If I were a Hollywood writer, and I’d been tasked to scribe a new action-hero blockbuster (is that still a term?) involving the current strifes and struggles in California, I’d imagine the conversation would go as such:
“Joshua, we need you to make up a villain–so dastardly, so devious, so deceitful, and so utterly flamboyant; who seeks to slowly crush the good people of his native state. Are you up to the task?”
“Sure. I’ll just call him Scott Weiner.”
His name. Is Scott. Weiner.
The man with the progressive plan for the People’s Republic of California. Like most individuals mixed up in the facade of the Left, Scott Weiner seems like a hero.
“He’s so courageous! He’s fighting for the underdog! And BOY does he look good in a leather vest!”
But to the few of us in this country who seem to still grasp any sliver of common sense, Scott Weiner is just another cog in the progressive utopian machine. While many self-important Californians have their gaze furiously set on protecting illegal non-Californians, Weiner is keeping his eye on LGBTQP prize. (We’ll explain the P in part 4 of this series.)
Weiner is a Democratic state senator who has ushered in not one, not two, but three senate bills that have been signed into legislation by CA governor Jerry Brown last month.
If I were a gossip-columnist, I’d theorize that Weiner and Brown, whose Hollywood couple name would obviously be Brown-Weiner, are engaged in a ludicrous love affair, exchanging sexual favors for legislative benefits. This is what’s called a Double Dutch Rudder. Look it up.
But as I am merely a semi-professional writer, I’ll just have to assume that the deal is this: Weiner gets laws to protect his buddies in the LGBTQP community, and Governor Brown gets to virtue signal with the rest of his Democratic cronies.
Whatever the case, these bills are here to stay, and they range from ridiculous to downright disturbing. Let’s start with the former and work our way towards the latter, shall we?
Surprisingly, California is one of only four states that has a lifetime registration for all sex offenders. I know, right? That’s so not ‘peace and love.’ Sex is beautiful, man.
Okay, I’m back. But instead of erring on the side of serious sex crimes, Scott Weiner feels the system is “draconian” to low-level offenders, citing that gay men have been “stuck on this registry” for decades because they were caught having sex at clandestine hook-up spots in public parks…
Why do I feel like if it was a straight white couple caught having sex in a public park, they’d be drawn and quartered and made example to us all?
“They are all treated the same as a sexually violent predator,” he said.
Okay, Scott. That’s fair. Someone who gets caught giving an HJ in an alley may be less of a risk to society than a serial rapist.
I even understand separating the sex offenders into three tiers: not so serious, serious, and super serious (not the actual names of the tiers). Under this new law, the ‘not so serious’ offenders can petition to get their name off the list after 10 years; the ‘serious’ offenders can get off after 20; the ‘super serious’ offenders are stuck on there for life, as they should be.
While I believe in second chances, Weiner is again playing to the emotion of the matter: not all sex offenders are bad people. Some of them just decided to have a naked sack race through an Arby’s parking lot, followed by an intramural garbage orgy in a dumpster behind an elementary school. Typical Friday night, really.
But Californians can sleep tight knowing that sex offenders who have committed violent acts, can be removed from the list after 20 years, so long as they only did it once. Phew.
One of California’s newest progressive proclamations requires that state employees forbid any business travel to states which prohibit transgender bathrooms. Take that, all four of you. This was not under the guidance of Scott Weiner, mind you. Just more of the same.
So, it’s no surprise California has a soft spot for those suffering from gender dysphoria. That’s like saying Hollywood has a soft spot for statutory rape. According to FoxNews, California health care workers who “willfully and repeatedly” decline to use a senior transgender patient’s “preferred name or pronouns” could face punishments ranging from a fine to jail time under a newly signed law.
Scott Weiner with the pass. Governor Brown with the alley-oop.
Brown-Weiner claims that nobody is going to be criminally prosecuted. “It’s just more scare tactics by people who oppose all LGBT civil rights and protections,” just Weiner said. The bill aims to protect transgender and other LGBTQP individuals in hospitals, retirement homes, and assisted living facilities. It will ensure those facilities accommodate transgender people and their needs, including letting them decide which gender-specific bathroom they prefer to use.
If one of these healthcare workers dare to “willfully and repeatedly” fail to use a transgender person’s “preferred name or pronouns” after he or she or xe or whatever has “clearly informed them of the preferred name or pronouns,” they may face up to a $1,000 fine or a YEAR in jail.
Mother Mary, full of grace, are you kidding me? So, I guess if you call them the wrong pronoun the first time, you’re in the clear…but if they correct you and you still can’t get with the program, then it’s fair game to haul your ass off to prison for not calling Barry–Mary.
Feelings. Hurt feelings. That is the idol that these Californians now obey. Never mind the pain and destruction sending a person to jail over this would cause, you better not make a senior transgender patient feel ashamed. Got it.
Speaking of feeling ashamed…
But Scott Weiner wasn’t finished there. No, sir-ee. S.B. 219 was just a warm-up. S.B. 239 may be his pièce de résistance.
Side note: why do all Weiners have a such an overwhelming affinity for the gay community?
Starting January 1, 2018, with the help of Brown-Weiner, it now will no longer be a felony to knowingly expose someone to HIV without disclosing the infection beforehand. It’s merely a misdemeanor.
As if that wasn’t alarming enough, this also applies to those who donate blood without informing the blood bank that they are HIV-positive. If you’re someone who generally believes actions have consequences, this could potentially infect thousands of uninfected people with a deadly virus.
It’s those pesky hurt feelings again. You see, people with HIV feel stigmatized. Not saying anyone takes pleasure in the suffering of others, gay or straight, but come on. Weiner and Assemblyman Todd Gloria (D-San Diego), who co-authored this cool, hip bill believe that modern medicine allows HIV carriers to live longer lives and “nearly eliminates the possibility of transmission.”
Okay, so what’s your point?
“We are going to end new HIV infections, and we will do so not by threatening people with state prison time, but rather by getting people to test and providing them access to care,” Weiner said.
So…to prevent people from getting HIV, we should make it optional to disclose that information before having unprotected sex? Or donating blood? Do liberals actually read their bills?
It should be mentioned that the groups that co-sponsored this bill include Equality California, the ACLU of California, APLA Health, Lambda Legal, Positive Women’s Network, and the Black AIDS Institute.
Because apparently White AIDS doesn’t get its own institute.
AIDS has killed 36 million people globally since first being documented in the early 1980s. 70% of those affected are gay and bisexual man.
Instead of making it acceptable for men with HIV to spread the virus, maybe we should teach them how to wrap up.