That’s my whole point. When a meaningful story’s author is revealed to have views that run counter to the messages of that story, the natural response is confusion about the dissonance.

That’s the most baffling thing about the sacred “bathroom” argument upon which TERFs plant their flag. Is there some sort of visual scanner on the ladies’ restroom that only lets in women? If so, i’ve never seen it before. I can’t imagine the serial thrill rapist* who is like, “oh man, I really wish I could go rape…

Mine was Ray Bradbury. He was one of the main writers whose work I’d idolized and one of the biggest reasons was how humane and empathetic it always felt to me. He was the guy who bridged the gap for me from YA fiction to adult writings. And when he was on Politically Incorrect, he defended Bob Packwood sexually…

As per Daniel Radcliffe statements’,

Obviously there’s zero rational thought involved. It’s purely reactionary. Pro-lifers, and as you say personal responsibility advocates, standing up for the freedom to infect others with a deadly disease is just so bizarre, perverse, contrarian and self defeating it defies comprehension.  

Why indeed would she choose a pen name so close to this guy’s name?

Weird flex coming from someone sporting a Genesis game character as their profile pic.

my friend has a mother and siblings living in Honduras and she told me they take the pandemic so seriously it’s kinda scary, like an actual pandemic movie, and it has her wondering why the Americans living in her home state of NJ don’t take it more seriously, and I don’t know what to tell her other than, many…

Or, hear me out, it’s okay to like things that influenced you as a kid and it’s okay to be bummed out when the author is revealed to be a bigot.

She can market this new book to the same communities who banned Harry Potter back in the day.

That’s a debate worth having. Asking people to help protect each other from a deadly virus, and if they refuse holding them accountable for the direct consequences, is not “jackbooted control”. My best analogy is suggesting we should have the “freedom” to fire guns into the air in a city. Who in their right mind would…

Hey man, he passed a cognitive test! /s

Should we throw people in prison for not wearing condoms? Should we tattoo HIV-positive gay people so the community knows they are a health threat? Should we involuntarily quarantine high risk people long-term, for the “good of the community”? Should we permanently close down gay bars and businesses for being…

It depends, were these HIV people in the 80s and 90s hosting rallies saying that HIV does not exist and it’s a conspiracy, while having unprotected sex with as many people as possible to spread HIV around?

My fantasy would be to have those not wearing masks have to pay the medical expenses of those they infect. This is a more achievable step in that direction. You’re “free” to not wear a mask. And we’re free to make you pay for the consequences.

upon receiving the report the judge exclaimed, “this cant be right, im a judge and im not racist. go back and find the real reason.”

News?.. No.. Evidence.. yes, another record to toss on the massive pile of data.

Speed-related fatalities would certainly drop, because 95% of those people had an underlying condition anyway.

Am I alone in thinking that the current led lights on public safety vehicles are also dangerous?  Any time I come up on a traffic stop or anything else at night I’m flat blinded.

Less test = fewer cases