Agree. You can put all of the Ford parts on a Chevy you want. It doesn't make it a Ford.

Which time and for what reason?

If the boycott was in protest of Chick-fil-A's (CfA's) association with a particular group or refusal to denounce a particular group - basically if they wanted to boycott because the store refused to join them in their hate then yes, I would call them bigots as well.

Are you trying to portray the LGBTQ community as all pedophiles? If so, then I believe the saying starts, "if the shoe fits...."

Some do tend to read things that are not there. Perhaps that is something that needs to explored with someone schooled in the topic?
It is hard to defend against pedophilia, so it is understandable that those who are guilty of, or support such a thing, would want to pull in gay and lesbian into the mix to cloud the waters. The truth is, very few care if someone is hetero or homo. What people do care about is stopping the sickness where grown men and women feel the need to come out to six year old children, or discuss personal sexual topics with kids. There are actually people who are protesting Fl's law that teachers can not discuss their sexual orientation with little kids. Protect Children and Protect Real Women. While Florida is banning children from attending drag shows, states like California are pushing a bill to take children away from parents who refuse to get their five year old gender surgery or give them puberty blockers.

So that I do not again get accused of reading things that are not there, what in the world are you trying to say with your comments about pedophilia? Was it just a public service announcement or did it somehow relate to this thread?

Are you aware that there is no FL law that prohibits teachers from discussing their sexual orientation with kids of any age, at least according to the sponsors? But add me to your list of those opposed to the poorly-written, and poorly-considered Don't Say Gay laws.

The new term is "MAP"... "Minor Attracted Person"...

Nice spin...

"ALL"? Yes, that is exactly what he said... Except he didn't...

You mean the "Don't say Gay" laws that don't exist?

No spin at all. You asked a question and I asked for clarification. If your clarification matches the criteria of a bigot then yes, they would be bigots. It is really that simple.

The law was passed and I believe it may have been expanded this session. Try to keep up.

So the hate, prejudice, and discrimination in this and other threads is really directed at only one or a few trans individuals? I definitely missed *those* distinctions.

Show me where "Don't say Gay" or anything like it is in the law... Or in any proposed "expansion" of the law...

I (and many others) have been quite clear on those who's actions I/we find problematic...

You seem to be the one with the broad brush...

Nice try

Yep, Bud Light for acknowledging a trans person in a non-negative way, Target for selling clothes with rainbows, and I don't recall the others with the gall to be accepting.

Forgive me for using my brain (some of ours still work) and seeing a connection.

Once again, reading what is not there. Would you please show me where in the bill, anywhere in the bill, it says Don't Say Gay, or was that just a dishonest attempt to divide people?

What color on the rainbow flag are they getting? I'm sure it has been discussed.

Are you saying the bill was expanded, and now it has "Don't Say Gay" in it?
I would be shocked but willing to read it if you can point out where that is in the bill.

The dishonesty is not mine.