That whole committee hearing was something to behold. That all the proponents for the bill up and left as soon as their side was done speaking tells me they believed the committee would pass the bill. That they kept pushing the lies about five- and six-year-olds being "mutilated" at the mere mention of, well, anything was...groan-inducing. Some woman who wouldn't take off her damn ballcap sat in the row ahead of me and kept waving around some Kinko's-bound "book" about SEL (which...I still have no idea what the absolute f*ck that is).
Proponents tried invoking the dreaded slippery slope, but the level-headed among the people there didn't buy it for a moment. Those who spoke out against the bill were magnificent.
If, gods forbid, Senate Republicans are able to force a floor vote, we will be there in the gallery. And I know quite a few people who would happily raise absolute hell.
(Also of note: the Louisiana "Don't Say Gay" bill is supposed to be on the agenda for the Senate education committee. Aren't I glad my part-time job is very part time.)
I've heard estimates that are more or less around 10-15% of the population being LGBTQ+ of one stripe or another. Is that completely accurate? Maybe not, but it's at least a good estimation.
As one of many resident queers in this dick joke emporium, let me use my fashion sense to disabuse you of any idea that seersucker is anything but vomit-inducing. Try a simple linen, but skip the seersucker entirely--UNLESS you're attending the Kentucky Derby in a VIP box with delicious mint juleps in hand.
These are the same people who scream and wail that their feelings are more important than any facts...and then bitch that Democrats shouldn't rely on feelings at all.
Ok, I kid you not. When I spoke at that hearing, I brought up a parallel between the supposed "invasion" of public schools by trans people to "indoctrinate and recruit" and the great furry litterbox hoax. I had to make the comparison--it was too absolutely clear.
I have successively avoided seersucker for my whole life, and as to the Kentucky derby I have a firm policy of never going any farther South than General Lee got North.
Reading between the lines, I think what he's saying is that the physicians of Louisiana aren't performing procedures the bill would ban and that he would object to if they did perform them. So long as they behave, they don't need to have a ban enacted. It's a small government position that much of the Republican Party has abandoned in favor of passing legislation that covers the latest Fox News outrage regardless of its applicability to the facts, often without reading it and very often without listening to committee or other public testimony. That makes him marginally less objectionable than his colleagues, or Republicans in rubber stamp legislatures from the Great Plains and throughout the rest of the South. But the distinction is small, notwithstanding the outsized outrage of the rest of the Republicans in Louisiana.
But with abortion, he'd most likely find that what he objects to is in fact happening in Louisiana health care facilities and would vote to shut it down.
Incestuous rape victim baby steps.
Let's Fighting Love! (sorry the English lyrics are so hard to read, but worth the effort)
https://www.youtube.com/wat...
We aim to please.
https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
Did Noah have both freshwater and saltwater aquariums? Seems sophisticated for a guy measuring in cubits.
We'll always have Mississippi 😱
Would a Bud Lite also worked😉
Was he with Cardi B's cousin's boyfriend?
That whole committee hearing was something to behold. That all the proponents for the bill up and left as soon as their side was done speaking tells me they believed the committee would pass the bill. That they kept pushing the lies about five- and six-year-olds being "mutilated" at the mere mention of, well, anything was...groan-inducing. Some woman who wouldn't take off her damn ballcap sat in the row ahead of me and kept waving around some Kinko's-bound "book" about SEL (which...I still have no idea what the absolute f*ck that is).
Proponents tried invoking the dreaded slippery slope, but the level-headed among the people there didn't buy it for a moment. Those who spoke out against the bill were magnificent.
If, gods forbid, Senate Republicans are able to force a floor vote, we will be there in the gallery. And I know quite a few people who would happily raise absolute hell.
(Also of note: the Louisiana "Don't Say Gay" bill is supposed to be on the agenda for the Senate education committee. Aren't I glad my part-time job is very part time.)
I've heard estimates that are more or less around 10-15% of the population being LGBTQ+ of one stripe or another. Is that completely accurate? Maybe not, but it's at least a good estimation.
As one of many resident queers in this dick joke emporium, let me use my fashion sense to disabuse you of any idea that seersucker is anything but vomit-inducing. Try a simple linen, but skip the seersucker entirely--UNLESS you're attending the Kentucky Derby in a VIP box with delicious mint juleps in hand.
These are the same people who scream and wail that their feelings are more important than any facts...and then bitch that Democrats shouldn't rely on feelings at all.
Ok, I kid you not. When I spoke at that hearing, I brought up a parallel between the supposed "invasion" of public schools by trans people to "indoctrinate and recruit" and the great furry litterbox hoax. I had to make the comparison--it was too absolutely clear.
I have successively avoided seersucker for my whole life, and as to the Kentucky derby I have a firm policy of never going any farther South than General Lee got North.
Please continue avoiding seersucker, and for the love of god pray for us further south.
"But on this bill, he saw the research and made the rational decision."
Would he do the same level of research on abortion or is his mind made up?
Reading between the lines, I think what he's saying is that the physicians of Louisiana aren't performing procedures the bill would ban and that he would object to if they did perform them. So long as they behave, they don't need to have a ban enacted. It's a small government position that much of the Republican Party has abandoned in favor of passing legislation that covers the latest Fox News outrage regardless of its applicability to the facts, often without reading it and very often without listening to committee or other public testimony. That makes him marginally less objectionable than his colleagues, or Republicans in rubber stamp legislatures from the Great Plains and throughout the rest of the South. But the distinction is small, notwithstanding the outsized outrage of the rest of the Republicans in Louisiana.
But with abortion, he'd most likely find that what he objects to is in fact happening in Louisiana health care facilities and would vote to shut it down.