"Elected leaders expect the option of a more or less constructive discussion as a community, Bitz said. But their well-meaning strategy doesn’t work with extremist groups."

Well-meaning? It certainly sounds like these particular elected officials are not well-meaning or interested in constructive discussion.

And @1 raindrop - it sounds like those who support LBGT people in Arlington are already getting harassment and death threats. Perhaps they really CAN'T be too careful.

As Christianity dies it’s long-awaited death, the churches get more desperate to fill seats, so they create controversies that attract stupid people (i.e. conservatives)

My SIL, who is having an affair (and also does on-line sex shows for money where she masturbates while using a variety of sex toys), goes to a church down in Puyallup, where they are fed a steady diet of fear. The pastor has supposedly been threatened by “ANTIFA”, they encourage the congregation to be armed at all times, and they have several cops who regularly address the congregation on legislation, including that one about trans youth, which they equate to the state taking away teens and forcing them to transition.

They all imagine themselves as oppressed victims (probably because normal people treat them like the morons they are when they find out about that church), and their supposed victim status allows them to feel sorry for themselves and engage in self-righteous anger. That’s the beauty of conservatism: it allows stupid people to live a life free of responsibility or self-reflection. Everything is always somebody else’s fault. In this particular instance, it’s “the gays”

These people contribute nothing to society. It’s both surprising and unfortunate that they didn’t have a Covid outbreak.

@3 well said!
and as for @4
The people picking the crops and emptying the bedpans are much more likely underpaid (and often immigrants) who have to work 70 hours a week just to survive. They have no time or energy to waste on these inflammatory fear- mongering churches.

As usual, You don’t know what you are talking about, Raindrop dear. The people at that church are not immigrants. They’re just a bunch of dumb old white people who skated through life and never worked an honest day in their lives.

“ We're seeing drag queens simulate sex acts in front of audiences with children these days”

I don’t know who “we” is, Raindrop. Is that something you people do at your Log Cabin Republican meetings?

Still trying to work through how children potentially viewing abstract simulations of the animalistic acts that brought them into material existence will somehow lead to their moral ruin. Conservatives would have us believe that every child is the product of an immaculate conception, when in fact said children are typically the result of their parents doing unspeakable and frankly nasty things to one another, abetted by alcohol.

I suppose I'll be the only person who thinks both that the event should go right ahead, as it is obviously a 1st Amendment protected activity, and the open carry restriction in public is silly, as that is a 2nd Amendment protected activity.

@8 I'm sorry and I know people are going to dogpile you for this even here, and I don't even think it's a fair characterization of a drag show, but I think "I don't see what's so harmful about your children seeing simulations of sex, which is natural, and only conservative prudes think otherwise" is definitely a winning message and you should be really vocal about that one.

"... in fact said children are typically the result of their parents doing unspeakable and frankly nasty things to one another, abetted by alcohol." --@8

Jesus H. Christ
that's Disgusting.

are there
Videos?

b. how do the
Babies get
Out?

@11 No, the second amendment does not give anyone the right to carry weapons outside of the home. The state should completely ban the possession of firearms in public by those who do not have a concealed weapons permit and should treat ANY display of a firearm as brandishing a weapon, especially when Fascist scum show up to intimidate people.

@14 A core value of Pride has always been disparaging ignorant cis/het bigots like you. In fact, the one thing I would love to see at a Pride celebration would be for the LGBTQ+ community to unite and beat the crap out of any religious bigots who spread hate.

@15 Not even close to being true - the Second Amendment obviously draws no distinction between the home and public right to bear arms.

@21 The idea that the 2nd Amendment only refers to a militia is jejune enough that it's been dismissed by every court that ever seriously examined the question, even if it still pops up online a lot from commenters who never studied the subject but feel confident they just figured it out, like yourself. Think about the actual text for one second: it isn't "being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed", it's "the right of the people". In every other instance of the Constitution referring to a "right of the people", in 4th and 9th Amendments for example, it is plainly understood to mean an individual right. It would also be sort of weird and redundant if they said "the right of the militia". Although you also seem to think "regulated" meant "disciplined" in that context, at the time it would have been understood as "supplied". So think of it more like this: Civilians, well-equipped with arms, are necessary for the safety and security of a state. Tell your friends.

In the later part you're shifting goalposts on me a little by talking about regulation (in the modern sense, haha) of "what arms citizens can own" and "brandishing", which I didn't say anything about - the only part I waa addressing was your incorrect claim about the 2nd Amendment not protecting a right to carry (bear) guns outside the home. But now you've been enlightened and educated.

“Civilians, well-equipped with arms, are necessary for the safety and security of a state.”

And that’s worked out so well for us, hasn’t it?

Whatever “the founders” intended is of no interest to me. They’re dead, and they’re not coming back. And even they thought that was nonsense. Take it away, Thomas Jefferson.

“I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and Constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.”

But we are where we are, and we are stuck with this ridiculous situation until the fetishists die off.

And I’m not even anti-gun. I understand the needs of hunters and sportspeople. I even buy into parts of the mostly dumb “home defense” argument. After all, if you live out in the rural districts, where drug-related petty crime is rampant, the sheriff can be miles away. But concealed or even open carry is just stupid, and in my view a sign of mental illness.

I think it should come down to this: you have a “right to bear arms”. But when a bullet leaves a chamber there had better be a damn good reason it did that. Cowardly actions, like shooting through a door or because someone felt vaguely “threatened” are not good reasons.

Is there a way to help Arlington Pride with fees, e.g. GoFundMe or similar?

I'm tired of right-wing extremists dictating what is and is not freedom of expression. Am willing to do what I can to help put these bullies in their place.

Pardon my French, Raindrop dear, but that’s a bunch of bullshit.

No citizen or group of citizens, can protect themselves from the power of the US government. And since we keep electing horrible people (Republicans) to office, we have very little options. And guns aren’t one of them.

@27 while movies like Red Dawn speak to the fantasy of your successful gorilla war, reality would show different (look no further than Ukraine - heavy weapons, aircraft, etc. are necessary to hold off even a semi modern army like Russia / Wagner).

Your “arsenal” of .223 guns will not repel an armored column - but good luck trying.

@28 The Taliban, waving goodbye to the US military, might beg to differ on the effectiveness of small arms.

The Taliban had been fighting the Russians and then the Allied forces for generations. The average American is older, obese, and lacks the discipline required to stage any sort of rebellion. Not to mention most of the country are not anti-government nutjobs. That’s mostly just old white conservatives

Yes, I was going to mention the other time the Taliban defeated a modern army with small arms. History replete with examples, it just goes to show you how silly the "you need fighter jets" argument is. Easier if we all just accepted the individual right to self defense. Hopefully many at the Pride event will exercise their right, carry, and keep themselves safe!

@23: Comment
of the Decade!
BRAVO.

when the Babies
can tote Derringers
only Then shall all be
Safe: one-year-old Armies
of one and each one with their
very own Gun toddling their precious
ways to Peace and Civility & to the Free Market!

and if there's some
Collateral Damage
along the way well
it's a Small Price to
pay for FREEDOM!

@30 the Taliban were provided sophisticated weapons by the US (example, stinger missiles), huge amounts of funding from the Saudi’s, and extensive intelligence from both the US and the Saudi’s to win a war of attrition over a borderline incompetent USSR military invasion. After 9/11, the US easily defeated the Taliban backed government forces.

What people confuse with the recent withdrawal of US forces (and the subsequent collapse of the US backed government) is the US populace tired of our military presence in Afghanistan - this was a US political issue, not a Taliban victory over US military might.

But please try again…

This may be a difficult concept, but when you leave the people you were fighting a war with, and they outlasted you, and then they run the country, it means they won.

I think everyone understands that, nekrasova dear, but that's the the charming non-sequitur.

That should read, "but thanks for the charming non-sequitur."

Mrs. Vel-DuRay regrets the error.