The Montana Farmers Union reports the Trump Administration’s widespread tariffs already caused a significant drop in the price of several crops -- and they say
after an impassioned speech from a trans representative that we also recently elected. Things aren’t always black and white.
First, I applaud that the legislature rejected the anti-trans legislation, but did you listen to the speech yourself? If not, I recommend it. Its less than 10 minutes.
The tact the representative took wasn’t a impassioned speech defending the rights of trans folks on moral grounds (which is a very valid argument in my opinion anyway). It was a brass tacks presentation how people that weren’t trans could get caught up in the legislation and be negatively affected. I don’t believe the legislature rejected the bill because it would protect trans folks, they did it because it would hurt non-trans folks. As in, it was written too vaguely and wasn’t targeting *only * trans folks. I think it was smart of the legislator that gave that speech because they presented an argument they new their ultraconservative colleagues would agree with. I don’t fault them for making those points in that way. They were successful in getting the bill defeated. In my mind, that’s worth it, however if a new bill is introduced with tighter language I believe the Montana legislature would absolutely pass an anti-trans only bill.
First, I applaud that the legislature rejected the anti-trans legislation, but did you listen to the speech yourself? If not, I recommend it. Its less than 10 minutes.
The tact the representative took wasn’t a impassioned speech defending the rights of trans folks on moral grounds (which is a very valid argument in my opinion anyway). It was a brass tacks presentation how people that weren’t trans could get caught up in the legislation and be negatively affected. I don’t believe the legislature rejected the bill because it would protect trans folks, they did it because it would hurt non-trans folks. As in, it was written too vaguely and wasn’t targeting *only * trans folks. I think it was smart of the legislator that gave that speech because they presented an argument they new their ultraconservative colleagues would agree with. I don’t fault them for making those points in that way. They were successful in getting the bill defeated. In my mind, that’s worth it, however if a new bill is introduced with tighter language I believe the Montana legislature would absolutely pass an anti-trans only bill.
Wait. Now, reading the article is not enough? I need to listen to a 10min speech? /s