Section 28 was literally a child safeguarding law, that was the explicit justification for it used by conservatives -- LIKE EMMA NICHOLSON -- to argue for it
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @CarolT52973604 and
Things have deteriorated in the UK so rapidly that the LGB Alliance has within a year gone from "How dare you accuse us of supporting Section 28, that's vile slander to throw at any gay person" to "Yeah actually Section 28 is good"
2 replies 12 retweets 121 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @KidThorazine and
That's really quite stupid slander - don't you know that the LGB Alliance are the main UK organisation for LGB rights? Suggesting they would support Section 28




13 replies 0 retweets 15 likes -
Replying to @CarolT52973604 @arthur_affect and
I like how you straight up call them "the main UK organisation for LGB rights" like they aren't actually and obviously religious right backed astroterf nonsense that was created practically yesterday
5 replies 1 retweet 105 likes -
Replying to @Mishyana @CarolT52973604 and
You will need to back up those allegations. Libel is a serious business.
8 replies 1 retweet 13 likes -
Replying to @eclair_voyance @Mishyana and
Nah US citizens are protected by the SPEECH Act so by UK standards we can "libel" to our heart's content
4 replies 2 retweets 76 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @eclair_voyance and
Libel is not protected speech. You made a specific claim that LGB Alliance supports Section 28.
3 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @Shatterface @arthur_affect and
I mean if you want to be technical they don't because they didn't exist when that law was on the books and when they try to get a new law passed they'll call it something different, but yes, they do support the principles behind it at least.
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @MadScientist212 @Shatterface and
So no you won't find a nice handy statement from them saying "we support section 28" you'll just find them saying things like LGBT clubs should be banned from school because they're a danger to children which is conveniently enough one of the things section 28 did.
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @MadScientist212 @arthur_affect and
They’re not saying that either.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The guy said he thinks GSAs shouldn't exist because they're a way for predatory gay men to try to recruit straight kids There's no creepy Tory opinion he doesn't think has a point
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.