Drag Queens Won’t Be “Erased” Under Federal Regs

Barbwire ^ | November 7, 2018 | Linda Harvey

[fwdude]

A full-page ad in USA Today on October 26 from the Human Rights Campaign screamed the homosexual lobby’s latest complaint: “We #WontBeErased – Because We Will Vote.”

Gigantic white, pink and blue streamers were unfurled at the Washington Mall earlier this week and demonstrators explained their purpose by using the same slogan.

Is there an authentic danger here? Are thousands of people soon to vanish?

No, of course not. It’s the latest victim-posing of the “LGBT” crowd, reacting to news that the Trump administration may actually adhere to the real meaning of the words “male” and “female” in federal regulations.

[fwdude]

I'll post the same here that I posted at the original article.

Understanding the left requires learning a new code language.

When they say they're "being erased," they mean that their political power to make otherwise free people unwillingly do their bidding is being erased.

[pepsi_junkie]

Gays put away the feathered boas, nun costumes, and a**less leather pants and put on sensible cardigans and suede shoes in a bid to win over the support of suburban women. they were shown on every TV show as funny, loving people who were the kindest and noblest of anyone and all they wanted was a chance to have love. "Oh dear, I'm getting misty. Let's vote for these wonderful normal guys to have a chance at love!" said the suburban white women. And they won everything.

Now that they won the war, the purges are to begin. The feather boas and the a**less leather pants are back on and if you don't like it, you're going to be ruined for it. There will be no mercy. The act is over.

[Amendment10]

A couple of things …

While people are complaining about gridlocked federal government, please bear in mind the following.

The Founding States made the federal Constitution to deliberately limit cripple the fed’s powers. So military issues aside, since federal domestic policy is arguably limited to little more than running the US Mail Service (1.8.7), fed involvement in the sovereign states is actually constitutionally gridlocked by design.

In fact, the congressional record shows the following clarification by a constitutional lawmaker.

”... the care of the property, the liberty, and the life of the citizen, under the solemn sanction of an oath imposed by your Federal Constitution, is in the States, and not in the Federal Government [emphases added].” —Rep. John Bingham, Congressional Globe, 1866. (See about middle of 3rd column.)

In other words after citizens support Pres. Trump in putting a stop to unconstitutional federal taxes, such taxes arguably stolen state revenues, citizens should be discussing their "government" needs with state lawmakers as the founders had intended, not federal lawmakers.

Also, the Republican Party Platform got my attention a few days back. Patriots beware that platform reflects “Hollywood” conservative political values imo, as opposed to constitutionally limited power federal government, no references to constitutional clauses or emphasis on state sovereignty.

In other words the conservatively politically correct Republican Party Platform is arguably still a RINO Party Platform.

Also, since Pres. Trump basically had no choice but to surround himself with post-FDR era, institutionally indoctrinated constitutional "experts," his biggest problem as POTUS is that he probably does not read FRee Republic and is therefore unaware of the following Supreme Court clarifications.

• “Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.

• ”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.

Insights welcome.