Taking On The Mouse
-
@Axtremus said in Taking On The Mouse:
Also, why should you cheer that the state is prohibiting schools from teaching X, Y, or Z? You do not believe in “local control” anymore, that you now welcome the state to take away the local school’s freedom to locally decide what to teach?
Look, where you stick your dick is no business of mine. Do with it what you wish. But there is something inherently evil about grooming and preying on children, before they decide what their sexual orientation will be.
Since the state should enact laws to protect the most vulnerable among us, and in this case the state is actively financing public schools, they do have a say in the rules and curriculum of public schools in the state of Florida.
Alternatively, if you feel that sexual function, orientation recruitment and transgender experimentation should be a part of a school curriculum for K-3 students, I invite you to establish an alternative to the Florida public school system and invite all comers who wish to participate in your alternative educational establishment.
Live long and prosper.
Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion. -
@Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:
But there is something inherently evil about grooming and preying on children, …
No school is doing that on the matter of sexual orientation. You’re just erecting straw man and making shit up. Now on the matter of religion, there are plenty of schools (e.g., “Sunday schools”) really pushing specific religions and even specific denominations hard on to very young children, if you want to worry about young children being groomed before they can make their own choices.
You continue to be wrong about sexual orientation being a choice. Which church or temple or mosque or synagogue or house of worship to go to, which congregation or sect or coven to join, what scripture to read, what prayers to recite … those are indeed choices. Who to love? Not so much. I will even give you a simple way to falsify this: you show me you romantically loving another man — this will show that you can really “choose” your orientation. Go ahead and surprise me.
-
@Axtremus said in Taking On The Mouse:
@Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:
But there is something inherently evil about grooming and preying on children, …
No school is doing that on the matter of sexual orientation. You’re just erecting straw man and making shit up. Now on the matter of religion, there are plenty of schools (e.g., “Sunday schools”) really pushing specific religions and even specific denominations hard on to very young children, if you want to worry about young children being groomed before they can make their own choices.
You continue to be wrong about sexual orientation being a choice. Which church or temple or mosque or synagogue or house of worship to go to, which congregation or sect or coven to join, what scripture to read, what prayers to recite … those are indeed choices. Who to love? Not so much. I will even give you a simple way to falsify this: you show me you romantically loving another man — this will show that you can really “choose” your orientation. Go ahead and surprise me.
No, the person making shit up and driving an agenda is you, my friend. Young children are very malleable. They trust what adults tell them. At this age, people should be worried whether they can tie their own shoes or whether they can begin to read, not whether they are a boy without a penis.
What you want is invasive. It is subversive of parental responsibility and authority.
It is evil. It is in some ways, pedophilic.
Keep your hands and your sex organs off of young children.
-
@Axtremus said in Taking On The Mouse:
@Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:
But there is something inherently evil about grooming and preying on children, …
No school is doing that on the matter of sexual orientation. You’re just erecting straw man and making shit up. Now on the matter of religion, there are plenty of schools (e.g., “Sunday schools”) really pushing specific religions and even specific denominations hard on to very young children, if you want to worry about young children being groomed before they can make their own choices.
You continue to be wrong about sexual orientation being a choice. Which church or temple or mosque or synagogue or house of worship to go to, which congregation or sect or coven to join, what scripture to read, what prayers to recite … those are indeed choices. Who to love? Not so much. I will even give you a simple way to falsify this: you show me you romantically loving another man — this will show that you can really “choose” your orientation. Go ahead and surprise me.
Your use of the word "love" rather than "be sexually attracted to" betrays a lack of comfort with what is actually being discussed. This is likely leading to cognitive dissonance, and you should work to correct it.
-
this isn't a discussion about the morality or ethics of homosexuality or transgenderism, or the biological basis for either. We can have another thread about that if you would like.
This thread is specifically about the Florida bill, Disney's response, the State's response, and the (in)appropriateness of all/any of the above.
-
@Axtremus said in Taking On The Mouse:
No school is doing that on the matter of sexual orientation. You’re just erecting straw man and making shit up.
Schools doing that is exactly what started this controversy.
Teachers on Libs of TikTok bragged about teaching evil to kindergarten students.
This caused some parents to wonder if they want their child to be taught about alternative sex practices in kindergarten.
Many parents decided they did not want this taught to their young children.
Disney decided they would fight to force this teaching on young children.
Teachers (with green hair) were teaching this, no straw man here.
You should pay closer attention when you watch Tucker Carson Tonight.
-
@Horace said in Taking On The Mouse:
So, a conservative big business was given political favors by the conservative political establishment long ago, and now tribal leftists are positing some moral obligation for the government to perpetuate those favors forever?
Haha Copper how did you get Horace’s login info?
DON’T let them eat cake.
- RFK Jr -
@jon-nyc said in Taking On The Mouse:
@Horace said in Taking On The Mouse:
So, a conservative big business was given political favors by the conservative political establishment long ago, and now tribal leftists are positing some moral obligation for the government to perpetuate those favors forever?
Haha Copper how did you get Horace’s login info?
Lol! Biting wit.
-
Heard on the radio this evening, DeSantis may not be through with Disney
- At his presser Friday, he said no individual Floridian's tax will increase because of Disney losing their tax autonomy.
- The legislator who wrote the bill that Disney tried to six, stated the next step was to not allow Disney to use out of state incorporation to not pay their fair share of taxes.
This could get interesting...
-
-
I’m curious what’s the broader principle for you.
Is punishing private entities who opposed a bill favored by the party in power a valid act of government in your mind? So, for example, if it were Elizabeth Warren or Gavin Newsome doing it, you might grumble about the particulars but would at least recognize them as exercising a legitimate prerogative of power?
Or is this simply something you think is ok if your side does it but would be government overreach if the other side does it?
DON’T let them eat cake.
- RFK Jr -
@jon-nyc said in Taking On The Mouse:
I’m curious what’s the broader principle for you.
Is punishing private entities who opposed a bill favored by the party in power a valid act of government in your mind? So, for example, if it were Elizabeth Warren or Gavin Newsome doing it, you might grumble about the particulars but would at least recognize them as exercising a legitimate prerogative of power?
Or is this simply something you think is ok if your side does it and government overreach if the other side does it?
If Warren opposed it, it's just another day in politics. If a Disney employee opposed it, without being an official spokesman for the company, it's just another day in politics. If the CEO of Disney personally opposed it, it's just another day in politics.
I think it a very slippery slope that should be avoided, when public companies wade into the lawmaking of social issues.
-
DON’T let them eat cake.
- RFK Jr -
@jon-nyc said in Taking On The Mouse:
Mask mandates are a social issue.
If the Biden administration punished companies for taking a vocal stance against them that would be legitimate in your mind?
Good question, but mask mandates are also a workplace and productivity issue. That's a corporate issue, especially in healthcare.
Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion. -
-
Do you not understand politics or are you being intentionally obtuse because corporate America got gored for coloring outside of the lines?
Coloring outside the lines sounds like acting beyond their corporate charter...
-
@jon-nyc said in Taking On The Mouse:
Driving on public roads is a privilege. Maybe they can take licenses away from every Disney employee who publicly opposed the bill.
No, driving on public roads is not a privilege. It is a necessary condition for the commonweal.
-
@Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:
@jon-nyc said in Taking On The Mouse:
Mask mandates are a social issue.
If the Biden administration punished companies for taking a vocal stance against them that would be legitimate in your mind?
Good question, but mask mandates are also a workplace and productivity issue. That's a corporate issue, especially in healthcare.
Recruiting is a corporate issue too.
Social issues affect us in the workplace as well as the home.
