politics

Oh, I think they can precisely articulate exactly what they're angry about if you let them, but they know if they do that in public it'll show just how crazy, hateful, ignorant, and bigoted they are. What they're struggling with is how to articulate what they're angry about in a way that doesn't immediately expose them as a modern-day KKK for LGBT+ folk.

As best I've been able to suss out, living as I do in a very red state, "grooming" has simply been expanded out to encompass any activity that makes a kid feel like they don't have to be a cis-het Christian to be a good person.

Neither party will go after churches, because theyre consistantvoters who vote how their religious leader tells them to vote.

me too

That's because the right wing has moved far beyond reality, evidence, logic, reason, semantics—only ever casually familiar to them to begin with.

They are now only about feelings.

They are trained, ala Pavlov, to react to the sounds of certain words, not their meaning: woke, liberal, groomer, trans ideology, gay agenda, immigrant, and the like. The right wing pundits could just have easily used different bells and sound clips to evoke the same reactions.

Well, they certainly can define “woke”, but they probably know they can’t fully say the quiet part out loud.

To them, the existence of gay and trans people is “woke”. Teaching about inequality or systemic racism is “woke”. Heck, I’m sure women’s rights and related healthcare is also “woke” to them.

Which is why one of the best weapons against fascism is publicly mocking them

That’s a risky tactic because while none have substance some flounder and others don’t. For some people confidence can mask lack of substance, especially from someone able to target their biases. Folks like Jordan Peterson pre brain damage were dangerous to platform because idiots couldn’t tell. The difference is these were fascist organizers not fascist propagandists

Honestly I think it's more about generating more Republican voters however "they" can. I would not in the slightest bit be surprised to find moms for liberty was some form of a "Koch funded" (not specifically that family though) enterprise that only has the aim of spreading propaganda that will trick more people into voting Republican to "save the children."

The people actually joining and pushing this will more than likely be people that really think they're doing the right thing, but I think the inception of this program was purely for political power.

Who would have thought calm, outlandishly dressed people would be more effective than calmly dressed, outlandishly behaved people?

They're focusing on literary issues by forcing books out of the library?

"Children have no rights! they are just my property and should do as I say, when I say it!" - These kinds of parents, usually.

Well first they'd have to be convinced that children are allowed to have rights.

I've said this before, but my abusive mother once told me that I wasn't a human and had no rights beyond what she allowed me until I became an adult and moved out of her house. They truly don't consider their children people. They also consider themselves wonderful parents who are victims when those children grow up and cut all contact with them.

Before birth, obviously.

Yep. Parent’s rights means having the right to a abuse or neglect their own children and the right to tell everyone what is appropriate for all children.

How did this legitimize them? They look like idiots to everyone who watched it. This was an opportunity for the public at large to get a view into what these people are like—it didn’t go well for them.