The formerly persecuted, whose identity and sense of moral advantage is firmly based on that self-conception, can never allow themselves to see that they have become the persecutors.
Worth repeating:
The formerly persecuted, whose identity and sense of moral advantage is firmly based on that self-conception, can never allow themselves to see that they have become the persecutors.
Worth repeating:
Well, I finally did, and I debunked it here:https://t.co/A5Eh1ONeXX
— Brad Polumbo ??⚽️ ?️? (@brad_polumbo) October 14, 2020
Meanwhile on the Democratic side there is no criticism and outrage https://t.co/0YlS5B7Arp
— AC (@4ng3lica) October 14, 2020
More. Via National Review:
Joe Biden used the term “sexual preference” in May 2020, and the late Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg used it in 2017. Senators Richard Blumenthal and Dick Durbin — both Judiciary Committee members — have used the term in Senate floor speeches over the past decade.
He adds:
More than any other value, the brave men and women who started the American gay rights movement in the middle part of the last century advocated freedom—the freedom of sexual expression, the freedom to hold a job, the freedom to publish, the freedom to associate (whether at a bar free from police harassment or in a political meeting free from FBI surveillance), the freedom to serve openly in the military, and the freedom to marry. Now that it has achieved those freedoms and a cultural influence once thought impossible, much of what passes for gay activism today is driven by an impulse which is the very opposite of freedom: control.
As I’ve written before, the pagans bloodily persecuted the Christians, and then the Christians came to power and bloodily persecuted the pagans. Communists began as a small, radical movement for workers’ rights, but everywhere they’ve attained power they’ve been ruthless, murderous totalitarians. Those who were formerly outlawed and subject to arrest and worse, once the tide turns and they have the power of government to force others to bend knee, are totally assured of their own moral superiority in doing so.
Along related lines, but about woke-ism generally:
Big-LGBTQ was wrong about Neil Gorsuch, as it turned out. We’ll see if they’re wrong about Amy Coney Barrett and if Guy Benson is right.
Thread? : Some people have challenged me over ACB & the courts, asking why I’m so supportive of a nomination that would ostensibly make it likelier that my own (same-sex) marriage would be invalidated. Short answer, among other factors…I am convinced that will not happen…
— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) September 27, 2020
Walter Olson’s on the future of Obergefell.
Added: His update is below:
Not big-LGBTQ, that’s for sure.
In the U.K., teachers are told not to push tomboys to change their gender just because of the way they like to dress or play.
We try to maintain a measured tone here. But in truth we’re very angry at what has happened, what is happening, to a generation of children who would most likely grow up lesbian, gay or bisexual if not raised on genderbread fairytales./1of2 https://t.co/O8N5ATIXc4
— LGB Alliance (@ALLIANCELGB) September 25, 2020
We need to protect lesbian and gay kids (because big LGBTQ won't). https://t.co/RwKi0hD6lO
— IGF CultureWatch (@IndeGayForum) October 9, 2020
Added: The Spectator USA also noted:
>>To prove its case, HRC has compiled a constantly-updated ‘Timeline of Hate’ to memorialize Trump’s ‘dangerous and discriminatory agenda’. It has yet to update one of the very first entries, however, concerning Trump’s nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. The jurist’s past opposition to ‘crucial medical treatment for a transgender person’, HRC declared in January 2017, led it to take the unprecedented step of opposing a Supreme Court nomination. Yet in June, Gorsuch wrote one of the most comprehensive pro-LGBT rights decisions in court history when he ruled that the workplace discrimination protections within the 1964 Civil Rights Act encompass gay and transgender people.<<
Via The Spectator USA: Worse than “Dwight Eisenhower, whose executive order preventing those guilty of ‘sexual perversion’ from holding government jobs led to the firing of an estimated 10,000 people”?
Or how about George W. Bush, who called for a constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage (or Bill Clinton, whose campaign commercials touted his support for the Defense of Marriage Act)?
Reagan’s legacy is more nuanced than The Spectator would have it, but still, as they write, he “waited years to even utter the name of the disease which was killing thousands of gay men during his presidential term.”
Also, the worst anti-Semite ever? Netanyahu: ‘Treaty could end Arab-Israel conflict.
Biden voters:
This is embarrassing for these gay guys!
— Richard Grenell (@RichardGrenell) September 20, 2020
They are being harassed by BLM and yet they keep pleading “but we are with you…”
Grow some. We aren’t victims. @hrc is teaching gays to surrender to the mob. Never! @getoutspoken20 https://t.co/4m9WN5wD3Y
Tucker Carlson has the top-rated show during prime time on Fox News. The message here to Fox viewers is clear — welcome gays as part of the coalition — and a huge break from years past, before marriage was a settled issue.
.@eScarry breaks down why so many LGBTs are expected to vote for @realDonaldTrump in November. pic.twitter.com/NGHzumeo94
— LogCabinRepublicans (@LogCabinGOP) September 17, 2020
The policy is not anywhere near as draconian, and is far more reasonable, than activists at the Palm Center and elsewhere would have you believe.
Issued Sept. 4, 2020
DOD Instruction 1300.28 – Military Service by Transgender Persons and Persons with Gender Dysphoria Policy
a. Service in the Military Services is open to all persons who can meet the high standards for military service and readiness without special accommodations.
b. All Service members and applicants for accession to the Military Services must be treated with dignity and respect. No person, solely on the basis of his or her gender identity, will be:
(1) Denied accession into the Military Services;
(2) Involuntarily separated or discharged from the Military Services;
(3) Denied reenlistment or continuation of service in the Military Services; or
(4) Subjected to adverse action or mistreatment.
c. Service members who accessed in their preferred gender or received a diagnosis of gender dysphoria from, or had such diagnosis confirmed by, a military medical provider before April 12, 2019, are allowed to continue serving in the military pursuant to the policies and procedures in Section 4 of this issuance.
d. Except where a provision of policy has granted an exception, transgender Service members or applicants for accession to the Military Services must be subject to the same standards as all other persons.
(1) When a standard, requirement, or policy depends on whether the individual is a male or a female (e.g., medical fitness for duty, physical fitness and body fat standards; berthing, bathroom, and shower facilities; and uniform and grooming standards), all persons will be subject to the standard, requirement, or policy associated with their biological sex.
(2) Transgender persons may seek waivers or exceptions to these or any other standards, requirements, or policies on the same terms as any other person; additional policy guidance on such waivers or exceptions is in Paragraph 5.1. of this issuance.
e. Accession and retention standards for gender dysphoria and the treatment of gender dysphoria, including stability periods and surgical procedures, will be aligned with analogous conditions and treatments.