The gaystapo reveals itself, and a must read
This is an excellent must read from The Federalist on the trans issue. It deserves your click. Rarely does someone with a wide audience come so close to the arguments I'd make.
How The Transgender Crusade Made Me Rethink My Support For Gay Marriage
http://thefederalist.com/2017/09/06/transgender-crusade-made-rethink-support-gay-marriage/
"Many of my fellow millennial conservatives, out of what they view as courtesy, use the preferred pronoun and name for individuals who identify as transgender. Here is why I won’t: We will be made to care.
The phrase is care of another great conservative thinker, Erick Erickson. He coined it in the midst of the gay marriage debate. During that debate, I was like many of these younger millennial conservatives. I naively thought the issue was merely about gay marriage"
Those who've followed me from the beginning knew I was making the argument all along that I would happily support gay unions but not marriage, because the fight was about rule, not acceptance. I was wildly attacked for it. Hey_It's_Michael here on LJ, gay leftist coward and zealot, pretended to befriend me for nearly a year, pumping me for information to use against me because of that. He accidentally lost it one day, revealing himself. I was never more sure than after that day.
"It wasn’t just about redefining marriage to these activists; it was also about punishing those who weren’t 100 percent on board, especially religious Christians. The livelihoods and lives of bakers, photographers, farmers, and the CEO of Mozilla were destroyed for not completely adhering to the Thought Police’s demands."
I've been saying this, and it will happen:
"For Acculturated recently, I gamed out a frightening thought experiment about how parents who decide not to play along with their child’s gender dysphoria could one day be faced with a visit from Child Protective Services."
If dissent even in thought is hate, so much so banning or even violence against it is okay, then you are committing child abuse if you teach your daughter that Sandy is actually still Bobby (and she must shower with him) but we have to humor the government school, or that you believe marriage is between one man and one woman. That's not tinfoil. It's an obvious progression now proven by the gay marriage debate.
"With every tweet aimed at publicizing and shaming my position on transgenderism, the progressive Left is solidifying my decision to call Bruce Jenner by his given name"
"My answer for those on the Left who ask me 'Why do you care what transgender individuals call themselves?' is simply this: because you have made me."
Now here comes the big reveal. The LGBTQ Editor at Think Progress reacted to this piece on Twitter. Like the fellow gaystapo above he made the mistake of slipping and revealing who he is and what he actually wants, completely validating her argument. This is the left. This is Democrats. If you don't get that your head is up your ass.
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905427742988132353
1. So the @FDRLST has a whiny post from @BethanyShondark today about being forced to care about LGBTQ rights:
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905428118248325120
2. @bethanyshondark's "because that's what I believe" pro-bigotry arguments are weak, but there's something noteworthy there.
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905428338201829377
3. If you listened to this week's @HiddenBrain, you know that tolerance for intolerance is increasing:
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905428868181450752
4. What @BethanyShondark argues that she should be ALLOWED to believe what she believes, even though those odious beliefs harm others.
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905429011802804224
5. Indeed, she is a quintessential example of claiming free speech to justify her bigotry.
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905429097161138176
6. I don't think it strengthens her argument, but I think it's a context in which we need to view why she's so pissed.
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905429372026458112
7. You'll be "made to care," because intolerance harms people and is unjustified and the rest of us want the world to be a better place.
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905429550183612418
8. People who object to "coercion" and "loss of choice," as anti-LGBTQ conservatives often do, are avoiding responsibility.
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905429923048906752
9. We should respond by calling that out, not catering to their patently false concerns that their freedom is in danger.
An hour later...
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905441762012999681
*10. Not sure folks are reading the full thread. My whole point is no one is saying she's not allowed to believe anything.
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905442098060685312
*11. She's just fanning that fear to avoid the conversation and debate about whether she actually should believe those things.
He accidentally revealed part of the end game in his rage, then tried to walk it back after people pointed out the reveal. She should not "be ALLOWED to believe what she believes", if "those odious beliefs harm others", and "harms others" is defined by Democrats.
Against gay marriage
Against your kid shower with the opposite sex
Question climate change
Pro gun rights
Against illegal invasion
Against socialized medicine
And on and on.
The left frames all of those arguments as your desire to harm others.
She should not "be ALLOWED to believe what she believes." And how will they stop you when you shouldn't be "allowed"? By any means necessary.
How The Transgender Crusade Made Me Rethink My Support For Gay Marriage
http://thefederalist.com/2017/09/06/transgender-crusade-made-rethink-support-gay-marriage/
"Many of my fellow millennial conservatives, out of what they view as courtesy, use the preferred pronoun and name for individuals who identify as transgender. Here is why I won’t: We will be made to care.
The phrase is care of another great conservative thinker, Erick Erickson. He coined it in the midst of the gay marriage debate. During that debate, I was like many of these younger millennial conservatives. I naively thought the issue was merely about gay marriage"
Those who've followed me from the beginning knew I was making the argument all along that I would happily support gay unions but not marriage, because the fight was about rule, not acceptance. I was wildly attacked for it. Hey_It's_Michael here on LJ, gay leftist coward and zealot, pretended to befriend me for nearly a year, pumping me for information to use against me because of that. He accidentally lost it one day, revealing himself. I was never more sure than after that day.
"It wasn’t just about redefining marriage to these activists; it was also about punishing those who weren’t 100 percent on board, especially religious Christians. The livelihoods and lives of bakers, photographers, farmers, and the CEO of Mozilla were destroyed for not completely adhering to the Thought Police’s demands."
I've been saying this, and it will happen:
"For Acculturated recently, I gamed out a frightening thought experiment about how parents who decide not to play along with their child’s gender dysphoria could one day be faced with a visit from Child Protective Services."
If dissent even in thought is hate, so much so banning or even violence against it is okay, then you are committing child abuse if you teach your daughter that Sandy is actually still Bobby (and she must shower with him) but we have to humor the government school, or that you believe marriage is between one man and one woman. That's not tinfoil. It's an obvious progression now proven by the gay marriage debate.
"With every tweet aimed at publicizing and shaming my position on transgenderism, the progressive Left is solidifying my decision to call Bruce Jenner by his given name"
"My answer for those on the Left who ask me 'Why do you care what transgender individuals call themselves?' is simply this: because you have made me."
Now here comes the big reveal. The LGBTQ Editor at Think Progress reacted to this piece on Twitter. Like the fellow gaystapo above he made the mistake of slipping and revealing who he is and what he actually wants, completely validating her argument. This is the left. This is Democrats. If you don't get that your head is up your ass.
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905427742988132353
1. So the @FDRLST has a whiny post from @BethanyShondark today about being forced to care about LGBTQ rights:
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905428118248325120
2. @bethanyshondark's "because that's what I believe" pro-bigotry arguments are weak, but there's something noteworthy there.
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905428338201829377
3. If you listened to this week's @HiddenBrain, you know that tolerance for intolerance is increasing:
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905428868181450752
4. What @BethanyShondark argues that she should be ALLOWED to believe what she believes, even though those odious beliefs harm others.
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905429011802804224
5. Indeed, she is a quintessential example of claiming free speech to justify her bigotry.
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905429097161138176
6. I don't think it strengthens her argument, but I think it's a context in which we need to view why she's so pissed.
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905429372026458112
7. You'll be "made to care," because intolerance harms people and is unjustified and the rest of us want the world to be a better place.
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905429550183612418
8. People who object to "coercion" and "loss of choice," as anti-LGBTQ conservatives often do, are avoiding responsibility.
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905429923048906752
9. We should respond by calling that out, not catering to their patently false concerns that their freedom is in danger.
An hour later...
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905441762012999681
*10. Not sure folks are reading the full thread. My whole point is no one is saying she's not allowed to believe anything.
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905442098060685312
*11. She's just fanning that fear to avoid the conversation and debate about whether she actually should believe those things.
He accidentally revealed part of the end game in his rage, then tried to walk it back after people pointed out the reveal. She should not "be ALLOWED to believe what she believes", if "those odious beliefs harm others", and "harms others" is defined by Democrats.
Against gay marriage
Against your kid shower with the opposite sex
Question climate change
Pro gun rights
Against illegal invasion
Against socialized medicine
And on and on.
The left frames all of those arguments as your desire to harm others.
She should not "be ALLOWED to believe what she believes." And how will they stop you when you shouldn't be "allowed"? By any means necessary.