Actually a whole lot of us did. There are dumbasses on both the right and the left constantly trying to forcefully silence people who they don't like, and there's a rather larger group of us in the center who have been screaming bloody fucking murder about it for over a decade now, but you all keep pretending that we're inconsistent and actually just Republicans (or libtards/groomers, if you're of the other persuasion). It's maddening.
That article doesn't at all refute the fact that a ton of centrists have very reasonable beliefs and are loud about them. "Citation required" is a zero-content contribution, please go away.
Check out any state abortion laws lately? How about something called "teaching actual history?" And the best one "we didn't want to teach kids about gender differences, so now teachers are going to ignore gender entirely" in Florida.
But please, do go on about the "Bush-era evangelicals." I'm sure they've totally calmed down since then.
You're confusing opposition to the left's overreach with evangelical resurgence.
> Check out any state abortion laws lately?
This mistakenly assumes that opposition to abortion is necessarily evangelical in nature. By requiring the availability of elective second trimester abortions, Roe mandates an abortion regime that extends significantly beyond what most people can stomach. Most Americans think elective abortions should be prohibited after the first trimester: https://apnews.com/article/only-on-ap-us-supreme-court-abort.... But highly secular countries like France, Denmark, and Finland also restrict abortions after the first trimester. Most of the developed world draws the line for elective abortions at "when the fetus has a face" and not viability like Roe does. So you will continue to see things like Mississippi's abortion law (which imposes a 15-week ban with exceptions for health of the mother and baby) regardless of the strength of the evangelical movement.
> How about something called "teaching actual history?" And the best one "we didn't want to teach kids about gender differences, so now teachers are going to ignore gender entirely" in Florida.
It's not only or even mostly evangelicals that are worked up about the effort to normalize folks like Robin Di Angelo and Ibram Kendi in schools, or to teach young children about sexuality.
On these issues, the left thinks it’s relitigating issues it previously won, but in reality they’re taking up again issues the far left lost in the 1970s: racial preferences, racial separatism, breaking down social notions of gender, etc.
> You're confusing opposition to the left's overreach with evangelical resurgence.
No, I'm not. The opposition to abortion in the evangelical community didn't begin until Republicans bundled the issue with black civil rights and trickle down economics. Both Roe and her lawyer were Southern Baptists, and there were editorials published in Baptist and Evangelical periodicals affirming the decision as the right thing. Religious opposition to abortion rights should not extend to our laws. Oklahoma just passed a 6 week bill with no exceptions for rape, so please, spare me the hand-wringing.
> It's not only or even mostly evangelicals that are worked up about the effort to normalize folks like Robin Di Angelo and Ibram Kendi in schools, or to teach young children about sexuality.
You ignored the part about "teaching actual history," which includes teaching kids about the effects of slavery and Jim Crow and how that permanently damaged minorities because it might make little white minds evaluate the damage their ancestors did and how that continues to harm minorities today. That Florida bill had nothing to do with teaching kids about sexuality, and it backfired and will continue to do so. There is zero way to word those bills that will not result in malicious compliance because they are plainly meant to be discriminatory.
> The opposition to abortion in the evangelical community didn't begin until Republicans bundled the issue with black civil rights and trickle down economics.
The opposition to abortion was an international phenomenon happening around the same time. Within a few years of Roe, high courts in Canada, Germany, Italy, and France heard abortion cases as well. All except Germany determined that it was a question for the legislature. Germany determined that legalized abortion violated the basic law. To this day, German, French, and Italian abortion laws contain several restrictions that Roe doesn’t permit, specifically limiting elective abortions to the first trimester. Those counties must be full of evangelical Baptists according to you.
> In response to a question on access to abortion and restrictions on Medicaid coverage of the procedure, [Justice] Ginsburg said, "Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe [v. Wade] was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion."
> You ignored the part about "teaching actual history,"
Virginia didn’t just vote for Glen Youngkin (including half of Asians, who are almost all in liberal northern Virginia where I grew up) because they oppose teaching “actual history.” It’s because Fairfax County paid Ibram Kendi $$$ to come lecture to teachers.
> which includes teaching kids about the effects of slavery and Jim Crow and how that permanently damaged minorities
That doesn’t sound like “history” but pseudoscience. Racist pseudoscience at that, conflating Black people with “minorities” and implying they are “permanently damaged.”
> because it might make little white minds evaluate the damage their ancestors did and how that continues to harm minorities today.
> That Florida bill had nothing to do with teaching kids about sexuality, and it backfired and will continue to do so.
The law is literally limited to “instruction” about “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.” Prior to fourth grade, it’s prohibited. After fourth grade, it must be “age appropriate.” If you think it’s just evangelicals that don’t teachers instructing their kids on human sexuality in third grade, you need more POC friends.
Were the artists formerly known as Dixie Chicks cancelled or did their market fragment and they chose to focus on one segment? For some, is the notoriety of "cancellation" a welcome signal of authenticity and salience to consumers? For example Prince successfully used self-cancellation as a marketing rebirth during a legal dispute.
The Dixie Chicks are joining a growing list of brands, entertainers, and artists making changes in wake of the racial justice movement happening now. Like many, they "want to meet this moment" in history, which is why the country trio will go by The Chicks from this point forward.
Gosh, this is utter nonsense. Pretty much every anti-woke person on the left was just as critical of illiberalism when the right was flexing its cultural muscles. Are you under the impression that Paul Graham was in support of post-9/11 restrictions on speech? Or that eg the comedians now complaining about cancel culture were totally cool with people losing their jobs for insufficient "patriotism"? For God's sake, Bill Maher lost his show under precisely the same norms that he criticizes now, except that the illiberalism at the time was right-coded.
Are you so unable to conceive of a person holding a principle that you need to create an alternate timeline to resolve the cognitive dissonance? It's always truly horrifying to be reminded that people like this exist.
He still gave a presentation, it just wasn't on his stupid "anti-vaxxers are just like Nazi Germany" nonsense that was beneath both him and the university.
I am not aware of this history. Is there any data or document? What kind of jobs, private? governmental? academic?