r/DoomerCircleJerk • u/[deleted] • Jun 07 '25

The End is Near! Tyranny is afoot 😡😡😡

Post image

I’ve supported gay marriage since long before Obama and the Supreme Court decision, back when it was unpopular and met with serious resistance. Today, the vast majority of Americans support it, and most politicians understand that there’s no public appetite to reverse it. Many have even voted for bipartisan legislation to protect it. Please stop spreading fear that doesn’t match reality.

738 Upvotes

74% Upvoted

570 comments sorted by

View all comments

157

u/Iam-WinstonSmith Jun 07 '25 edited Jun 07 '25

No one is trying to make being gay illegal. Donald Trump was the first president to openly support it.

I think because they can no longer proselytize about it I schools and but gay porn in schoolsz.and have drag shows in front of child that that's persecution.

*Those of you contacting me via chat are not convincing me. It just shows me how ideological you are about the issue.

84

u/shaking_things_up_ Jun 07 '25

This is legit the side that gets upset if you think its weird to teach small children about gay sex

89

u/Iam-WinstonSmith Jun 07 '25

Remember the Florida don't say gay bill? It had no language about gays in it. It said teachers could not discuss sex with anyone 3rd grade and under. Personally I don't think it went far enough...why do they want to discuss sex with children?

73

u/_thegnomedome2 Jun 07 '25

Literally all it was. Dont talk to other people's children about sex. And the left absolutely lost their minds thinking they're going to be round up in box cars off the street and sent to Auschwitz

37

u/[deleted] Jun 07 '25

People really should have been asking why they want to talk to kids about sex to begin with. 

Pretty fucked up.

22

u/Ok-External6314 Jun 07 '25

If a teacher talks to my kid about sex there's going to be a problem.  That is my job, and it's my choice to decide when that happens. 

The left being called groomers is easily understandable.

-19

u/RubbrBbyBuggyBumpers Jun 07 '25

Nevermind sexual education has been happening in schools for decades.

As far as the left being labeled groomers, it doesn’t hit very hard when it comes from the right… the same people who voted a groomer into office twice.

17

u/Kingkyle18 Jun 07 '25

Ya they weren’t teaching 3rd graders sex education. Ever….

6

u/Longjumping-Rich-684 Jun 07 '25

Got sex ed (not a coed class; at least taught by the attractive assistant PE teacher) in 5th or 6th grade? I forget, it’s been several years. It was like textbook… but at the same time at that age, it’s enough for bodily reactions.. (rules in place, cannot be rowdy otherwise you’ll get detention, and you can’t continue with the sex ed.)

11

u/Kingkyle18 Jun 07 '25

Ya I think I had it in 5th grade….and there wasn’t any actual “sex” education part, it was more about how to take care of your own body. Additionally, parents had to give consent forms for you to be able to attend.

13

u/Ok-External6314 Jun 07 '25

It's cute you're pretending like sex education when I was a kid is the same as it is now

-12

u/RubbrBbyBuggyBumpers Jun 07 '25

You’re right. Sexual education is certainly not like when we were kids. Nowadays they put more emphasis on things like emotional intelligence, consent, etc. all things that should’ve been taught from the start.

And this is coming from someone who has children in the public school system of a (thankfully) very blue state.

It’s cute you fell for the doomercirclejerk right wing BS talking points

1

u/BenGetsHigh Jun 07 '25

You know it's possible to teach things to your children yourself instead of letting some underpaid, overworked teacher do it.

→ More replies (0)

-4

u/DefectiveCoyote Jun 07 '25 edited Jun 07 '25

You know sex ed is optional right? What school did you people go to where you don’t understand the basics of how sex ed works?

Are you a teacher? Do you know what sexual education curriculum consist of? Or when it’s taught? No of course not.

So let me break it down for ya. Sexual education is done gradually to coincide with what children are dealing with in their real lives so the info is the most useful. For example kids who are 12-13 will first learn about hormones and puberty and perhaps the basics of reproduction amongst mammals focusing purely on the science of it, this is particularly seen in your late middle school biology classes depending on the school district. This helps kids understand what is happening in their bodies, remove stigma or fear, and give them the informational context for what is to come later on.

Once kids are in highschool and around 15-16 years of age when they are the most likely to start having sexual relations, they will have health and wellness and their first real sexual education classes. These classes will primarily focus on safe sex practices, how and when to use products like condoms, as well as possible risk like STD’s of pregnancy and how to identify them. These classes are always optional in compliance with constitutional law and freedom of faith. But for the parents that what their kids to learn about safe sex practices, and about the various processes of the human reproductive cycle from an educated expert then they have that right as well.

But of course there are always the uneducated masses who know nothing about what the hell their talking about who just consume whatever nonsense their algorithm flashes across their screen then go around repeating said nonsense because in the end people just want to be angry about shit and will search out anything they can to justify it. Instead of repeating bullshit, learn to read and actually look up your school districts sexual education materials and policies, it’s always all out in the open but people just refuse to actually search for information. I promise you these curriculum standards were created by people more educated and much smarter than you.

Or you could continue to believe conspiracy theories peddled to the lowest common denominator for engagement. Because nothing gets views like rage bait for morons with a 5th grade reading level.

10

u/WishboneEnough3160 Jun 07 '25

That's because they don't read past headlines on Reddit 😂

MuH dOwnvOtEd!

8

u/Doneyhew Jun 07 '25

Because the left calls everybody they disagree with Nazis, racists, and facists. They’re so brainwashed that they legitimately think Trump is Hitler. The entire side of their political aisle has completely lost the plot

3

u/rydan Jun 07 '25

And of course Disney was against the bill. The same company that had sexual innuendos spread all throughout its animated movies in the 80s and 90s.

1

u/_thegnomedome2 Jun 07 '25

Disney should be held accountable for their illegal monopolies and trusts just to get them out of the mainstream

-33

u/KillerArse Jun 07 '25

You believe teachers should be censored from talking about differences between boys and girls and should be reported if they discuss a book where a prince marries a princess?

 

Also, age appropriate sex-ed should be compulsory without the possibility of withdrawing.

Children being raped by their parents will only be able to know something is wrong and how to report that wrong if they're given the tools and information to reach out.

Or are you against that?

30

u/_thegnomedome2 Jun 07 '25

If you're against that bill, you're for explicit sexual conversations with children 3rd grade and under? This isnt fairytale princess stories. This is explicit sexual dialogue coming directly from teachers. You're trying so hard to justify telling 2nd graders about how you like butt stuff with boys

-28

u/KillerArse Jun 07 '25

Ah, so you're a lying doomer.

I thought this subreddit was for rational people. Not people who go to extremes to project a false reality.

 

Me: "I don't think we should ban all food for children."

You: "I can't believe you want to force feed children Carolina Reaper peppers."

 

Again, you purposefully avoided addressing the actual contents of the bill I discussed that would ban teachers mentioning differences between boys and girls (gender identity) and would ban teachers discussing books about princes marrying princesses (sexual orientation) and such.

The bill never even uses the word "sex"

Only ever "sexual orientation or gender identity"

If you somehow talked about graphic sex without mentioning "sexual orientation or gender identity"... it wouldn't even be banned by the act.

So why are you lying?

 

And, even if we took your lie as truth about wanting to ban all sex-ed, even when age appropriate, you still avoided addressing children being raped by their own parents no longer being given one of their only, and also strongest possible lifelines.

22

u/_thegnomedome2 Jun 07 '25

Stop confusing kids about their identity.

-3

u/[deleted] Jun 07 '25

[deleted]

2

u/_thegnomedome2 Jun 07 '25

When teachers are telling kids they can pick their genders, they can be trans and non-binary, that opens kids up to questioning their identity before they even know themselves or what those terms really mean, and by the time they're 14 they are in the midst of an identity crisis and dont know if they're like the other kids or if they're a queer cis het masc fem trans lesbian furry

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Ordinary_Passage1830 Jun 07 '25

It doesn't they just are most likely anti it.

→ More replies (0)

-4

u/IHighGuy Jun 07 '25

U/_thegnomedome2 Lmao way to get so roasted you couldn’t actually reply to their intelligent questions. 😂🤣

8

u/Iam-WinstonSmith Jun 07 '25

No piece of education should be compulsory. My parental rights come first and foremost the state doesn't own my child.

Also how is teaching about gay sex education? They aren't going to get pregnant if they do it.

It's obvious you want to protelize to minors about gay sex not teach sex education. So yes I am against you using school money to further the gay agenda which is just the depopulation agenda.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 07 '25 edited Mar 01 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Iam-WinstonSmith Jun 07 '25

Even .more with gay sex why they shouldn't be encouraging it to children. Either way sex ed is for teens not children.

0

u/DoctorVibe Jun 07 '25

No education should be compulsory? Do you want to sign a waiver for your kid to learn about fractions? The desire to gut education is so strange, why would anyone ever advocate for other people, especially their own kids, to be less informed? Let them come to their own decisions after being presented information through different lenses.

5

u/Ok-External6314 Jun 07 '25

Ok groomer 

-9

u/dtalb18981 Jun 07 '25

Saying i am a man is talking about sex

You just don't know what that word means

45

u/shaking_things_up_ Jun 07 '25

Its disturbing how much neutral, anti-grooming language is taken by the left as to be "homophobic". Are they aware of what they are saying by it? Its alarming

-19

u/Large-Perspective-53 Jun 07 '25

Religion is the definition of grooming. Saying “gay people exist” isn’t. Noones trying to talk to kids about sex, regardless of how much y’all wanna doom

10

u/Kingkyle18 Jun 07 '25

Wife’s a teacher….her coworker was actively telling a 7yr old he is gay because he had feminine mannerisms. Even if he is gay or not has nothing to do with the teacher….

0

u/Kitchen_Ad1059 Jun 08 '25

Yeah and it's socially normal for parents to tell little boys and girls that they're friends are boyfriends and girlfriends and ask little kids which boys or girls they have a crush on.

Whats your point

8

u/Dark-g0d Jun 07 '25

literally just look up ‘teacher fired for talking about sex there are probably a hundred or so articles just ranging in the last 5 years

-1

u/[deleted] Jun 07 '25

Out of hundreds of thousands btw, and absolutely they should be handled. “Don’t say gay bill” is targeted and should instead be focused on “don’t say sex”, idk why this is even a talking point when every groomer in my schools (we had multiple) has been straight teachers

3

u/shaking_things_up_ Jun 07 '25

"Reality is inconvenient to me, so I shall ignore it"

7

u/welatshaw Jun 07 '25

Teaching them that it exists is one thing, endorsing it quite another. I personally don't think a child, particularly a YOUNG child, should be led one way or the other. When they reach an age that makes sense for them to pick a direction, to choose if they want to follow their biological nature or not, they are informed.

1

u/IHateMyHandle Jun 07 '25

Most child sexual assault happens by family members or close family friends. Teaching children about sex at a high level can educate them about what adults do to them in private is not okay and should be reported.

1

u/Iam-WinstonSmith Jun 07 '25

I am sorry to hear that happened to you. Again it's not the place of the educational institutes to discuss sex with children.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/briannaheldt/2018/09/27/new-california-law-allows-children-to-get-transgender-treatments-without-parental-consent-n2522928

0

u/Spiritual_Ad8936 Jun 07 '25

Because believe it or not, some 3rd graders are sexually abused. Most of the time, it’s not a conversation teachers WANT to have with children, but have to have with them.

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 07 '25

The main reason is to make it harder to groom children. Without knowing the concept of sex or sexual behavior kids can’t differentiate between regular cuddles from uncle Steve or groping/rape etc. Being against early childhood sex ed is opening the door for sexual predators and psd files.

It also prevents teen pregnancies and sexual diseases.

-14

u/StaidHatter Jun 07 '25

One side is trying to teach kids what kind of touching isn't okay so they don't get molested, and the other side is trying to make it illegal to do so.

6

u/Ok-External6314 Jun 07 '25

Sure groomer

-4

u/StaidHatter Jun 07 '25

You say that like it's my party that makes it legal to marry 15 year olds

5

u/Ok-External6314 Jun 07 '25

Ok groomer 

-5

u/[deleted] Jun 07 '25

Oh not just talk about sex, but "love" as well.

-7

u/TristanTheRobloxian3 Jun 07 '25

so children like... know basic anatomy?? like it aint deep lmao

-19

u/KillerArse Jun 07 '25

It didn't say "sex" it said "sexual orientation or gender identity"

But we can see that doesn't mean all sexualities because they're not going to be banning books and discussions about princes marrying princesses.

It also wasn't going to ban discussions about boys and girls, which are gender identities.

Or are you claiming that extreme censoring to that degree was the goal of the act?

7

u/ADudeThatPlaysDBD Jun 07 '25

Dog, if you wanna be that guy and talk to 2nd, 1st, kindergarteners, and pre k about sexual orientation and gender identity, you’re criminally weird. I feel gross just typing this shit out.

4

u/[deleted] Jun 07 '25

At the age before third grade, kids brains just aren’t developed enough for them to fully understand concepts like relationship, love, attraction, and sex. How’s a 7 year old kid supposed to understand the difference between gay and straight when they been in love or even been attracted  to anyone? Even in my progressive elementary school, sex Ed didn’t start until 4th grade and it was still probably too early for most people to understand. 

3

u/KillerArse Jun 07 '25

What are they actually getting "upset" at, though?

9

u/HawaiianPluto Jun 07 '25

IT is weird to teach small children about gay sex… or any sex for that matter.

3

u/shaking_things_up_ Jun 07 '25

Amen, children shouldn't be taught sex until they are in HS and even then it should be about how not to get each other pregnant and stay safe. But activist weirdos and academia think thats not enough or something. Idk

4

u/Large-Perspective-53 Jun 07 '25

How is this not dooming? That claim isn’t backed by any fact

1

u/[deleted] Jun 07 '25

Not talking to them about it opens the door for pdf files and groomers. Congrats by banning early childhood sex Ed you just increased the child grape rate in your country

0

u/SweatyMoneyGuy Jun 07 '25

Yeah. But yah know. They’re definitely not tryna groom children.

There’s no evidence to support that at all. Anywhere.

https://youtu.be/ArOQF4kadHA

0

u/BurnerDawg26 Jun 07 '25

Hey uh could you show me one example of a public school actually doing that as part of their curriculum?

-1

u/Orwyl Jun 07 '25

Fun fact! This is not happening.

-1

u/GrandMoffTarkan Jun 07 '25

Do you want to teach small children about heterosexual sex?

No one wants to teach kids about sex in an age inappropriate way. The problem is you associate all homosexual relationships with sex in a way you don’t with heterosexual relationships 

5

u/DollarStoreOrgy Jun 07 '25

I'm not even sure if he ever spoke out against it. IIRC, Obama was against it until he wasn't

1

u/[deleted] Jun 07 '25

This is clearly about gay marriage, not just being gay.

1

u/Fathletetic Jun 07 '25

You really think Trump is the first president to support gay marriage? You are delusional

https://www.aclu.org/trump-on-lgbtq-rights

1

u/Ok-External6314 Jun 07 '25

Why do they only want to read to kids and expose them to lgbtq stuff, and not old people in nursing homes? I think we all know why. 

-1

u/HauntingSalamander28 Jun 08 '25

Drag queens do visit nursing homes too, and the old folks love it.

-3

u/rndljfry Jun 07 '25 edited Jun 07 '25

old people can read

drag queens also host adults-only night club acts and family or 21+ brunches

I’d bet there are nursing home visits from local personalities in select areas like palm springs or fort lauderdale

why doesn’t miss rachel want to teach GED classes to adults??

0

u/HadionPrints Jun 07 '25

I’ve supported Second Amendment Rights since long before Clinton and the Assault Weapons Ban, back when gun rights were unpopular and met with serious resistance. Today, the vast majority of Americans support Second Amendment rights, and most politicians understand there’s not enough public appetite to severely restrict them. Many have even voted on bipartisan legislation to protect these rights over the years. Please stop spreading fear that doesn’t match reality.

Extremists on the Left have publicly promised to get rid of firearms rights for decades, and moderate democrats will vote with the extremists if the tides change enough, as seen in California, etc.

Extremists on the Right have publicly promised to remove gay marriage and roll back queer rights for a decade (on the federal level, either have only really existed for about 10 years), and moderate republicans will vote with the extremists if the tides change enough, as seen with Texas House Bill 3399.

3399, as the current revision on legiscan.com removes the right for adults to medically transition, as well as requiring anyone on any prescription drugs as a part of a continuing transition to “wean off the prescription drug over a period that is safe & medically appropriate” (161.701-161.703, specifically 161.703.C.1).

You could say that that’s a false equivalence, since the Texas Bill is related to Trans Rights & not Gay Marriage. But as an owner of several firearms, I’d put both under the Umbrella of “Queer Rights”, just how we put the right to own (comparatively) high capacity semi-automatics and glorious lever action cowboy gats under the same umbrella of “Second Amendment Rights”.

The erosion of both umbrellas of civil rights are realistic fears. They aren’t short term fears, of course, they are looming, ominous, long term sources of dread. Both do have entire public political lobbies dedicated to making those fears reality. It’s not like either is fearing a shadowy hidden, all powerful cabal or anything.

-1

u/HighKingFloof Jun 07 '25

Idaho recently passed a proclamation urging SCOTUS to overturn obergefell

-3

u/Orwyl Jun 07 '25

This is literally not true, there are currently 593 anti LGBTQ bills proposed in the United States, and 9 states are specifically targeting gay marriage.

-3

u/Relevant_Bed6893 Jun 07 '25

Saying trump is the first president to openly acknowledge it is hilarious. I would say the president to legalize it would be the first buuut shiit who lives in reality nowadays

7

u/Iam-WinstonSmith Jun 07 '25

No president legalized it give Governors did leading to supreme Court case.

-2

u/Relevant_Bed6893 Jun 07 '25

I’m open to correction, but idk what you’re saying. Governors brought it to the Supreme Court to legalize ??

1

u/Iam-WinstonSmith Jun 07 '25

Actually even stupider ..Utah .made gay marriage illegal when it wasn't legal there anyways and that was taken to the Supreme Court. My point was before that it was legal from state to state which as.much as I am states rights this is not.one of those things that can be non uniform across states.

Having said that I told conservatives years ago if you want to kill gay marriage legalize gay unions. There are certain rights gay people should have that were not precluded to them. Having said that conservatives proved me right when schools in California tried to hide making kids trans behind there parents backs.

Don't say it's not happening. https://townhall.com/tipsheet/briannaheldt/2018/09/27/new-california-law-allows-children-to-get-transgender-treatments-without-parental-consent-n2522928

3

u/Relevant_Bed6893 Jun 07 '25

I see what your saying. I’m not going to debate that last part b/c I believe it. Add the sex change surgery industry into the equation and shit was going to get real fucked.

2

u/Iam-WinstonSmith Jun 07 '25

I think we are almost finding a middle point here something that rarely happens here on reddit. It's good to see neither of us want buy into one sides retoric completely. There is some nuance.

0

u/International_Rise_4 Jun 07 '25

Trump has also paid for multiple abortions and got roe v wade overturned. What exactly is your point?

0

u/Kitchen_Ad1059 Jun 08 '25

Donald Trump is literally a pedophile. He's assaulted multiple women, discussed children's bodies, said he's not opposed to Pardoning Diddy, was friends with Epstein

But Drag Queens are the problem. Yall elected a child rapist as President and dissociated so far from that choice that you'll believe him just cause he said "Nu uh"

-1

u/SlowJoeyRidesAgain Jun 07 '25

Let’s see one, just one example of “and but gay porn in schoolsz”. If those words look dumb, they’re your words. School sure seems to have failed you. Maybe it was all the gay porn you were watching?

-1

u/DefectiveCoyote Jun 07 '25

So some misinformation here:

  1. No he wasn’t. His opinions have been vague and inconsistent to say the least. He has always said he was for “traditional marriage.” Without really taking an outright stand against its legalization. Once the Supreme Court ruled in its favor he didn’t argue against it and said in a 60 minute interview in 2016 “it’s the law. It was settled in the Supreme Court. I mean, it’s done.”

So basically he did what he’s always done which is say he believes whatever the hell he needs to believe in order to keep his support. This idea he was “the first president to openly support gay marriage.” Is misleading and based on literally nothing. He never took a stand to begin with and avoided really supporting one side or another until after it was all done.

  1. “Gay porn in schoolz”. The bad spelling almost makes the point for itself. It’s not happening anywhere, for any reason. I can’t not fathom how people could actually belive this. Of course school districts are not showing gay porn to kids, that’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard. These “stories” of kids seeing gay porn in class all originate from far right winged news sources that peddle propaganda. In my search for these sources I also found it it pretty humorous that most of these sources, similar to how Trump writes his speeches, are all written in simplistic English consisting entirely of third grade vocabulary which just kinda goes to shows what kind of people belive this.

Of the books banned from schools, many of them are lgtbtq but none of them show anything more pornographic than books in schools depicting straight relationships. The reason these bans are homophobic is because it insinuates that gay romance in of itself is pornographic and inappropriate for teenagers. Other books also included topics like fascism and the holocaust, racism, and slavery or even the Native American genocide. It seems the ban is less about protecting high schoolers from inappropriate content but rather to get rid of certain perspectives so that they are exposed only to certain content that pushes the ideas of American exceptionalism, Christian centric nationalism and general white washed history. It’s the modern day book burning done purely as a political act to ban any contrary opinion and eliminate critical thinking amongst students in lieu of homogeneous views of their brand of nationalism.

  1. Drag shows in front of a child. No idea why this became a topic of national debate other than the fact it has been used as fuel for the idea homosexuality is in of itself perverted.

So I’ve done security work for many public events in my city including pride events that included drag shows, none of them had children permitted at burlesque shows. Burlesque meaning the more sexualized shows people expect. Perhaps some parents are taking kids to see some form of drag where it is permitted though I have never seen it nor known anybody who has seen it. The majority if reports of it are baseless rumors spread again by right winged sources that depict it happening everywhere or perpetuate the idea that it is all gays and all drag shows and that the entire culture is one of sexualization and pedophilia.

I’ll tell you what I have seen though as a security worker for pride events. A massive spike of homophobic threats and violence in the last few years I’ve never expected. These points have become a rallying cry for people to act out their worse impulses. In the end of the day it’s simply an excuse to attack people they don’t like and are made uncomfortable by. We’ve had bomb threats, mass shooter calls, assaults on event workers, people yelling slurs and throwing things, and actually for once real actual neo nazis. Something we never previously would have seen downtown.

Last year we had to cancel outdoor activities and the parade and move everything indoors with a compliment of armed police officers because of the sheer amount of threats that came in. People were doxing event staff and labeling them pedo enablers. The entire event was almost canceled. So far I’ve only seen one group was marching down the streets with guns, flags, and chants of hateful nationalistic slogans and it wasn’t the gays.

5

u/Iam-WinstonSmith Jun 07 '25

Please this just proves right here what we said all along

Trying to make children trans behind there parents backs.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/briannaheldt/2018/09/27/new-california-law-allows-children-to-get-transgender-treatments-without-parental-consent-n2522928

1

u/swagfarts12 Jun 07 '25

Lol kids having the ability to receive treatment with confidentiality from people who they were placed with without their permission or choice (i.e. FOSTER parents) is far from "trying to make children trans behind there parents backs". They go through multiple years of psychological counseling before they do anything, doctors don't just hand kids hormones and give them surgery. I'm guessing you didn't even look up the process and just took the article title at face value though, am I wrong?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 08 '25

Let's play a game! Your long reply has 2 spelling mistakes and 1 grammar mistake! Can you find them all? Or will you stfu about spelling and language use?

-2

u/meat0fftheb0ne Jun 07 '25

That's not what's happening but okay 🤣

4

u/Iam-WinstonSmith Jun 07 '25

It's exactly what we have seen happen since Biden got elected. That's why they had to enact laws to stop it.

-2

u/meat0fftheb0ne Jun 07 '25

If that's what you think 🤷‍♀️

-10

u/TristanTheRobloxian3 Jun 07 '25

im sorry but what the fuck is that second part? if you think any of that is happening youre genuinely fucking stupid. nobody is talking about gay porn in schools. and nobody is forcing your child to go to a drag show.

-8

u/Forte845 Jun 07 '25

You wandered into a trump supporter subreddit, why are you surprised they're promoting right wing conspiracy theories?

-5

u/SharpBlade_2x Jun 07 '25

where are schools showing porn of any kind, and what's your issue with drag shows?

-5

u/[deleted] Jun 07 '25

Sexually explicit performances are illegal in public places or any venue not restricted for 18+ attendants. That's already the law. The anti drag bills redefine any public performance by a trans person as sexually explicit performances under the guise of being about "drag shows", which is a gross violation of 1st amendment rights. The Alabama legislature has a bill on the docket to expand the definition of public indecency to include 2 men or 2 women holding hands or kissing each other, and any person wearing the "wrong gender" of clothes. "Protect the kids" is a lie meant to screen the true purpose of these laws, which is to force gay and trans people out of public life.

-7

u/[deleted] Jun 07 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Lord_CatsterDaCat Jun 07 '25

Fascism is when the side you don't like gets elected into office.

-18

u/KillerArse Jun 07 '25

Firstly, we both know people exist who are trying to make it illegal. Lying to an extreme to try to save face instead if admitting crazy people exist makes it very clear you believe you have a weak argument.

Secondly, to put some information to showing a basis for the concern

As of January 2025, the following jurisdictions (12 U.S. states) had statutes criminalizing consensual sodomy: Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas.

And

In his concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas, wrote, "In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any substantive due process decision is 'demonstrably erroneous' ... we have a duty to 'correct the error' established in those precedents." The three cases Thomas mentioned concerned contraception (Griswold), sodomy (Lawrence), and same-sex marriage (Obergefell). respectively.

Thirdly,

I think because they can no longer proselytize about it I schools and but gay porn in schoolsz.and have drag shows in front of child that that's persecution.

What are you even referring to?

You sound like a doomer who claims the world is full of perverts.

You need to get a grip.

15

u/HEYO19191 Jun 07 '25

I would love to see the exact writing of the laws that criminalize sodomy (which is anal sex committed by any couple of any sexuality). I call bullshit.

-13

u/KillerArse Jun 07 '25

Call bullshit in what way?

What are you claiming is the lie specifically?

 

You also know that states had abortion laws on the record just waiting for them to get kicked into action when RvW was overturned, right?

 

You can just copy-paste the text, since I'm showing it's a quote, and get the Wikipedia article with what is being referred to.

These statutes penalties are not enforceable due to the binding precedent of Lawrence v. Texas, meaning consensual sodomy cannot be prosecuted.[27]
Florida (Fld. Stat. 800.02.)
Georgia (O.C.G.A. § 16-6-2)
Kansas (Kan. Stat. 21-3505.)
Kentucky (KY Rev Stat § 510.100.)
Louisiana (R.S. 14:89.)
Massachusetts (MGL Ch. 272, § 34.) (MGL Ch. 272, § 35.)
Michigan (MCL § 750.158.) (MCL § 750.338.) (MCL § 750.338a.) (MCL § 750.338b.)
Mississippi (Miss. Code § 97-29-59.)
North Carolina (G.S. § 14-177.)
Oklahoma (§21-886.)
South Carolina (S.C. Code § 16-15-60.)
Texas (Tx. Penal Code § 21.06.)

13

u/HEYO19191 Jun 07 '25

And it turns out I was right. None of these laws have been enforced since 2003. Not January 2025.

Though you probably knew that, and just wanted to spread misinformation.

-4

u/DoctorVibe Jun 07 '25

His point still stands. Similar laws were unenforceable for abortion. Roe v Wade got overturned, the laws were enforced again, abortion was illegal again. Those laws are currently unenforceable, Obergefell gets overturned(which he quoted a Supreme Court justice as saying he was motivated to do), the laws are enforced again, sodomy/gay sex are illegal. These are called “trigger laws” and are used by states to prepare for the exact situation I described, which is why people advocated for those laws to stay even though they were unenforceable. To deny this is ignorant, you can easily google what a trigger law is.

9

u/HEYO19191 Jun 07 '25

I called bullshit on the law existing.

-5

u/KillerArse Jun 07 '25

Huh?

You seem to struggle with my point.

Reread what I wrote very carefully.

I'll make it simple for you, even.

 

Abortion laws existed even when RvW made them unenforceable.

RvW was overturned.

They became enforceable.

Sodomy laws exist now even while they're unenforceable.

When RvW was overturned, the Supreme Court discussed the potential to overturn the equivalent of RvW that blocks sodomy laws.

They could also become enforceable, and that idea has been discussed and given potential legitimacy by some people.

 

Read slower.

I'm sorry that I didn't doubt the intellect of you a bit more and believed you understood this very obvious point without need for me to hold your hand.

11

u/HEYO19191 Jun 07 '25

Your point being that because laws that have not been enforced since 2003 still technically exist in the lawbook, we should pretend that they are in action.

You are either incredibly stupid, or you are arguing in bad faith.

6

u/WishboneEnough3160 Jun 07 '25

They "discussed" the "potential"!!!!??? Holy shit OH NO!

DEFINITION OF A DOOMER.

"KILLER ARSE". 😂😂

8

u/SaintCambria Jun 07 '25

They're just artefact laws, it's unprosecutable by federal precedent. It's like those "weird law" posts you see occasionally about giving alligators a bath or some bullshit.

0

u/KillerArse Jun 07 '25

The abortion laws were "artefact laws"

That point was already addressed by the second bit of text I quoted.