Further Progress on Campus Free Speech

In some states, the public university systems are pushing back against the malign forces that want to censor or punish anyone who says things that clash with leftist orthodoxies. North Carolina is among them.

In today’s Martin Center article, Ashlynn Warta discusses several good developments.

One is at UNC Charlotte. She writes, “Last month, UNC Charlotte’s Faculty Council held a special meeting to discuss and ultimately pass a free-speech resolution endorsing the Chicago Principles. Following suit, the UNC Charlotte Board of Trustees made a similar commitment, also endorsing the Chicago Principles.”

It’s quite possible for a university to say that it’s going to protect free speech and still fail to do so when controversy erupts, but at least this shows concern over the problem.

Warta also reports on good news at East Carolina University: “East Carolina University (ECU) is also making strides in protecting First Amendment rights. The ECU Board of Trustees passed a resolution for academic freedom and freedom of speech earlier this year. ECU’s trustees also confirmed the Chicago Principles, and they went a step further by including the Kalven Committee’s ‘Report on the University’s Role in Political and Social Action’ in their resolution.”

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/further-progress-on-campus-free-speech/

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

Michigan school ignores free speech to spare Biden supporters’ feelings

Tri-County Middle School in Howard City, Michigan, showed political favoritism and its lack of commitment to free speech by demanding that two students remove anti-Biden sweatshirts in February 2022. The sweatshirts said "Let's Go Brandon," a political slogan that is a euphemism for "F*** Joe Biden."

Now, the two students, along with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, are suing the school for viewpoint discrimination.

Although schools can legally restrict profane speech on clothing, "Let's Go Brandon" contains no profane speech. None of those three words are curse words. However, the slogan lets people know that the youths wearing the sweatshirt probably dislike the sitting president.

Given that we do not live in a one-party totalitarian dictatorship, they have the right to dislike President Joe Biden. After all, it's not difficult to think of many reasons why someone may disapprove of the sitting president.

FIRE has correctly pointed out the hypocrisy that exists when it comes to political speech at Tri-County Middle School. The school allows students to wear clothing with other political messaging, including gay-pride-themed sweatshirts. It also allowed students to wear pride flags as capes on field day, but not flags of former President Donald Trump. Regardless of how one feels about Trump and Biden, the double standard and lack of commitment to free speech is absurd.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/michigan-school-ignores-free-speech-to-spare-biden-supporters-feelings/ar-AA1aFTTB

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

Republicans Subpoena Head of CDC Over Big Tech Censorship Coordination

The U.S. House of Representatives has subpoenaed several top Biden administration officials, including the director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), over the administration’s coordination with Big Tech to censor users.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, sent the subpoenas on April 28 to CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Director Jen Easterly, and James Rubin, an official at the State Department’s Global Engagement Center (GEC).

All three have responded inadequately to requests to provide documents, including communications between their respective entities and social media platforms, Jordan said in letters accompanying the subpoenas. CISA and GEC have not responded at all to the requests, while the CDC has not provided any of the requested documents, he said.

“Freedom of speech is one of the most important rights we have in this country,” Jordan told the Washington Examiner. “The collusion between our federal government and Big Tech undermines First Amendment principles and should be investigated.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/republicans-subpoena-head-of-cdc-over-big-tech-censorship-coordination_5229639.html

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

Not so Keen on free speech

Of the many aphorisms about free speech, surely the best known is that attributed to Voltaire: that although he might disapprove of what you say, he would defend to the death your right to say it. It is, of course, excellent — as far as it goes. Often, however, those who seek to silence other people’s speech object not to what they say, but how and where.

Consider Kellie-Jay Keen, aka Posie Parker, a women’s rights activist who holds rallies under the rubric Let Women Speak. She advertises a place and time, turns up with stewards in hi-viz jackets, and hands the mic to any woman with something to say. Some talk about men who identify as women using women’s toilets and changing rooms at workplaces and gyms, or muscling into women-only support groups for everything from addiction to the menopause.

One frequent speaker served a prison sentence locked up with a trans-identified man; another, a disabled woman, fears asking for a female carer only for a man who identifies as a woman to turn up. An increasingly common theme is schools colluding with gender-distressed children’s delusion that they can change sex.

In a sane world, what these women say wouldn’t attract criticism; indeed, it wouldn’t even need to be said. But often they are drowned out by transactivists shrieking threats and slogans of the sort Robert Jay Lifton, in his 1961 book Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism, called thought-terminating clichés: “brief, highly reductive, definitive-sounding phrases [that] become the start and finish of any ideological analysis”. “Trans women are women”. “Trans rights are human rights”. “Kill all terfs [trans-exclusionary radical feminists]”.

Keen recently returned to the UK from a tour of Australia and New Zealand, which was aborted after a police no-show at a planned rally in Auckland. She was hemmed in and jostled, pelted with eggs and tomato soup and sprayed with liquid. Protesters picked up the metal barriers that were supposed to keep them back and brandished them as weapons.

Keen barely kept her footing as she was hustled away by private event stewards. Afterwards she tweeted: “I genuinely thought if I fell to the floor I would never get up again, my children would lose their mother and my husband would lose his wife.”

If anyone is supposed to be Voltaireishly assiduous in defending the lawful exercise of free speech, it’s the police. That they failed to do so in Auckland — and at some Let Women Speak rallies in the UK — can be blamed on the way Keen is smeared and dehumanised by the authorities.

Before her tour of Australia and New Zealand, she was vilified by politicians and in the press. Her “evil ideology is to scapegoat minorities”, said the premier of the Australian state of Victoria. “That woman and her views are abhorrent,” said New Zealand’s deputy prime minister. New Zealand Greens claimed she had a “longstanding track record of hateful speech and the incitement of violence”.

Describing Keen like this marks her as outside civilised society: an acceptable target for threats and violence. It outsources the dirty work of shutting her up to the bovver boys. Commentators, politicians and campaigners can say “I support free speech, but … ”, while maintaining (im)plausible deniability.

Trans lobby groups who tried to get a court order blocking Keen from New Zealand came up with a classic of the genre: “We are not opposing freedom of speech, we are opposing the measurable threat to public order and the safety of transgender people.”

https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/may-2023/not-so-keen-on-free-speech/

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

ABC Refuses to Air RFK Jr. Comments About COVID-19 Vaccines

ABC News cut off a presidential candidate when he started talking about COVID-19 vaccines, raising concerns about censorship.

Robert Kennedy Jr., who recently announced his presidential run as a Democrat, sat down with ABC News for a lengthy interview released on April 27.

After airing clips of the interview, reporter Linsey Davis spoke to viewers.

“We should note that during our conversation, Kennedy made false claims about the COVID-19 vaccines,” she said. “We’ve used our editorial judgment in not including extended portions of that exchange in our interview,” Davis said.

The claims in question were not listed, and ABC did not return a request for comment.

Davis indicated that at least one dealt with the effectiveness of the vaccines.

“Data shows that the COVID-19 vaccine has prevented millions of hospitalizations and deaths from the disease,” Davis said. She did not provide any citations for the claim.

“He also made misleading claims about the relationship between vaccination and autism. Research shows that vaccines and the ingredients used in the vaccines do not cause autism, including multiple studies involving more than a million children and major medical associations like the American Academy of Pediatrics and the advocacy group Autism Speaks,” she added.

Kennedy said that what happened violated the U.S. law that bars some media outlets from censoring candidates for public office.

“ABC showed its contempt for the law, democracy, and its audience by cutting most of the content of my interview with host Linsey Davis leaving only cherry-picked snippets and a defamatory disclaimer,” Kennedy said.

“Offering no evidence, ABC justified this act of censorship by falsely asserting that I made ‘false claims.’ In truth, Davis engaged me in a lively, informative, and mutually respectful debate on the government’s Covid countermeasures. I’m happy to supply citations to support every statement I made during that exchange. I’m certain that ABC’s decision to censor came as a shock to Linsey as well. Instead of journalism, the public saw a hatchet job,” he added.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/abc-refuses-to-air-rfk-jr-comments-about-covid-19-vaccines_5228674.html

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

Attacks on free speech from the Israeli Left

Jewish Brownshirts objecting to possible  reform of the very Leftist Israel Supreme Court

By DAVID ELIEZRIE

For over five years, I have been honored to be a member of the Board of Governors of the Jewish Agency, and for some 15 years, I’ve participated in numerous General Assemblies put on by the Jewish Federations of North America. Historically, these events have been of vital importance in bringing together Jewish leaders of varied views for important decorous debate and dialogue.

This year, the culture of respect usually upheld at these events was shattered by a small group of disruptors trying to impose their views. Yelling, screaming, using bullhorns and worse were all tactics to try to shut down any kind of debate on crucial issues facing Israel and world Jewry.

The disruptions came from just one side of the political spectrum: the Left. It was spearheaded by leaders of the Reform movement, mostly from Israel and a few from overseas. Guards were deployed at the entrances and at the plenary of the Jewish Agency board meeting.

At the larger GA conference, numerous security guards were stationed at the session I attended on the Law of Return. In both cases, it was the presence of MK Simcha Rothman, an architect of the judicial overhaul legislation, that was being protested. At each conference, he spoke with patience, dignity and decency. The disruptors’ goal was to silence him and muzzle any debate.

For years, whenever a Liberal Jewish leader felt that an expressed view of an Orthodox rabbi, or right-wing leader was racist or incited violence, they spoke out with harsh criticism. This time, it was they who incited and tried to intimidate and forcibly silence those who have differing views from their own. Rothman was forced to slip in and out of sessions surrounded by guards.

https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-741485

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

Over 100 Harvard professors form council in fight for free speech amid ‘crisis’

More than 100 of the school’s faculty members have joined the new Council on Academic Freedom, banding together to protect free speech on the Ivy League campus.

“We are in a crisis time right now,” Janet Halley, a Harvard Law School professor and feminist legal theory scholar, told The Post. “Many, many people are being threatened with — and actually put through — disciplinary processes for their exercise of free speech and academic freedom.”

The initiative was announced earlier this month with a Boston Globe op-ed penned by the council’s co-founder, psychology professor Steven Pinker, who declared, “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, and if we don’t defend academic freedom, we should not be surprised when … a disgusted citizenry writes us off.”

After that, the council nearly doubled in size over just four days, drawing faculty across all disciplines, according to council co-president Jeffrey Flier.

Janet Halley, who has been at Harvard since 2000, joined after seeing countless professors targeted and punished for their speech or viewpoints.

“Many people think that they’re entitled not to be offended [on campus], and they are willing to complain,” she said. “It’s very difficult for institutions to stop the disciplinary wheels from churning.”

According to the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), 145 professors were targeted for sanction nationwide in 2022 alone — something Halley said must stop: “An organization at Harvard, sponsored by faculty, is crucial for putting this issue on the agenda in a clear and consistent way in the Harvard environment.”

Despite consistently topping US News and World Report’s college rankings, Harvard ranked 170th out of 203 schools on FIRE’s 2022 Campus Free Speech rankings.

A 2023 survey conducted in collaboration with College Pulse found that only 27% of Harvard students thought shouting down a speaker on campus was never acceptable, while 26% said it’s at least occasionally permissible to use violence to stop speech on campus.

This change in attitude shocks some faculty members.

“During the great part of my career, I never really thought of there being a problem with free speech or academic freedom at Harvard,” medical school professor Jeffrey Flier, who has been at the school since 1978, told The Post. “I mean, that would have almost seemed like a non sequitur.”

But he began to notice a gradual degradation of free speech — and a lack of willingness to speak up — while serving as the Dean of Harvard Medical School from 2007 to 2016.

“There’s not enough of an advantage to someone on the faculty raising their hand, putting their head above the parapet, and saying, ‘I think this is wrong,’” Flier said. “There hasn’t been any network of people from across the spectrum that could be able to do this — but that’s what we now have in the council.”

Flier is co-president of the new group, which he hopes will help fortify free speech on campus — and preemptively prevent censorship: “When the next instance occurs … this group will spring into action both behind the scenes and publicly. And I think it will be a different ball game when that happens.”

One of his fellow co-presidents, philosophy professor Ned Hall, said the council is “resolutely non-partisan” and pulls members from across the political aisle.

“Some people will read the expression of academic freedom as code for ‘right wing.’ But it’s simply not,” he told The Post.

Hall, who has taught epistemology at Harvard since 2005, said he’s concerned by an uptick in students eager to squash out speech they don’t like.

“Some students come in, guns blazing, saying certain topics are just off limits and that you’re a terrible person if you raise them,” he said. “It doesn’t take very many of them to spoil the mood.”

But, according to Hall, it’s merely a tyranny of a very vocal minority. He joined the council and stepped up as co-president after several pupils confided in him that they feel their speech is being stifled on campus.

“Most students come to Harvard actively interested in having robust conversations and in being guided by us professors,” he said. “Students have said to me before, ‘I want to have conversations about hot button topics, but I’m not so comfortable doing it.’”

And the statistics back him up.

According to FIRE’s survey, only 14% of students would feel very comfortable expressing controversial views with peers, and three-quarters of students are at least somewhat worried about reputation damage if they express an unpopular opinion.

https://nypost.com/2023/04/26/harvard-professors-band-to-fight-for-free-speech/

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

Washington’s Effort to Censor (True) Pandemic Information

In July 2022, Twitter permanently suspended Rhode Island physician Andrew Bostom after awarding the epidemiologist and longtime researcher at Brown University a fifth strike for spreading “misinformation.”

A July 26 tweet alleging that there was no solid evidence Covid-19 vaccines had prevented any children from being hospitalized—”only RCT data we have from children reveals ZERO hospitalizations prevented by vaccination vs. placebo”—was apparently the final straw.

The funny thing was, it appeared Bostom’s tweet was true.

Dr. Anish Koka, a cardiologist and writer, said he was initially skeptical of Bostom’s claim. But after speaking with him for more than an hour, he realized Bostom was citing the government’s own data, a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) briefing document that included randomized controlled trial (RCT) data on children.

“...Dr. Bostom’s tweet appears quite correct as per the FDA documents,” Koka wrote on Substack. “In the RCTs available, there does not appear to be evidence that the vaccine prevented hospitalizations.”

‘They Veered From CDC Guidance’

Bostom’s permanent suspension was one of many anecdotes shared by journalist David Zweig in a December Twitter Files thread viewed by more than 64 million people, which exposed how the government worked with Twitter to try to “rig the Covid debate.”

It turns out this was not the only one of Bostom’s tweets that was true but was nevertheless flagged for “misinformation.”

“A review of Twitter log files revealed that an internal audit, conducted after Bostom’s attorney contacted Twitter, found that only 1 of Bostom’s 5 violations were valid,” Zweig notes. “The one Bostom tweet found to still be in violation cited data that was legitimate but inconvenient to the public health establishment’s narrative about the risks of flu versus Covid in children.”

In other words, all five of Bostom’s tweets that had been flagged as “misinformation” were legitimate. At the very least, four-out-of-five were, and that’s according to Twitter’s own internal audit.

How this happened was partially explored by Zweig, who explained Twitter’s convoluted censorship process, which relied heavily on bots, contractors in foreign countries who lacked the expertise to make informed decisions, and Twitter brass who carried their own biases and incentives. This structure led to a predictable result.

“In my review of internal files,” writes Zweig, “I found countless instances of tweets labeled as ‘misleading’ or taken down entirely, sometimes triggering account suspensions, simply because they veered from CDC guidance or differed from establishment views.”

The CDC had effectively become the arbiter of truth.

This is alarming for at least two reasons. First, for anyone familiar with the government’s track record on truth, there’s reason to be skeptical of putting any government agency in charge of deciding what is true and false. Second, the CDC has been, to put it kindly, fallible throughout the pandemic. Indeed, the agency has been plagued with so much dysfunction and made so many crucial mistakes that its own director announced less than a year ago the organization needed an overhaul.

https://catalyst.independent.org/2023/04/25/censor-true-pandemic-information/?omhide=true

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

Another social media giant caves to censorship

TikTok is about to become the propaganda outfit that so many worried it would be. Except it’s not going to be Chinese propaganda, this is to come from the United Nations instead.

As Engadget applauds, nothing that contradicts the UN’s “climate science” is to be allowed in TikTok videos. There free speech, scientific inquiry and even just plain good common sense.

“Last month, TikTok updated its community guidelines to add policies that prohibit videos with climate change misinformation on the app,” Engadget reported.

This idea of having censorship of “misinformation” sounds so lovely and cuddly. Why wouldn’t we want people not to be misinformed? Except all that does is push the definition of truth back into the background.

Instead of it being an open conversation bout what best describes the world we’ve now some group in the background determining what people can say in public. The dangers of this were exactly what the Founding Fathers insisted on the First Amendment. Yes, we know they said Congress shall make no…but what’s the UN if it isn’t a collection of the worst Congresses from elsewhere? You know, the UN that put Saudi Arabia in charge of the Human Rights committee once. These are the folks who get to determine what appears in a TikTok video?

Yeah, right.

This is even before we get to this:

“TikTok will no longer allow content that ‘undermines well-established scientific consensus’ regarding the climate crisis.”

The entire point of science is that it doesn’t need protection from misinformation. In fact, the scientific method is exactly the opposite. It’s the prizefighter in the ring at the County Fair insisting to all – bring it on. Bring what you’ve got and test it against me. Science will win against any such tests because that’s what a scientific result is. The thing that survives all the tests thrown at it. If it doesn’t survive the tests then it’s not true. That’s simply, no really, the way science does work. Any single fact can destroy a theory. A theory is an explanation that explains all the facts. If there are facts contrary to the theory then the facts win and the theory is wrong.

The absurdity is that people are trying to curb that free speech in the name of science. When the entire point of the whole scientific enterprise is to always, but always, be subjecting every single scientific idea to continual testing, even attempt to undermine it. Because, again, that’s what science is. Trying to prove the other ideas wrong. It’s the failure to prove the idea wrong that shows that it’s right.

https://aim.org/2023/04/21/another-social-media-giant-caves-to-censorship/

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

Street preacher threatened with jail time after citing Bible verses against local Oklahoma LGBTQ organization

An outspoken street preacher is appealing to the Oklahoma Supreme Court after he was slapped with a five-year restraining order that threatened him with jail time if he speaks out in opposition against a local LGBTQ advocacy group.

Rich Penkoski, a pastor who heads up the online organization Warriors for Christ and has protested drag shows for children nationwide, told Fox News Digital that he believes the restraining order is unconstitutional and could herald a legal precedent that could chill the speech of Christians and others.

"I've been preaching against this kind of stuff for years when it first started in libraries," he said of drag queen story time for children. "We've been telling people it's going to get worse if we don't do anything, and that's where we are."

Penkoski said he was invited by a church in Bartlesville, Oklahoma, to preach outside a local Pride event last fall after other local churches failed to speak out against it.

Penkoski also posted a public photo of the same-sex wedding of Sheena Hayes and Morgan Lawrence-Hayes, who is the executive board president of the Bartlesville chapter of Oklahomans for Equality, according to the Christian Post.

In his post, Penkoski referenced Bible verses condemning homosexuality, including Romans 1:32 – "and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same but also give hearty approval to those who practice them."

The pastor also cited Matthew 18:6, which quotes Jesus saying that "whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea."

In a police report filed by an officer with ties to Oklahomans for Equality in Bartlesville, the couple felt threatened and harassed by Penkoski's social media posts, according to local outlet V1SUT. The report claimed he made references to bestiality during a sermon at the Pride event, which he denies.

In February, Washington County District Court Judge Linda Thomas granted the couple a five-year protective order against Penkoski after they claimed they felt unsafe in Bartlesville because of the pastor, according to the Rutherford Institute.

Penkoski made two additional posts in which he expressed his disapproval of several Pride events in Bartlesville. In one post, he criticized local Disciples Christian Church for sharing photos of children celebrating Pride Month last June.

In the other post, he aimed to disprove a statement made by Lawrence-Hayes claiming during a City Council meeting that no adult-oriented entertainment, obscenity or sexually suggestive performances took place at the Pride event, which Penkoski maintained to be false.

Penkoski, who has a sizable social media following, said he posted a video of the leader's statement intercut with footage of a drag queen near children during the Pride event. The video, which showed "a drag queen grabbing his crotch and gyrating it in front of children," was pulled from both Facebook and YouTube for being obscene, he said.

Penkoski, who has children ranging from 3 years old to 20, said he "felt moved by God" to oppose drag events involving children. He said he has received multiple death threats and that his property has been vandalized during his legal battle with the LGBTQ group.

John Whitehead, a constitutional attorney and president of the Charlottesville, Virginia-based Rutherford Institute that is representing Penkoski, told Fox News Digital that the pastor's case "is definitely about free speech." They argue that the restraining order against Penkoski is "vague and overly broad."

Whitehead said the Rutherford Institute, which represented Paula Jones in her sexual harassment claim against former President Bill Clinton, took on Penkoski's case because they believe it could set a dangerous precedent that could chill the speech of Christians or anyone else who publicly opposes LGBTQ ideology.

"I think what we're saying is that citing a Bible verse could be a crime at a certain point in the United States," the attorney said.

Both Penkoski and Whitehead told Fox News Digital that his case is likely the first of its kind.

"Other Christians have messaged me, and they said as far as we can tell, you are the first Christian in America to be threatened with jail for posting Bible verses critical of same-sex marriage or drag shows," Penkoski said.

Rutherford Institute President John Whitehead warned that Penkoski's case could set a dangerous legal precedent that "would open [the] door for persecution, obviously." (iStock)

Whitehead, who founded the Rutherford Institute in 1982, said Penkoski never threatened violence against his accusers and that Penkoski's case is symptomatic of eroding freedoms in the U.S.

"The First Amendment is the sole savior of America, and what I'm seeing in America today with all the wokeness and political correctness is that people are afraid to speak," Whitehead said.

"Free speech is so important. It raises critical thinking and makes people think and maybe reconsider some of the things they're doing, so I think people like Richard Penkoski are very, very important in our society," he added.

Whitehead said that if Penkoski fails in his appeal, the First Amendment is "dead," which he believes "would open [the] door for persecution, obviously."

"He quotes what Jesus Christ says, OK? If that's a crime, then we're in a bad state in this country," he added.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/street-preacher-rich-penkoski-threatened-jail-time-citing-bible-verses-oklahoma-lgbtq-organization

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

The Time They Canceled Syrup: The classic breakfast staple brand Aunt Jemima.

Finding out the impacts on sales of this branding switch is not easy. Common sense would dictate that considering all of the advanced hype of the decision, some follow-up details would be at the ready. There is little in the way of media interest in the results. Also, the company is not very forthcoming with the numbers. It has taken a bit of digging to come up with ballpark estimates.

We need to understand the timeline of the rebranding was stretched out. First, the Aunt Jemima image was removed in December 2020, but the name remained in place. The Pearl Milling Company name for the line of items was not applied until the summer of 2021, and there would be a lag time as the products were graduated off store shelves. So to get a read on the sales results means looking through the financials from then through 2022 – when the full change had taken place and sales were reflected in the reports.

And even this is an opaque presentation. In PepsiCo's quarterly reports, the company only details the performance of the subsidiaries in percentile changes in the various sectors without providing hard sales figures. So more sleuthing was needed. In one interview with Fortune Magazine, I found Kristin Kroepfl, chief marketing officer for Quaker Foods North America, stating that in the year 2020, the Aunt Jemima brand had $350 million in sales. Okay, this gives us something of a baseline.

Throughout 2021, the Quaker Foods division saw the pancake mix and syrup sales plunge. The period following the introduction of the name switch that summer reported "a double-digit decline in pancake syrup and mix." This was matched in the final quarter of that year – when the name change had gone into full effect – with "double-digit declines in pancake syrups and mixes."

This downward trend continued through last year. Quarter 1 delivered another "double-digit decline." In Q-2, Quaker saw unit volume grow 2% across all of its products but was weighed down by another "double-digit decline in pancake syrups and mixes," something also seen in the Q-3 reports. The only glimmer of positivity is that the former Aunt Jemima brand saw its bleeding slowing in Q-4, as that line only saw "a high-single-digit decline in pancake syrups and mixes."

Considering the vagueness of these reports (since "double-digit" can range anywhere from 10 to 99%), even applying the rosiest measurement, by only counting a ten percent decline in each of those six quarters, the former Aunt Jemima brand declined by at least -50% since the name change. It is very likely much worse.

This should serve as yet another object lesson for companies looking to enter the woke, DEI-ESG social awareness waters. As seen with Disney last year, and as Bud Light is experiencing now, appeasing and appealing to the woke mobs does not deliver market results. These are not reliable customer bases you are trying to curry favor with, and you are more likely to injure your brand than benefit from your virtue-signaling moves.

Look at how PepsiCo killed off a 130-year-old brand and, in the process, lost a huge amount of market share. Thinking about making good with activists? That is simply not good business.

https://townhall.com/columnists/bradslager/2023/04/20/a-lesson-in-corporate-wokeness-the-disaster-after-making-aunt-jemima-a-pariah-n2622208

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

********************************

Must not call a government funded organization a government funded organization

The Canadian Broadcasting Corp. is the latest to receive a Twitter tag calling it a “government-funded” outlet, and, boy, is it mad.

Earlier this month, Elon Musk’s social media platform labeled NPR and PBS — two American broadcasters supported by tax dollars — as “state-affiliated media,” later changing that to “government-funded media.”

Now Twitter has turned its attention to the government-funded “news” outlets of foreign nations, including Canada and the United Kingdom.

On Sunday, the “government-funded media” label appeared on the CBC’s Twitter account.

The outlet immediately rose up in anger, with spokesman Leon Mar claiming the broadcaster was being “falsely described.”

The new tag prompted the CBC to stop using Twitter in a huff, just as NPR and PBS did after their fealty to the U.S. government was highlighted.

The Canadian broadcaster claimed it is “impartial and independent” as it announced it was pausing its use of the platform. The CBC also demonstrated cowardice by turning off commenting on the tweet.

https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/cbc-cries-called-government-funded-media-elon-musk-gives-even-worse-label

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

TikTok Begins Massive Climate Censorship Campaign Ahead Of ‘Earth Day’

The popular China-based social media app TikTok will revise its misinformation policy to include climate change denial ahead of Earth Day, according to its website.

The policy update, which was first announced in March, will remove videos from the platform that “undermines well-established scientific consensus” or denies the existence of or factors to climate change, TikTok confirmed. It will take effect on April 21 — one day before Earth Day.

“Trust and authenticity fuel the creativity of TikTok—and we believe we have an important role to play in empowering informed climate discussions on our platform,” the app’s website reads. “This week, we are introducing several initiatives that will help reduce harmful climate change misinformation while elevating authoritative information year-round.”

The app will permit videos to circulate that debate various topics involving climate change including the “benefits” or “disadvantages” of politics or a user’s own opinion about “specific weather events,” according to TechCrunch. Users will breach the threshold into alleged denial if they “undermine scientific consensus.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/tiktok-begins-massive-climate-censorship-campaign-ahead-of-earth-day/ar-AA1a4avL

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

Why teachers now have to call students by TWO different names if they change their gender or pronouns

Teachers in Queensland are being forced to call their students two different names if they change their gender or pronouns, a leaked email has revealed.

The Sunshine State email said that, under the Human Rights Act, teachers are required to use a child's preferred pronouns and names in the classroom.

However, they are expected to use their birth name in official communication with their parents.

This has led to concerns teachers could have to keep secrets from the parents of children who don't want their identities to be known.   

School staff and parents across the state are said to be concerned over the issue.

'Staff are now expected to talk to the parents and not mention it and they must use the name on the child's birth certificate, but otherwise they should use the child's preferred name and pronoun in the classroom,' One anonymous teacher told the Courier Mail.

'At parent-teacher interviews, are we expected to not bring it up with a student's mother even if the child is sitting there next to their mother?'

The teacher also questioned why changing a name is so easy for a student. 'If a child wants to change a subject in their senior year, there are significant protocols to make sure it is the right decision and three or four signatures are required. 'But if they want to change their name or pronoun, it is a case of speaking to the guidance officer.'

The Department of Education said it advises schools and principals to assess each case individually.

It said that it may be best for a school to keep a child's wishes secret in some cases, particularly if the child's family has certain religious beliefs.

A Department of Education spokesman said: 'A student may request that the school uses a preferred name or pronouns. Schools consider these requests based on a case-by-case basis considering the best interests of the student.

'This information acknowledges that circumstances for individual students will be different and decisions about how best to support students should be made on an individual basis.

'As a matter of course, schools communicate regularly with parents and carers on matters at school that affect their children.

'A student's preferred pronouns/gender may also be used on student academic reports if requested by their parent or carer.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11985519/Queensland-teachers-call-students-TWO-different-names-change-pronouns.html

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

NIH Releases New "Pronoun Guide," Claims Intentional Misgendering is a Civil Rights Violation

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) just published a guideline outlining how professionals should use gender pronouns to “affirm gender identity” for themselves and colleagues.

The guideline, issued by the NIH Sexual & Gender Minority Research Office, warns that intentionally using the wrong pronouns is “equivalent to harassment.”

Fox News Digital reviewed the “Gender Pronouns & Their Use in Workplace Communications” guide, which provides more than 40 different pronoun examples and offers guidance on avoiding pronoun “mistakes” in the workplace.

To create inclusive, affirming, and welcoming workplaces, the guide lists several “mistakes” to avoid when using pronouns.

For example, the guide claims professionals should not describe pronouns as “preferred” or “chosen,” as doing so allegedly implies that gender identity is a preference or choice, which the NIH claims it is not.

The guide also discourages “performative allyship,” wherein people superficially demonstrate devotion to a cause. This includes a hypothetical scenario in which an employer requires all employees to publicly share their pronouns.

However, the guide acknowledges that some employees may not want to disclose their pronouns, as they are not ready to “come out” and reveal their gender identity.

Requiring all employees to use pronouns could be perceived as performative allyship, particularly if employees are uncertain or unable to articulate the importance of correct pronoun usage.

Established under former President Barack Obama’s administration in 2015, the Sexual & Gender Minority Research Office coordinates sexual and gender minority (SGM)–related research and activities by working directly with NIH Institutes, Centers, and Offices.

The NIH told Fox News Digital that the guide was developed in part to integrate Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) principles across the agency and the broader biomedical and health science research enterprise.

The agency hopes that this resource will foster inclusive and respectful workplaces for sexual and gender minority employees.

According to the guide, gender pronouns are a way for individuals to identify themselves beyond using their names.

Pronouns are important not only for everyday communication but also for conveying and affirming gender identity, especially for SGM communities.

The NIH is encouraging professionals to disclose their pronouns in the workplace by adding them to email signatures or initiating conversations with personal pronouns to make colleagues more comfortable disclosing their own and preventing so called misgendering.

https://thefederalistpapers.org/opinion/nih-releases-new-pronoun-guide-claims-intentional-misgendering-civil-rights-violation

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

Morgan Freeman slammed the terms “Black History Month” and “African American” on Saturday claiming that both terms were an “insult.”

The 85-year-old actor told The Sunday Times the annual observance — which takes place every February and recognizes the cultural achievement of black people — has a negative connotation to him and that it “relegates” his culture to just 4 weeks.

“Two things I can say publicly that I do not like,” said the “Million Dollar Baby” star. “Black History Month is an insult. You’re going to relegate my history to a month?”

“Also ‘African-American’ is an insult. I don’t subscribe to that title,” continued Freeman. “Black people have had different titles all the way back to the n-word and I do not know how these things get such a grip, but everyone uses ‘African-American.’ What does it really mean?”

https://nypost.com/2023/04/16/morgan-freeman-calls-black-history-month-and-african-american-terms-an-insult/

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

UK: Prime Minister’s bold ‘penis’ declaration

What was once automatic truth is now "bold"

UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has declared that women do not have penises amid an ongoing debate over transgender issues.

Mr Sunak was speaking with the ConservativeHome website on Thursday when he was asked to weigh in on Labour leader Keir Starmer’s recent statement that “99.9 per cent of women of course haven’t got a penis”.

Mr Starmer had been facing questions over transgender self-identification when he made the comment to The Sunday Times earlier this month, insisting that there would be “no rolling back” of women’s rights if he were elected PM.

“Sir Keir said recently that ‘99 per cent of women of course haven’t got a penis’. What percentage would you put it at?” ConservativeHome editor Paul Goodman asked Mr Sunak.

The PM laughed and said he had a “slightly different point of view to him on this”.  “I’ve been very clear that when it comes … on this topic, I think the first—” Mr Sunak began to respond.

“Do you think it’s 100 per cent?” Goodman interrupted.

“Yeah, of course,” Mr Sunak said.

“But I think the first thing to say is we should always have compassion and understanding and tolerance for those who are thinking about their gender. Of course we should, right? We’re a compassionate and understanding society and we’ll always remember that.”

Mr Sunak continued that “when it comes to these issues of protecting women’s rights, women’s spaces, I think the issue of biological sex is fundamentally important when we think about those questions, I’ve said that repeatedly”.

https://www.news.com.au/technology/science/human-body/uk-prime-minister-rishi-sunak-comments-on-transgender-debate-saying-no-women-have-penises/news-story/c831c0495fd0dceda9104713fe99a741

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

Goldman Sachs hands out ‘pronoun’ pamphlets as it fights sex harass suits

Rainbow-colored pamphlets advising “bring your authentic self” have lately appeared over cubicles at Goldman Sachs, coaching employees on the proper use of gender pronouns — and some bankers are reeling over the hypocrisy.

The pamphlet advises in addition to “she/her/hers/herself,” “he/him/his/himself” and the gender-neutral “they/them/their/themself” that another set of gender neutral pronouns is “ze/zir (zem) / zirs (zes) / zirself (zemself).”

Examples in a column to the right: “Ze went to the store. I spoke with zir / zem. The apple was zirs / zes.”

But some insiders say the posturing of Goldman — whose offices at 200 West. St. have long been run by old-school, testosterone-fueled, steak-eating males — embracing “woke” values is too much to stomach.

Goldman’s new message of acceptance and support looks especially phony given the mega-bank’s efforts to hush up accusations from thousands of women that sexism is rampant at the firm, employees gripe.

“I think Goldman has a lot of other problems to worry about besides pronouns,” one source who spoke on the condition of anonymity told The Post. “Perhaps start by getting rid of … those who harass women and then maybe the women here will take their diversity and inclusivity issues seriously.”

The pamphlet — which was first introduced in 2019 — set high standards for the workplace, both inside and out.

“Proactively share your pronouns to foster a sense of respect and awareness (e.g., “Hi, I’m Karen! My pronouns are she/hers. Welcome to the team!”),” the pamphlet advises.

“Replace gendered language with gender-inclusive language wherever possible in every day conversation (e.g., “Hi All,” v. “Hi guys.”).

The pamphlet also notes that “practice makes perfect,” advising workers to “practice using gender-neutral pronouns on your own time. Feeling comfortable with these terms does not happen immediately and can require concerted effort.”

https://nypost.com/2023/04/13/goldman-sachs-hands-out-pronoun-pamphlets-as-it-fights-sex-harassment-suits/

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

The RESTRICT Act could be used to shut down Truth Social and Rumble, or any app that challenges the ‘reported result’ of an election

Unlikely to get past the House once its implicatins are known. SCOTUS could block it too, fortunately

By Robert Romano

S.686, the Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology Act (RESTRICT Act), contains language that could be used to shut down any website or app with more than 1 million users that challenges the “reported result of a Federal election” — threatening websites and apps that allow free speech on their platforms including Truth Social and Rumble, not just TikTok, the supposed reason for the legislation.

Specifically, Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the proposed legislation states, “The Secretary [of Commerce], in consultation with the relevant executive department and agency heads, is authorized to and shall take action to identify, deter, disrupt, prevent, prohibit, investigate, or otherwise mitigate, including by negotiating, entering into, or imposing, and enforcing any mitigation measure to address any risk arising from any covered transaction by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States that the Secretary determines… poses an undue or unacceptable risk of… interfering in, or altering the result or reported result of a Federal election, as determined in coordination with the Attorney General, the Director of National Intelligence, the Secretary of Treasury, and the Federal Election Commission…”

The key words there are “interfering in, or altering the…reported result of a Federal election…” How does one “interfere” or “alter” the “reported result” of an election? By saying somebody else won the election and that it was rigged or corrupt.

That’s exactly what anybody, including former President Donald Trump in 2020 or former 2016 Green Party nominee Jill Stein or Al Gore in 2000 did by challenging the “reported result” of the presidential elections of 2020, 2016 and 2000, respectively, whether through lawsuits, television and print media or more recently, via social media.

https://dailytorch.com/2023/04/the-restrict-act-could-be-used-to-shut-down-truth-social-and-rumble-or-any-app-that-challenges-the-reported-result-of-an-election/

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

'Gender-neutral' pronouns will be introduced in South Australian state parliament for MPs and dignitaries... even His Majesty King Charles gets a 'woke' new title

South Australia's parliament is doing away with 'gender-specific' terms including 'he', 'she', 'him' and 'her' and will introduce 'gender-neutral' pronouns.

The Lower House will adopt the changes as part of its standing orders with even 'His Majesty' King Charles to now be referred to as 'the sovereign'.

Instead of saying His or Her Excellency for state Governors such as Frances Adamson, she and all subsequent titleholders will be called 'the governor'.

'They', 'their' and 'them' and will replace all gendered pronouns in the rules of procedure while parliamentary committees will no longer have a 'chairman' but be presided over by 'the chair'.

The state's Labor government and the Coalition opposition jointly supported the amendments.

A spokesperson for the government led by Premier Peter Malinauskas said the change would 'modernise the parliamentary workplace'.

'With record numbers of Labor women elected to the parliament, it makes no sense for them to be called 'chairman' when overseeing a committee,' they said.

Opposition spokeswoman Michelle Lensink said the changes reflect 'community expectations' while simplifying and updating references 'in line with other jurisdictions across the country'.

The modified language comes with a raft of other measures to allow electronic attendance at committee meetings, changes to maternity leave, changes to questions on notice deadlines and removal of redundant standing orders.

Despite the changes only applying to the Lower House some of South Australia's Upper House MPs were far from impressed.

'Wokeism has even penetrated the workings of parliament,' SA-Best MLC Frank Pangallo said.

'I don't think (gendered pronouns) caused any harm or offence in our community. I think this is sort of the left elements in politics that are exerting themselves.'

Mr Pangallo argued parliament should be focused on issues such as the crises in health and the child protection system.

One Nation MLC Sarah Game said 'at the first instance, I feel that to remove him/her/he/she is ridiculous'.

Greens MLC Robert Simms supported the changes and said they were in line with modern workplace standards.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11956561/South-Australia-Parliament-introduce-gender-neutral-language-King-Charles.html

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com/ (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************