Posted on 03/24/2021 11:46:35 AM PDT by AnotherUnixGeek
The Spectator’s Amber Athey reports that South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem says she’s the victim of “conservative cancel culture” over her opposition to a bill making its way through the state legislature to “promote continued fairness in women’s sports”
(Excerpt) Read more at twitchy.com ...
Seems we have a bunch of lazy headline-only, pile on, folks here. Things have changed. Sign the bill for what it stands for, not what’s in it. smart, right.
5 13-67-4. Cause of Action.
16 If a student is deprived of an athletic opportunity or if a student suffers direct or
17 indirect harm, as a result of this Act being violated, that student has a private cause of
18 action for injunctive relief, damages, and any other relief available under law, against the
19 violating entity.
This seems vague enough to allow suit against a school or athletics program, even if they were unaware of the violation.
Of course she is. If any party is guilty of eating their own, it’s ours. One only has to read the threads here to see how prevalent it is............
If the law fails in federal court we have a bigger problem than what SD is dealing with.
The feds apparently don’t know we have only two sexes.
Republican women seem to have more balls than most Republican men. I thought Kristi was at the top. She may just another Republican p*ssy.
I just really dislike how she's chosen to make her case, and the whole "conservative cancel culture" schtick.
Whatever Kristi. You were put in place to execute our will and forcefully fight for that. You caved and offered weak excuses for doing what the NCAA and Chamber of Commerce wanted.
You are an administrator, not a leader.
Democrats push every position to the wall. If they lose 40% of the time in court, they gained 60 and that’s the new baseline.
Our side’s leaders like Kristi look at it, and only proceed on absolutely sure bets. This means at best, our cause is only maintained and never advanced. They never challenge the limits. If they ran Edwards Air Force base in the 1950s, we would still be flying P-51s.
She is worthless and sold out over financial threats. This tells us what she is, now we are only haggling over price.
So far we have learned that anytime someone says 4-D chess is occurring, conservatives lose.
“To each there comes in their lifetime a special moment when they are figuratively tapped on the shoulder and offered the chance to do a very special thing, unique to them and fitted to their talents. What a tragedy if that moment finds them unprepared or unqualified for that which could have been their finest hour.”
Winston Churchill
A leader would have signed it, surrounded by young female athletes. Then a Leader would have challenged Abbott, DeSantis, and other Republican governors to do the same and to join in her fight against the NCAA.
Noem is not a leader, she is a follower.
What I find the most interesting is seeing Governor Noem’s recent rise in our popularity, and that, all of the sudden, we see “stories” like this that seem to denigrate her conservative ‘gravitas’.
Not buying it. This is a RINO pre-emptive strike. Someone like Governor Noem scares the crap out of the DC Mafia.
Conservatives aren't going to tolerate Republicans that refuse to keep their promises and cave to the left. She should have realized that.
President Trump made a lot of terrible choices to help him govern. He has said as much.
With nearly four years left before the election, Kristi is - hopefully - a choice President Trump will avoid entirely.
She would not be my pick, but I can see how the optics of picking her might work for Trump or DeSantis as they try and go for the suburban female vote and the upper-middle-class vote that moved away from the GOP in 2020. She presents herself very well.
It will be interesting to see what happens to her in the next several months concerning this issue because it’s not going away.
And that raises the obvious question. Why Not?
“Pro-Life Democrat”
A working definition of oxymoron.
Well I’m not a lawyer, but when you go back up and read section 2, all the school has to do is obtain a statement from the athlete verifying their sex at birth. And then it even says if they doubt they “may” remove the athlete from participation. It sounds like the section you quoted would put the burden on the person claiming they suffered damage, and seems focus on preventing schools from ignoring the law.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.