> What's wrong with your kids being LGBT? Why wouldn't you support that?
There is nothing wrong with your kids being LGBT. I believe you are misunderstanding HDThoreaun. They are talking about why they wouldn't want to live in a red state. Read their comment again with that context in mind.
It says if they were living in a red state they couldn't tell their LGTB child that they support the child. Presumably because HDThoreaun feels if they would really support said LGBT child they would move out of the red state.
It sounds like you read their hypothetical as if HDThoreaun has some problem with their kid being LGBT. I don't believe that was the intended message, quite the contrary in fact.
You are supremely out of tough if you think red states preclude you from being vocally proud of your kids. Most conservatives got over the lgbt thing decades ago. Dont give voice to the extremeists of either party as if they are the norm.
> You are supremely out of tough if you think red states preclude you from being vocally proud of your kids.
Of course you can be vocally proud of said kid. But are you able to "in good faith tell my lgbt child that I support them". Supporting someone is not just words. But perhaps living in a place where they are not handicapped by laws.
> Dont give voice to the extremeists of either party as if they are the norm.
Sure. What about the extremists who are writing the law in those red states? Can I be concerned about those?
Some red states are beginning to enact legislation that makes it more difficult for lgbt children to come to terms with who they are. I think the abortion issue is a much bigger deal, but I would definitely feel guilty about raising a lgbt child in that environment.
I think the parent comment is suggesting you can't move to such an area and say you're supporting your LGBT child, that it would be in bad faith to tell them you support them having made the choice to move there.
Or in other words, perhaps they'd like to say they support their child, but it'd be disingenuous.
I'm sympathetic to concerns that some kids (mostly girls) are doing it because it's a trendy thing to do. I'm worried things like The Genderbread Person send the wrong message by gendering clothes and activities. It tells a boy wearing pink and playing with barbies he's a girl.
If my kid's LGB, I'm glad they found what they're looking for, and if they change their mind, that works too. The trans bit worries me because it's permanent.
I think both sides have gone too far on this issue, and find California and Florida equally scary.
The Romans managed their empire with divide and conquer tactics.
Guns, abortion, trans issues are just red meat the corporations throw to the masses to keep their eye off what's really going on.
What's really going on? The pensions and retirements of the middle class are being drained away with inflationary monetary policy to pay for wars around the world and keep the corporate class on top.
We are free to fight to the death about sex and guns, but there's no effective discussion of the murderous, planet killing US war machine and the parasites who profit from it in the public discourse. What a coincidence. Divide and conquer.
Absolutely anything to distract folks from class identity. I'm 50-50 on whether or not the intergenerational conflict articles[1] are part of a psyops program.
1. The sort of "Boomer hate Millennial" or vice versa or "Zoomers have no idea what a record player is"-type clickbait.
I deeply believe that unwanted children make society worse so expect abortion banning states to become less desirable in 15-20 years.