Gonna say it would be hard for him to be worse than any but a very few major party candidates.
I hope youâre feeling better today. Migraines are hell.
Edit: and my questions were rhetorical, no answers needed. Rest and be well.
I sounds just like the same tort-reform crap Iâve heard a million times. Legislators make bad laws and itâs the lawyersâ fault? Câmon.
Drew Curtis (and the rest of the world) doesnât seem to understand why and how intentional affliction of emotional distress* is a tort, but putting that aside, Curtis seems to have no opinion on the clear subjugation and offensive disruption of Trans peopleâs lives. Itâs because he thinks the âissuesâ are secondary, and just get in the way. Well people care about âthe issuesâ because the issues are pretty fucking important. We donât need political nihilists. Not taking a stand on the issues is actually an endorsement of the status quo, which might be fine, but donât pretend that youâre rising above anything.
*Iâm just going to come out and say this: I think everyone should take a legal issues/legal system class in high school as part of regular civics. Thereâs so much more to understanding law than just being lightly familiar with the concept of precedents. It would eliminate a ton of asinine bellyaching over what are actually pretty sensible ideas in law.
1 Like
Um⌠but arenât the legislatures fully stocked with lawyers, and arenât 100% of the people who actually write our laws lawyers? OK, but #notalllawyers are legislators, I do see the categorization error.
Anyway, as I read Curtisâs piece, it seemed to me that he was saying that itâs inappropriate to potentially bankrupt entire school systems and destroy minoritiesâ access to education in order to prevent one personâs delicate sensibilities from being hurt (in this case, by exposure to the mere possibility of seeing Trans people using bathrooms in the schools). Did you get something else? Thatâs what I got, but maybe thatâs because my local schools are horrifically broken and have been since Columbine, in the name of protecting children of course. The damage that bad laws do is in my face every day; children are literally killing themselves due to the zero tolerance laws that are supposed to protect them. Somehow weâve ended up with laws that send tens of thousands of children out of the schools and into the prison system because they misbehaved. How is that appropriate in an educational institution, wtf kind of mind says anyone who is not already perfectly behaved must not be taught how to behave correctly, and instead must be harshly punished and steered into a lifetime of misbehavior? What kind of person canât see that economic realities are inevitably going to make any such policies play out in a completely racist way? But thatâs what you will get as soon as you start making schools legally and economically responsible for an ever-extending policy of student âprotectionâ.
Ah, well, I guess it doesnât matter since everything is Socialist Muslim Kenyan Obamaâs fault anyway. 
2 Likes
Yeah, I got a whole lot of silence when it came to whether or not itâs wrong to make laws targeting people for their trans-status. Zero gumption there. If thatâs what Kentuckians want, they can have my governor.
As for the idea that this law would run amok⌠I looked it up. Iâm not sure he fucking read it. The cause of action applies very narrowly. The section that gave students a cause of action has since been deleted. The man needs a legal adviser, but that might involve paying a lawyer- and that would be bad, clearly. So since the cause of action has been deleted, and since it wonât help students sue the school, Curtis will be okay with that, right? Fuck Trans people as long as it doesnât cost the taxpayer.
I guess I canât complain about you reading it in the context of your own concerns since thatâs exactly what I did. I donât know what Curtisâs position on laws targeting minorities is, and I wasnât able to figure it out from looking at his websiteâs âissuesâ page, either, so I think your complaintâs pretty valid.
1 Like
Actually my concern here is senseless centrism. When did being a centrist involve failing to point to bigotry and calling it out? To me that was the glaring obvious issue, because the law was designed, fashioned and pointed, to target a minority. Drew Curtis not only failed to highlight enormity of the issue as it stood, but totally obfuscated what the real issue was (and still is, even as the bill changed to alleviate the concern he raised.) I understand that youâre worried about other things, but all I see is fecklessness* no matter how you slice it.
Look, I get it, Curtis doesnât want to be lefty in a red-state like Kentucky, but Iâd rather see red meat than dilute purple slop.
*(Or Farklessness, yâknow- 'cause. 
)
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
