading or disingenuous. 

I pointed out several parts of the CBC article which contained disinformation, can you point out some parts of the Fox article which contain disinformation? It seems pretty straightforward and accurate imo.

I'd say Fox has about 95% accuracy and CBC is at about 0.5%. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

I read most of the Fox article and the vast majority of what I see is facts, not emotional lies 

You have to separate yourself from what you believe to be true to answer the question.
Facts vs opinions - state the facts then report the opinions from the point of view of those who hold them.

Standard journalism.  Whether or not you or I agree with anything is beside the point.  It's called objectivity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2022 at 8:45 AM, Michael Hardner said:

Corporations self-governing is a bad thing.

Governments taking actions against a company because of a political grudge is a bad thing.

Doing so openly is a very bad thing.

The culture war is a bad thing.

My opinion -> it's all bad.

The woke Disney of today should have stayed out of politics period. Disney was founded by Walt Disney as a place to go where kids and parents can go have a fun time together. They did not want to go to Disney and get involved in woke politics. Good on Desantis for what he did. Anyone who complains or disagrees with what Desantis has done here has to be two bricks short of a friggin load. Just saying. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

You have to separate yourself from what you believe to be true to answer the question.
Facts vs opinions - state the facts then report the opinions from the point of view of those who hold them.

Standard journalism.  Whether or not you or I agree with anything is beside the point.  It's called objectivity.

The CBC's tripe would be elevated to "journalism" if they gave the article a non-partisan title, led with the facts, did a better job of stating and explaining the facts, and then reported on worthwhile opinions - FROM BOTH SIDES. 

The CBC did none of that. Their title was an homage to vitriolic leftist disinformation, the picture at the top of the page was another homage to the same false narrative, the facts were just a tiny portion of the article, the smidgeon of facts only came out after they had already told you how to feel about them, and they exclusively gave opinions from the side that they are clearly on.

The CBC article met the exact definition of propaganda, they didn't miss a beat.

 

The Fox article states all of the pertinent facts in sufficient detail, lays out the arguments from both sides clearly, Fox's criticisms were backed up with cites, there was nothing at all misleading or missing from their article.

How would you rate both articles on a scale from 1 - 10 MH?

1) If you went into this debate without knowing any of the facts would you learn more about the bill from the Fox article or CBC's? 

2) Did one article do a better job of detailing the most important and relevant favourable/negative opinions of the bill? 

3) Does one of the articles contain far more emotional & misleading partisan content than the other? 

4) If you were a journalism student and you were supposed to write an article giving people all of the pertinent information about the bill, and get them up to speed on the most worthwhile favourable/negative comments about it, which article would you plagiarize? 

5) Can you show me the places in the CBC article where they reported on opinions that were favourable to the bill from people standing more than ten feet from DeSantis?

 

FYI the CBC article was just shit MH. It wasn't the least bit objective, there was one informative paragraph and 24 out of the other 26 paragraphs were just leftist vitriol. 

Honest to God, you're the one who wanted to compare Fox's reporting to CBC's reporting, now you wanna stay mum on the topic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2022 at 1:48 PM, WestCanMan said:

The bill doesn't differentiate between talking about heterosexual relationships or homosexual relationships or anything else. It just makes any discussions of a sexual nature off-limits between teachers and students that are K-3.

Too many parents in today's world are simply too screwy to leave all the discussions to them alone.  By the time their kids reach grade 4 the damage that could be done to them may be too hard to undo.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Nationalist said:
On 4/26/2022 at 1:08 AM, Scott Mayers said:

Isn't ANY place that specifically favors 'family', especially children, more likely than not to eventually have apparent issues involving violations of children regardless? Maybe we should penalize the churches for IMPOSING adult-related biases upon them in isolation of their 'free choice' to choose what they want to become independently?

Personally, it is more likely than not that someone LIKE that DiSantis to BE of the type to abuse children in the first place. They know just how to 'appear' as though they are child-friendly as the very pedophiles that use the same methods to appeal to children as 'friends' most predominantly.

Expand  

Hi Scotty. Yup...it's me. Your non-religious fellow free-speech advocate.  ;)

Teaching pre-teen kids about sexual behavior is a bad idea. Teaching them about abnormal sexual behavior is even worse.

But not because of some religious reasons, as you elude to here, but because they're kids. You know...young people who are still trying to learn basic academic skills as well as basic social skills. 

But on the positive side...you got to say "pedophiles".

READ the response on the other thread regarding your false interpretation of what I said. I already know that most people leading anywhere politically require at least PRETENDING to be religious. Trump is good example. 

As for this argument, what you are conflating is the assumptions about CRT if you are concerned ABOUT the 'cultivating' of unsual behaviors. That it should be none of your fucking business about another person's sexual behaviors given it is PRIVATE is completely ignored given you PRETEND to favor exclusive benefits for someone based upon one's right to private ownership. That is, their private behavior is strictly their "OWNERSHIP" as a person. If you think you can impose your own lies about what people ARE, you have to stop being hypocritcal. Your side falsely associates the 'liberation' of peoples personal behaviors that are NOT infringing on your own as somehow STILL YOUR OWNERSHIP. THAT is 'religious'. 

The threats to Disney is based upon being called out on DeSantis' insistence that CRT is more extreme than it is AND the deception of his is to feign that the literal material in question was or was not PROMOTING of these lifestyles. It is an ACCIDENT of one's own ego that they would 'promote' their own behavior as unthreatening regardless of who you are. That is, people have a right to be 'religious' when that is itself a fraud AND where those who are the pedophiles normally come from in irony of your side's accusations. 

Why do you think it is fair to threaten Disney for FREEDOM OF SPEECH all of a sudden....especially considering the other thread on Elon Musk's reasoning for his purchase of Twitter? That Disney asserted they will ignore the intolerant assumptions about the INTENT of the way teachers or their materials teach for their community is justified to the theme of their own business. AND the real reason for DeSantis' actions are BASED ONLY on the fact that Christian Creationists can't get their own cultivating textbooks in public for directly being 'religious'. 

I have the actual examples of what is called, "CRT" by the Right from textbooks and while I too was not in favor of putting forward unrelevant 'heroes' based upon putting racial or sexual lines, the Right is NOT actualy concerned about that but hoping to eventually make it illegal for anyone to have any kind of non-Christian relationship. You guys are also GASLIGHTING when you declare the 'facts' that is only 'opinion' or out-and-out deception. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, sharkman said:

No, in that it isn’t more likely, and it shouldn’t be more likely for ‘violations of children’ to occur in institutions that cater to kids/families.

Any such crimes should be prosecuted vigorously, 100% of the time.  

Yes, and I think it should be a crime to be a pretentious Christian who gaslights society into thinking that the liberal side is seeking to make everyone favor pedophilia when this is not true. The idea of 'liberalism' is to be FREE of ones' choice to behave WHERE THEY DO NOT IMPOSE UPON OTHERS OF THE SAME. So where the liberal side tends to promote their supports are about the freedom of one to be gay or come from a different race or ethnicity or have equal access to real jobs, etc. Your side believes in IMPOSING against personal behaviors YET you think your ARBITRARY right to pass on inheritance and wealth to ONLY those you favor (while passing on debt to the society as a whole) are precisely what is going on. 

Those on the Left in power in the groups also favor a lot of the same as you do but recognize they cannot do so unless they have more power that collecting together provides. As such, they tend to require accepting the different choices people make as a right due to the inablity of any one cult to DICTATE. The conservatives of all societies have always been or become more and more concentrated to one SPECIFIC cults with associated 'familiar' relations due to inheritance. 

There are no threats to children by Disney. Oddly, they too are 'Rightwing' normally. The only reason they defend their stance relates to the specific KIND of business that appeals to universal acceptance of people's differences. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Scott Mayers said:

READ the response on the other thread regarding your false interpretation of what I said. I already know that most people leading anywhere politically require at least PRETENDING to be religious. Trump is good example. 

As for this argument, what you are conflating is the assumptions about CRT if you are concerned ABOUT the 'cultivating' of unsual behaviors. That it should be none of your fucking business about another person's sexual behaviors given it is PRIVATE is completely ignored given you PRETEND to favor exclusive benefits for someone based upon one's right to private ownership. That is, their private behavior is strictly their "OWNERSHIP" as a person. If you think you can impose your own lies about what people ARE, you have to stop being hypocritcal. Your side falsely associates the 'liberation' of peoples personal behaviors that are NOT infringing on your own as somehow STILL YOUR OWNERSHIP. THAT is 'religious'. 

The threats to Disney is based upon being called out on DeSantis' insistence that CRT is more extreme than it is AND the deception of his is to feign that the literal material in question was or was not PROMOTING of these lifestyles. It is an ACCIDENT of one's own ego that they would 'promote' their own behavior as unthreatening regardless of who you are. That is, people have a right to be 'religious' when that is itself a fraud AND where those who are the pedophiles normally come from in irony of your side's accusations. 

Why do you think it is fair to threaten Disney for FREEDOM OF SPEECH all of a sudden....especially considering the other thread on Elon Musk's reasoning for his purchase of Twitter? That Disney asserted they will ignore the intolerant assumptions about the INTENT of the way teachers or their materials teach for their community is justified to the theme of their own business. AND the real reason for DeSantis' actions are BASED ONLY on the fact that Christian Creationists can't get their own cultivating textbooks in public for directly being 'religious'. 

I have the actual examples of what is called, "CRT" by the Right from textbooks and while I too was not in favor of putting forward unrelevant 'heroes' based upon putting racial or sexual lines, the Right is NOT actualy concerned about that but hoping to eventually make it illegal for anyone to have any kind of non-Christian relationship. You guys are also GASLIGHTING when you declare the 'facts' that is only 'opinion' or out-and-out deception. 

Son...you have issues.

That bill simply forbids sexual content from being taught to little kids. Disney caved to a "clan" of screaming young freaks who somehow figure kids should be taught about sexual behavior. 

You assume some nefarious intent where there is none. Nobody cares if a person is straight or gay. Hell one of my boys is gay. And if that's his thing...good...be happy son. Just promise to adopt a few kids because...mom and I want grandchildren... ;)

I think your TDS is driving you to make silly conclusions. 

BTW...my gay son...is conservative. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Son...you have issues.

That bill simply forbids sexual content from being taught to little kids. Disney caved to a "clan" of screaming young freaks who somehow figure kids should be taught about sexual behavior. 

You assume some nefarious intent where there is none. Nobody cares if a person is straight or gay. Hell one of my boys is gay. And if that's his thing...good...be happy son. Just promise to adopt a few kids because...mom and I want grandchildren... ;)

I think your TDS is driving you to make silly conclusions. 

BTW...my gay son...is conservative. 

Oh Dad! you must be close to 90 if I'm your 'son.' You miss that DeSantis is definitely against the personal freedom of gay people as well as most non-Evangelical Christians. I know my politics.

Still don't know your acronym, "TDS", by the way.

The nefarious intent exists contrary to the fact that you are simply not sufficiently well versed in the essential political philosophy and manuevoring by those who believe in extremes. The BILL falsely bases its assumptions that there is some intentional conspiracy to make pedophiles or other misfits under the smokescreen of "CRT" as an excuse. Disney refused to respect this precisely for those who are 'weird' by some stereotypical standards that include gay people especially. They believe that teachers are 'normalizing' the acceptance of one to BE 'gay' for instance, as well as to anything non-traditionally Christian. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Scott Mayers said:

Oh Dad! you must be close to 90 if I'm your 'son.' You miss that DeSantis is definitely against the personal freedom of gay people as well as most non-Evangelical Christians. I know my politics.

Still don't know your acronym, "TDS", by the way.

The nefarious intent exists contrary to the fact that you are simply not sufficiently well versed in the essential political philosophy and manuevoring by those who believe in extremes. The BILL falsely bases its assumptions that there is some intentional conspiracy to make pedophiles or other misfits under the smokescreen of "CRT" as an excuse. Disney refused to respect this precisely for those who are 'weird' by some stereotypical standards that include gay people especially. They believe that teachers are 'normalizing' the acceptance of one to BE 'gay' for instance, as well as to anything non-traditionally Christian. 

 

TDS...Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Frankly...I don't think you know politics well at all. You seem to think the conservative side is nothing more than a bunch of white supremacist liars. Nothing could be further from the truth. There are white supremacist in the conservative camp...and there are black supremacists in the liberal camp. And in the end...acknowledging the small numbers of each extremist group...as long as the extremists don't take control of either side...who cares?

You need to try REALITY.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Scott Mayers said:

 The BILL falsely bases its assumptions that there is some intentional conspiracy to make pedophiles or other misfits under the smokescreen of "CRT" as an excuse. Disney refused to respect this precisely for those who are 'weird' by some stereotypical standards that include gay people especially. 

I agree with this.  The bill is set in a framework to foment a 'culture war' and to divide people based on false impressions.

That said, the bill itself seems mushy and unimportant.

DeSantis or Disney ? 

I choose neither.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

I agree with this.  The bill is set in a framework to foment a 'culture war' and to divide people based on false impressions.

That said, the bill itself seems mushy and unimportant.

DeSantis or Disney ? 

I choose neither.

OK...how would you say the bill is "framed to foment a 'culture war'"?

As I understand it, the bill simply says don't teach sexual behaviour of any sort, to little kids. As far as I'm concerned, that's something adults should not have to be told, yet evidently...they do.

So the wild-eyed Libbies go off the deep end and call it the "Don't say gay" bill.

Now I ask you...in all honesty...who the hell is fomenting a 'culture war'?

The reaction to this was as silly as it was transparent. My question to these Disney freaks is, 'Why do you want to teach sexual behaviour to little kids?'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

1. OK...how would you say the bill is "framed to foment a 'culture war'"?

2. So the wild-eyed Libbies go off the deep end and call it the "Don't say gay" bill.

3. Now I ask you...in all honesty...who the hell is fomenting a 'culture war'?

 

1. 2. It's framed on one side as an "anti-grooming" bill and on the other as "don't say gay".  Both versions are bullshit.
3.  Well, not me.  I didn't "pick" between Disney and DeSantis 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Scott Mayers said:

Yes, and I think it should be a crime to be a pretentious Christian who gaslights society into thinking that the liberal side is seeking to make everyone favor pedophilia when this is not true. The idea of 'liberalism' is to be FREE of ones' choice to behave WHERE THEY DO NOT IMPOSE UPON OTHERS OF THE SAME. So where the liberal side tends to promote their supports are about the freedom of one to be gay or come from a different race or ethnicity or have equal access to real jobs, etc. Your side believes in IMPOSING against personal behaviors YET you think your ARBITRARY right to pass on inheritance and wealth to ONLY those you favor (while passing on debt to the society as a whole) are precisely what is going on. 

Those on the Left in power in the groups also favor a lot of the same as you do but recognize they cannot do so unless they have more power that collecting together provides. As such, they tend to require accepting the different choices people make as a right due to the inablity of any one cult to DICTATE. The conservatives of all societies have always been or become more and more concentrated to one SPECIFIC cults with associated 'familiar' relations due to inheritance. 

There are no threats to children by Disney. Oddly, they too are 'Rightwing' normally. The only reason they defend their stance relates to the specific KIND of business that appeals to universal acceptance of people's differences. 

1)You know very little of my views, you assume far too much.

2)Take yourself a little less seriously.

3)If you want a law against gaslighting, it can’t apply to just the people whose views you disagree with.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. 2. It's framed on one side as an "anti-grooming" bill and on the other as "don't say gay".  Both versions are bullshit.
3.  Well, not me.  I didn't "pick" between Disney and DeSantis 

1. 2. HOW? And further to that...if we all agree that little children need not be exposed to sexual behaviour lessons, then children should not be exposed to sexual behaviour lessons. For instance, most societies have laws banning thievery. Why? Because we all agree that thievery is unwanted in our society. I do not understand what the objection to this simple concept is. Now, were some people to say things like, "Thieves are thieves and have rights as thieves. We need to teach our young'uns to be accepting of thieves and their thievery." do you figure that would go over well?

3. I didn't ask you to pick between the 2...I asked you "who the hell is fomenting a 'culture war'?" You know...the one you brought up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

1. HOW?  
2. I didn't ask you to pick between the 2...I asked you "who the hell is fomenting a 'culture war'?" You know...the one you brought up?

1. 2. "Grooming" as I understand it implies that those wanting to teach the subject matter are basically pedos.
2. People who ask you to pick between two retarded positions are fomenting a culture war.  You seem to love to fight.  I really don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. 2. "Grooming" as I understand it implies that those wanting to teach the subject matter are basically pedos.
2. People who ask you to pick between two retarded positions are fomenting a culture war.  You seem to love to fight.  I really don't.

1.2. Pedos??? Ya know...that never even occurred to me. I just figured this is one more thing that some people need to be reminded of...leave the sex ed till the kids are developed enough to deal with the subject. Pedos? Really? I'm not sure I believe that...

3. OK...so in your opinion, its retarded to make a law that the vast majority of folks agree on...especially parents of little kids...that makes sure the schools are not subjecting their little kids to sexual behaviour lessons? That's rather warped. Especially when we consider that the state government actually thought this is necessary. Thus there must have been some pretty raw examples of this stupidity already going on. Any person who figures such teaching at that age is...a good thing...frankly needs a slap and then be fired on the spot.

There's an old saying...perhaps you've heard it. It goes..."Lead, Follow, or get outta the way."

I cannot sit idly by and watch stupid extremists play games with our kids and their natural development. Nor can I sit idly by and watch people make erroneous shit up about a law that should never have had to be made in the first place. Only a demented person would teach sexual anything to a child.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2022 at 8:24 AM, Luz P. said:

Should corporations weigh in in public policy?   Was the retaliation commensurate with the “offense?”

 

All corporations should mind their own bloody business and stay out of politics. But in today's world, corporations are now pretty much running and ruling the world. It was nice and refreshing to see Desantis kick woke Disney's azz. I have heard that Disney is starting to lose plenty of money, and many families have cancelled their membership with Disney.  

When Walt Disney created Disney, the idea was for a family of children and parents and grandparents to go to a Disney theme park and have fun and enjoy themselves. Politics was not on Walt's agenda for Disney. But the woke Disney company management toddlers decided that they wanted to get in on the woke act and bring politics to Disney. 

With having globalist corporations, big tech, big pharma, bought off puppet on a string politicians, and the controlled MSM around who the hell needs enemies. They all have become the enemy. What chance do we the peasants have against all of these politically correct woke toddlers. 

With Disney starting to pay the price for their wokeness, and Twitter now being owned and controlled by Elon Musk, we may be starting to see the beginning of the end for woke leftist lieberal censorship. Works for me. Good freakin bye to those woke buffoons. ?

 

 

Edited by taxme
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,714
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    wopsas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Venandi went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...