Gonna say it would be hard for him to be worse than any but a very few major party candidates.
I hope you’re 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 I’ve heard a million times. Legislators make bad laws and it’s the lawyers’ fault? C’mon.
Drew Curtis (and the rest of the world) doesn’t 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 people’s lives. It’s because he thinks the “issues” are secondary, and just get in the way. Well people care about “the issues” because the issues are pretty fucking important. We don’t need political nihilists. Not taking a stand on the issues is actually an endorsement of the status quo, which might be fine, but don’t pretend that you’re rising above anything.
*I’m 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. There’s 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.
Um… but aren’t the legislatures fully stocked with lawyers, and aren’t 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 Curtis’s piece, it seemed to me that he was saying that it’s inappropriate to potentially bankrupt entire school systems and destroy minorities’ access to education in order to prevent one person’s 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? That’s what I got, but maybe that’s 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 we’ve 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 can’t see that economic realities are inevitably going to make any such policies play out in a completely racist way? But that’s what you will get as soon as you start making schools legally and economically responsible for an ever-extending policy of student “protection”.
Ah, well, I guess it doesn’t matter since everything is Socialist Muslim Kenyan Obama’s fault anyway.
Yeah, I got a whole lot of silence when it came to whether or not it’s wrong to make laws targeting people for their trans-status. Zero gumption there. If that’s what Kentuckians want, they can have my governor.
As for the idea that this law would run amok… I looked it up. I’m 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 won’t help students sue the school, Curtis will be okay with that, right? Fuck Trans people as long as it doesn’t cost the taxpayer.
I guess I can’t complain about you reading it in the context of your own concerns since that’s exactly what I did. I don’t know what Curtis’s position on laws targeting minorities is, and I wasn’t able to figure it out from looking at his website’s “issues” page, either, so I think your complaint’s pretty valid.
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 you’re worried about other things, but all I see is fecklessness* no matter how you slice it.
Look, I get it, Curtis doesn’t want to be lefty in a red-state like Kentucky, but I’d rather see red meat than dilute purple slop.
*(Or Farklessness, y’know- 'cause. )
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.