Republican lawmakers want to stop businesses in a small Florida town from displaying rainbow stickers to show they are a safe place for LGBTQ+ people

•

Democrats are against free speech because people on twitter will tell me I'm being racist or sexist when I post funny jokes.

Republicans are pro free speech because they don't ever tell me I'm a bigot, they just pass legislation that prevents me from publicly stating my political viewpoints that they do not agree with.

This is unironically how conservatives think.

•

You're unironically peddling lies

•

Conservatives constantly lie and can never own up to their fuckups. Just whine about how unfair the world is to them 😭

•

It seems every accusation is an admission with you

•

Your rebuttals so far have been

Accusation of lying with no evidence in support.
A 'no, u r'.

So kindly go back to sniffing your daddy's farts

•

It isn't my job to force reality down your throat

•

Call me a liar, refuse to elaborate, flee like a coward.

Let's face it, you're too scared to engage with me on this because of what a hilarious shit show your politics has been these past twenty years. You know you're all lying idiots, you just don't like to be reminded of it 😔

•

Lmao I see you just resort to insults because you're scared of facts

theodewere

•

they're so brave, they are willing to go to war with stickers

thefartographer

•

We've lost the wars on hunger, poverty, drugs, the middle-east and un-fucking the middle-east; why not go for stickers next? Goose egg omelettes for everyone!

FlyingSquid

•

No thank you. I had one once. It tasted fishy.

•

(Blechooooorkbarf, I did not need that pong memory)

thal3s

•

After losing to Disney, it’s a safer bet!

theodewere

•

from cartoons to colorful stickers, what's next.. postage stamps i guess.. beer coasters at Buffalo Wild Wings maybe.. whatever it is, i'm sure it'll put up a good solid fight against these morons..

thal3s

•

You mean “Buffalo Woke Wings” !

theodewere

•

start using language like that and you'll see a bunch of wings up in arms, brother.. they're not chicken..

nickwitha_k

•

they're not chicken..

They're Chixen™

Laticauda

•

Wtf is even their argument for this?!

Edit: I obviously know their motivation, what I wanna know is their excuse for why this is supposedly justified.

TheLowestStone

•

"Freedom of speech unless you're saying something that I don't like."

riskable

•

To a Republican, a safe space for people who aren't straight, white Christians is akin to a safe space for pedophiles/Satan/dark-skinned foreigners (all the same thing in their terms). The people they hate with everything in their being must not be allowed to peacefully exist. This is the very foundation of Republicanism/conservativism.

InputZero

•

This comment needs to be put on top. I am not American but I did live there for a short time installing very big machinery, and I'm glad to be out of there.The Republicans who are doing this think a pride flag is equivalent to putting up a sign that says 'kill kids'. Which you can't do, free speech doesn't cover overt threats to crime or violence.

That's how far gone these people are, they have drank so much of the kool-aid they perceve every pride flag as an overt call to crime and violence. They perceve the existence of LGBTQ+ as an overt threat to crime or violence. At this point they're too far gone to bring back. They're so full of misinformation and vitriol that they only things they can feel anymore are fear, pride, and rage; it's kind of of like Ingsoc in 1984 using those exact emotions to manipulate their people. It's bad.

TheBlue22

•

They want non straight (and non white) people dead. Thats it.

Laticauda

•

Obviously, but they usually try to obfuscate that with an excuse for why they're trying to portray this as a good thing without being too overtly bigoted. I'm wondering what possible excuse they could have for this.

FourPacketsOfPeanuts

•

It's got to be something to do with "political" slogans in retail spaces. But how that doesn't straight up violate the first amendment I don't know..

•

The lawmakers that wrote the businesses a letter are essentially extorting them. “We’ll fuck you with you like we did Disney but you’re too small to fight back so your town will die under the punitive regulatory smack down we will rain down on you”

WaxedWookie

•

It's almost certainly some nonsense about harbouring paedophiles... Because exercising your freedom to wear what you want means you diddle kids... Because reasons, you see.

As much as I hate that they'd want to do this, I'm kinda glad they are - the voter base wants more than just trans panic from their leaders - people have real problems they want solved, and this nonsense negatively affects both their electability and ability to deliver on this hateful, but very silly bullshit.

bobs_monkey

•

I'm wondering what possible excuse they could have for this

Something something "won't someone think of the children?" Same excuse as always.

WaterChi

•

And non conservative

WaxedWookie

•

Don't forget subjugating those filthy poors into slavery.

jscummy

•

They're claiming it could cause boycotts and hurt the local economy. Which even if it were true, wouldn't make much sense

Laticauda

•

So much for the "free market" 🙄🙄🙄

Pratai

•

Permanently Deleted

twisted28

•

Permanently Deleted

5714

•

Not everything is about rich people. Exploitation exists, but ending it, does not end queerphobia. Yes, poor people are vulnerable to religious indoctrination, but so are ^middle and owning class people. Ending religious indoctrination also isn't enough as we saw in several Eastern European countries with extensive lock-down on religious communities, where the countries continued queerphobic discrimination.

Eat the rich, but don't expect that to end queerphobia.

CADmonkey

•

Eating the rich won't end queerphobia, but it would shut down a bunch of the money that's being used to promote and normalize such phobia.

assassinatedbyCIA

•

The party of small government people

drbluefall

•

I feel like the GOP has pretty much abandoned the "small government" pretense altogether.

•

In this case they're ending a government program I guess. These kind of headlines are not doing us any favors.

Blapoo

•

What program are they ending?

•

Follow the url on the sticker.

Blapoo

•

I did. Nowhere on there are they suggesting to remove a government program.

•

It's the first bullet point in the article?

Chocrates

•

The towns mandate thing?

•

Yeah?

Red_October

•

The party of "Small Government" at it again.

Trainguyrom

•

Party of Free Speech for individuals and businesses too!

AI_toothbrush

•

Im not american so i dont know all the freedom of speech laws work but its so fucking convenient that republicans can just decide what is and what isnt freedom of speech.

•

You can put anything in your window that isn't fraudulent, straight pornography or otherwise illegal on its own.

"Kill x" would likely be illegal as it's incitement to violence. "x need to die" would likely be legal.

TwoGems

•

FYI their law is federally illegal

n2burns

•

While this article implies they want to restrict freedom of speech of the businesses, the actual threat is against the town who is distributing the signs. I still think it's abuse of the state's oversight powers, but it's not the 1A violation the article makes it sound like.

derpgon

•

Until recently the politicians didn't really have abuse their power to do this. But since the Republicans have no spine whatsoever, they decided if it'd possible - who's stopping them.

This is exactly the thing that should be stopped by the first sane person in the chain of rolling this out - but the Rep did a really good job infiltrating most of it.

BonesOfTheMoon

•

Republicans will not stop until they have the ability to legally shoot and kill anyone they perceive to be gay.

anon_8675309

•

They won’t stop until they have the legal ability to shoot and kill anyone they disagree with. They just starting with gays to normalize it.

5714

•

What republicans fear most is losing control, especially of their narrative.

WaterChi

•

s/gay/progressive/

Silverseren

•

We should never, ever at face value take claims from Republicans or anyone that they're doing this for the children or whatever (not that we should have been in the first place regardless). Because they've been making it more clear than ever that they want to erase the entirety of the idea of LGBT+ people from existence.

Ensign_Crab

•

Because they’ve been making it more clear than ever that they want to erase the entirety of the idea of LGBT+ people from existence.

And then they whine when people point out who they're acting like.

CharlesDarwin

•

The Republicans seem to spend most of their time thinking about LGBTQ+.

Hmm.....

Kittenstix

•

No "hmm...", don't do that shit to lgbtq people, they do it because they see them as less than human, full stop.

It's not them angry at others getting to be themselves while they have to suppress their true nature, it's just heirarchy.

DragonAce

•

"The assholes doth protest too much, methinks"

Rhodin

•

Come on Desantis, no one’s voting for you. Stop being such a tryhard.

jonne

•

Slightly more than half of Florida voted for him to be governor, and it was clear he was a piece of shit then.

LifeInMultipleChoice

•

4.6 million out of 21 almost 22 million.

~21% of the state of Florida.

More than half the state didn't even vote. (Not saying that's better)

cygnus

•

That doesn't mean the 10 million nonvoters are kind, welcoming people.

queermunist

•

That doesn't mean they're monsters either.

Don't go around making more enemies. We have enough of them.

chaogomu

•

Slightly more than half of the people who Florida allows to vote you mean.

With gerrymandering coupled with voter suppression, it's easy to keep power in a state. You pack all the blue voters into as tiny of an area as possible, then make sure they get fewer voting machines and longer lines. This gets you fewer blue voters overall. Tie in a few other tactics, and you have yourself a solid republican majority in what should be a swing state.

Got to purge those voter rolls every chance you get, but only in the cities. You wouldn't want to accidentally purge a likely republican voter.

Ensign_Crab

•

With gerrymandering coupled with voter suppression, it’s easy to keep power in a state.

Relatively. There's a reason they keep putting new suppression measures in place. They're serious about holding on to power because they know that if the lose just once, Democrats will be in a position to undo all the suppression they put in place.

Of course, whether Democrats will actually undo suppression once they have an opportunity depends on if they would be willing to return rights to the people even if it means slightly transgressing upon whatever Republicans call decorum.

•

Dems need to suck it up and fix the system even if it means sometimes losing power, if it is only temporary. Ranked choice voting, nonpartisan redistricting, in the state constitution.

Ensign_Crab

•

Dems need to suck it up and fix the system even if it means sometimes losing power

Even if it sometimes means wielding power.

•

Lol yup.

finkrat

•

Spoiled brat and his cadre need to show how angry they are at that "woke culture"

Buncha snowflakes

meldroc

•

How does this not violate the First Amendment?

Nightwingdragon

•

The same way that all of these anti-gay, anti-minority bills work:

They absolutely violate the Constitution. The Republicans just don't care.

Roundcat

•

I mean the SCOTUS basically signaled last year that they don't give a fuck either, or at the very least are willing to twist any interpretation of it to fit whatever the Republican's agenda is. Hell, Clarence basically said after the Roe repeal that gay marriage and reinstatement of sodomy laws was next.

The point of this push is to get a case in front of the supreme that more or less outlaws any expression of queerness.

tastysnacks

•

So you're saying them carrying around their little pocket constitution and showing it everybody was performative?

HowManyNimons

•

Pikachu can barely believe its ears! I've never seen it looking so shocked.

Godric

•

I don't understand why this is a headline, constitutionally, lawmakers can't do jack fuckin shit to forbid that.

doubletwist

•

There's a lot of things they can't do, until they do them anyway, which then either results in the other side wasting a bunch of time money fighting to get it overturned (during which the narrative is controlled by the assholes), or it doesn't actually get overturned, and they get something they want, but shouldn't have.

Lmaydev

•

Luckily I know a place where the constitution doesn't mean jack cut to the supreme court

•

As a 🦅Conservative®🦅, I think people should be left alone to do what they want.

That is why I support this policy, Because Ron M. Desantis should be allowed to do what he wants.

creamed_eels

•

But Ron Desantis isn’t a person. He’s a greasy nylon stocking stuffed full of purulent, rancid ground pork that somehow learnt to stand upright and wear high heels.

I_Fart_Glitter

•

Strangely accurate.

Mcballs1234

•

MargotRobbie

•

Hey, are you one of those "novelty accounts" I've heard so much about?

•

Novelty is the opposite of what is advocated for by 🦅Conservatives®🦅.

postmateDumbass

•

Also, Conservatives notoriously not particularly fond of conserving ~~conseeving~~ natural resources or 'The Commons'.

•

Personally? I'm seething at the thought of conseeving.

postmateDumbass

•

Thanks. People might have thought i was trying to pollenate the rocks.

WaterChi

•

Please tell me the misspelling in your username is intentional

•

MrTulip

•

Smells like a parody account, but Poe's law, etc.

Vaginal_blood_fart

•

It's not. It's more shit education. Thanks yank Tories

FlyingSquid

•

I don't know, is he Trump enough?

jennwiththesea

•

But I thought god owned the rainbow™️? Now the good Christians are disavowing it??