FaeDrifter @ FaeDrifter @midwest.social

Posts

0

Comments

499

Joined

2 yr. ago

There are real humans who have effectively been turned into "anti-woke" internet spammers who never watched Star Trek and are suddenly pretending to be very invested.

Just like all those man who thought women's sports was a joke, but are suddenly incredibly personally invested in women's sports whenever a trans women is involved.

Someone else compared being gay to being racist, and now you're comparing being gay to sexual assault.

These are disingenuous comparisons at best, dangerously homophobic at worst.

What you described was not the actual outcome of the ruling.

The wedding website designer did not give them a website with no mention of being gay, that they could fill in themselves. The website designer was allowed to fully refuse them any kind of website at all. Just like refusing a blank wedding cake because the couple is gay.

The justification of the decision was not in good faith. It stepped away over the bounds of protecting against compelled speech. And they deserve to feel the consequences.

I don't think it makes sense to compare being gay to being racist.

The use of "woke" and "political" in this hypercontextualist style is so vague as to border on non-expression.

The use of "woke" is vague?

Unfathomable, no way anyone would use the term "woke" in a vague way, especially not a presidental candidate.

Edit: Or here -- https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/star-trek-starship-enterprise-democrat-woke-david-marcus