Posts made by hubrys

@raphjd said in Rep. Mike Johnson elected 56th Speaker of the House:

The bill you are referring to say that you can't talk to kids below a certain grade (can't remember if it's below 3rd grade or including 3rd grade) about sex and/or sexuality.

Dumbass, I can tell you didn't read. I quote for you directly the law as it reads on Florida's law books right now. I will do so again since you couldn't read it the first time.

Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in prekindergarten through grade 8, except when required by ss. 1003.42(2)(n)3. and 1003.46. If such instruction is provided in grades 9 through 12, the instruction must be age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards. This subparagraph applies to charter schools.

And just in case you're thinking, "Oh, well that's just the general language they used. The law is really just about grooming," then let me dissuade you of that delusion.

If Florida had wanted to pass an anti-grooming law, then it could have done so using clear, explicit, unambiguous language. It didn't do that, because that's not what this Bill was about.

@blablarg18 said in Rep. Mike Johnson elected 56th Speaker of the House:

As to whatever laws you're going on about: they never banned gay discussions with kids - only pornographic discussions.

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Let me quote the actual Florida law language, as it currently reads after amendment in 2023.

Fla. Stat. 1001.42(8)(c)(3) states:

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in prekindergarten through grade 8, except when required by ss. 1003.42(2)(n)3. and 1003.46. If such instruction is provided in grades 9 through 12, the instruction must be age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards. This subparagraph applies to charter schools."

Read it with your own goddamn eyes above. It's not about pornography. It's not about sex books. The "Don't Say Gay" bill specifically and explicitly forbids school personnel from any instruction involving sexual orientation or sexual identity.

It doesn't say, "Don't show kids books with titties and cocks." It's sexual orientation. Under Florida's law, a teacher legally CANNOT read that book about a girl having two dads. That's what Florida banned. Not pornography.

Now, I understand why you thought the law did something different. That's because the forces trying to erase LGBT people sold this law on the basis of protecting children from grooming. But the law was always anti-gay.

In fact, it doesn't even stop kids from seeing pornography. So long as the material is heteronormative (i.e., a man fucking a woman) then this law doesn't even ban it. It does nothing to protect children from inappropriate heterosexual content.

You were, in fact, sold a lie.

Also please note that the law has been expanded beyond elementary school children. It was amended to apply up to the 8th grade. And it extends beyond to 12th grade so long as anyone complains, as you know a conservative will. So, it de facto covers pre-K thru 12th grade now.

Don't bullshit me when you haven't even read the law itself.

@raphjd The Groomer Libel is homophobic because the proponents of it, including yourself, support things like "Don't Say Gay" bills. Such bills are explicitly homophobic.

For example, under Florida's bill young children could be read the following book by their teacher in school:

But those same students could NOT be read this book:

And the only difference between the two books is that the first one features a heteronormative family unit, and the second one does not. That's a bigoted policy.

Teaching children about the existence of LGBT families doesn't involve pornography. It no more involves discussing ass fucking than talking about mommies and daddies involves talking about pussy pounding.

I believe that the people propounding the Grooming Libel are doing so because they care for children about as much as I believe the racists propounding the Blood Libel against Jews just care about protecting Christian babies.

The Grooming Libel is just political correctness cover for being an open homophobe. It's a dog whistle. The true goal is to oppress homosexuals, and they'll use "protecting children" as the pretextual justification.

Do some gays molest children? Sure. However, the vast, vast, vast majority of sexual molestation of underage children is heterosexual. Why does it seem like the conservatives are only concerned with male/male grooming?

For example, where's the outrage at Matt Gaetz for paying for underage and "barely legal" prostitutes using his public VENMO account? I guess you can fuck an underage girl so long as you're an older man.

@blablarg18 said in Sheila Jackson Lee Addresses Leaked Audio Tape Of Her Viciously Berating Staff:

I bet @hubrys or other lib crackpots libs we've known, nodded their heads - think she's real

I don't even know who Sheila Lee is. I didn't read the OP. But I did want to express my thanks for allowing me to live, rent free, in your broken little head.

@blablarg18 said in Rep. Mike Johnson elected 56th Speaker of the House:

One thing Speaker Mike has: he seems to be relatively pro-free speech.

Yup, the author and lead sponsor of the Federal "Don't Say Gay" bill is very pro-free speech. </irony>

LINK: How Anti-LGBTQ+ Is Newly Elected House Speaker Mike Johnson? Very.

2005

Too bad he was a frequent opinion writer. Just google and I'm sure you can find many more than I did in just 5 minutes of searching.

2004

@blablarg18 I don't have to. Your argument is irrelevant. You're trying to use the concept that people change SOME opinions over time to prove that, for certain, he's changed THIS SPECIFIC opinion over time.

Except you have no evidence for that belief. The vast examples of his recent commentary and actions prove otherwise. He's still a homophobe.

@blablarg18 Seeing as he tried to pass a Federal equivalent of Florida's "Don't Say Gay" bill, I don't really think his opinions of the gays has improved. In fact, he's one of the most homophobic members of Congress.

You should know who you're celebrating.

LINK: A President, a Billionaire and Questions About Access and National Security

"Their interactions were ultimately swept up in one of the two federal criminal cases that the special counsel Jack Smith brought against Mr. Trump. Prosecutors have interviewed Mr. Pratt in the case in which Mr. Trump is charged with taking classified documents with him from the White House when he left office and obstructing efforts to retrieve them. Mr. Pratt is listed as a potential witness who could testify against Mr. Trump at a trial next year.

In his interviews with prosecutors, Mr. Pratt recounted how Mr. Trump once revealed to him sensitive information about American nuclear submarines, an episode that Mr. Trump denies."

@raphjd Why? Why didn't all of Trump's lawyers just find one of these trustworthy appraisers you guys are relying on? How could they have been so negligent in his defense?

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/05/us/politics/trump-nuclear-submarine-classified-documents.html

Oh geez! What a goddamn moron! No wonder the government was afraid of him having classified documents.

@blablarg18 said in USSA watch: Mar a Lago worth $300 million plus; judge lies & calls it $18 million as threat to Biden's opposition leader:

For generations, before him, people done real estate appraisals wrong.

I'm not sure why the Trump defense team didn't call you two brain-trusts as witnesses for the trial. As it was, they didn't produce any credible appraisal witnesses during the trial to corroborate your theories on the property's values.

Why? Why didn't all of Trump's lawyers just find one of these trustworthy appraisers you guys are relying on? How could they have been so negligent in his defense?

@blablarg18 said in Most shamefully stupid person in USA congress?:

You really didn't watch the Crockett clip, did you?

I don't need your crackpot videos screwing up my algorithm.

Is it Matt Gaetz? Anyone stupid enough to pay for his barely legal prostitutes using a public VENMO account has to be the stupidest one.

Votes for the stopgap spending bill:

Republicans: 126
Democrats: 209

Huh? Isn't that interesting? It's almost as if it were the Democrats that were trying to get the bill passed. Funny how you missed that little statistic.