25 hilarious reactions to Kristi Noem's hypocrisy after husband's cross-dressing fetish leaks:
Noem has also built a career on supporting policies restricting LGBTQ+ rights, and while governor of South Dakota, she signed the "Religious Freedom Restoration Act," which would have granted the state "a license to discriminate against LGBTQ people," HRC reported. She also approved a ban on transgender girls participating in women's sports, and supported gender affirming care restrictions.
Gay D.C. staffer Josh Sorbe, who attended the University of South Dakota, summed up Noem’s hypocrisy perfectly in an Instagram Reel he posted yesterday after the cross-dressing news broke.
"They will do horrible things to queer people in public," he said in the video. "They will ban their books, they will ban their healthcare, they will ban their expression, they will ban their drag shows, and then turn around and queen out and do gay sh*t behind the scenes all the time. That’s where I draw the line. Be whoever the hell you want to be because your business is your business, but the second that your business involves insecurity or hypocrisy and you decide to make that my business — no, no, no."
But here’s the wrench in Paxton’s nefarious threat: His opinion – even when issued with an official seal – doesn’t actually change the law.
“People are taking this opinion as fact, as Ken Paxton altering the law or reinterpreting the law to suit his whims,” Naveen Farrani, strategic Communications Manager for Equality Texas, told LGBTQ Nation. “He does not have the jurisdiction to do that.”
“Pioneer” is a term often thrown around loosely, but these nine out LGBTQ women in sports exemplify the term.
Each of them has done something no publicly out gay, lesbian, bi or trans athlete had done before them.
Some like Billie Jean King are household names, while others are lesser-known but no less important.
We celebrate the women who have led the way out of the closet in sports.
The Supreme Court ruled in Chiles v. Salazar that a Colorado law banning conversion therapy is unconstitutional, striking down the state’s 2019 statute and potentially impacting similar laws across the country. Religious advocates have hailed Tuesday’s decision as a victory for the First Amendment and evangelical Christians, while LGBTQ activists warn it could lead to increased harm for LGBTQ youth.
The conservative majority, joined by two progressive members of the court, sided 8–1 with Kaley Chiles on March 31 in what some critics are calling a landmark ruling for religious zealots, placing the teachings of the Bible above established medical consensus.
More likely, the conservative justices have a unique hostility toward pro-LGBTQ+ protections and concoct bespoke reasons to strike them down—rules that are not applied to laws that these justices favor. We saw this move in 2023’s 303 Creative v. Elenis, which undermined another Colorado law protecting LGBTQ+ people from discrimination in the marketplace without fully dismantling all civil rights law. And we could see it again in Chiles. This time around, Kagan and Sotomayor may have sought to mitigate the damage rather than take a loss on the chin. But Jackson’s pessimism gives us every reason to fear that her colleagues have crafted a doctrine that lets them impose their own orthodoxy in the name of free expression.
How Nazi-era fears about gender gave rise to sex testing—and why the policy is resurfacing now.
No comments:
Post a Comment