Archuleta himself, though, has a history of anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric. He previously blamed LGBTQ+ individuals for the Club Q shooting and said that queer people are “groomers” – or child sex abusers – a negative stereotype that has been used to justify hatred and discrimination.
yeah of all the things in the article, that bit was particularly unforgiveable. It's stunning that this man expects his words to hold any weight with his own party if any of them already believe that kind of garbage.
I work with a gay republican, somehow he doesn't believe they are homophobic. I tried explaining that they don't want him to be married and will take that right away (amongst other things) if given the opportunity and he just flat does not believe me.
A little while back, I met a black guy who went to a Turning Point USA convention, and he said those people were nicer than feminists. Which of course they were. They wanted to use him as the example in sentences that start with "I have a black friend who..."
Same thing here. They probably do turn down the homophobic rhetoric in his presence. This works if you don't pay attention to anything else.
Yeah that’s the thing, they’ll be really nice to your face as they take away your rights and protections. They know you’re one of the good ones. Right up until you start expecting something of them.
The left expects things of people. We expect you not to be a racist, and so racists think we can be pretty mean. We expect you to not be a misogynist, so we wind up being mean feminist killjoys…
I find gay republicans often dislike gay culture (which is fine, it’s not for every gay person) and struggle to understand that some people will gladly call you a friend while firmly but quietly opposing an aspect of you, and that other people can hate your guts while they stand up for your rights.
I work with black Republicans and just watching them get bent out of shape over Biden, while completely ignoring all the wild racist shit GOP has said and done.
Weird that the party that has been explicitly anti-LGBT for several decades would suddenly turn out to be anti-LGBT. I’m as shocked about this as I am that Ant Man and The Wasp had both Ant Man and The Wasp in it.
Incredibly daft person is surprised to find out their fellow incredibly daft in-group has spewed hateful nonsense 24 hours a day for the last two decades is daft
By the way, this is the main argument against censorship, and the reason this society did not embrace it for hundreds of years, until the internet came along actually. All it does is make people find code words for the shitty things they say, (eg god hates flags, with the rainbow flag being held) that make it less obvious that they're being hateful. You can miss it sometimes, not in this case but in many others.
Whereas, without censorship and all the retardation that comes along with it, you're in the preferable situation of knowing immediately when someone is being an asshole, rather than having to wonder and doubt yourself more, that self-doubt being the motivation for the censorship in the first place.
this is the main argument against censorship, and the reason this society did not embrace it for hundreds of years, until the internet came along actually.
Did you mean censorship didn't existed before the internet?
you want me to bend to your censorship in a post about censorship? sure thing bruv
As a retard, legitimately having worn the label for the first two decades of my life on account of a bit o' the 'tism, I assure you it's you who's being offensive, not me. That is my word and I have a right to it, given to me by all of you.
stop borrowing things from other people's lives so you can have something to pretend you're righteous about. THAT is the common denominator of everything deemed "offensive" nowadays - it's not yours, no one with the problem is making this complaint, NOBODY WITH THE PROBLEM SEES THIS AS A PROBLEM, and you're just all virtue signalling your ridiculous asses off. That is what's censored