LGBTQ+ 'Pride' is totalitarian

This past Saturday night, the New York Rangers National Hockey League (NHL) team did something almost unbelievable. Though scheduled to wear LGBTQ "Pride" jerseys during pregame warmups, not one member of the team did so.

Another recent example of defying LGBTQ+ "Pride" jersey demands in the NHL – which is run by people who are as governed by cowardice as those who run Major League Baseball, the National Football League and the National Basketball Association – was a player for the Philadelphia Flyers, Ivan Provorov, who refused to wear a "Pride" jersey 10 days earlier.

"Provorov refused to participate in pregame warmups where players wore Pride-themed jerseys and wielded hockey sticks wrapped in rainbow Pride tape. 'I respect everyone,' he told reporters after they won the actual game against the Anaheim Ducks. 'I respect everybody's choices. My choice is to stay true to myself and my religion.'"

Provorov is Russian Orthodox. (Question: has one Protestant or Catholic NHL player refused to wear a "Pride" jersey?)…

“Ad Hominem”—This is as common around here as ants at a picnic.

;-)

Example:

Me: “The Deep State propaganda about Ukraine is a lie.

FR Poster: “You are a Russian plant.”

The idea that "not wearing a "Pride" shirt is bigoted" is fallacious because it assumes that everyone who doesn't wear a Pride shirt is bigoted and that their beliefs or actions are motivated by prejudice. This is a false generalization and an unfair attribution of motive, as there may be various reasons why someone chooses not to wear a Pride shirt, including personal preference, comfort, or a lack of resources, rather than bigotry. Additionally, wearing a Pride shirt doesn't necessarily guarantee that someone is not bigoted or prejudiced, and conversely, not wearing one doesn't automatically make someone so. In order to assess someone's beliefs or actions, it's necessary to consider the context and their behavior, rather than relying on outward appearances.

Also: Ad Hominem: Attacking the person, rather than the argument itself. Straw Man: Misrepresenting someone's argument to make it easier to attack. False Dilemma: Presenting only two options as the only possible outcomes, when there are more options available. Hasty Generalization: Reaching a conclusion based on insufficient evidence. Slippery Slope: Assuming that one event will inevitably lead to another, without evidence to support the claim. Circular Reasoning: Assuming the conclusion in the premise of an argument. Begging the Question: Assuming the answer to the question being asked in the argument itself. False Analogy: Comparing two things that are not similar enough to support the argument. Non Sequitur: Drawing a conclusion that doesn't logically follow from the premise. Ad Populum: Appealing to the emotions, prejudices, or desires of a group, rather than making a rational argument.

Well done, and it is also duplicitous since the wanton use of the broadside "homophobic" label - a slur - is "hate speech" based upon the measure used by liberals.

“...They’re really working on legalization of pedophilia...”

That is their endgame. That is why they came up with a new and less-negative sounding term for pedos by calling them “minor attracted persons”.

They are still perverted creeps no matter how they try to whitewash it.

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.