Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's clearly out of her depth. This is what happens when you elect an activist with no actual policy experience.

She lives in a binary world. You are either with her or against her. There is no middle ground.

Agree or disagree with her, she is very passionate about her activism. She’s a great activist! She cares deeply about trans LGBTQ issues.

What she is not, is a good council woman. She should never have gone into it, and she should not run again. She should keep her focus on her passion projects, where she will be very effective for them.

I browse her Twitter and you can tell what she cares about. I don’t see the apology on there, unless I missed it in one of her threads.

If you live in her district, and if she runs again, here's what you can do: vote for a different candidate. If you don't live in her district? *shrug*

Meanwhile the substance of what she said is correct. Even if the so-called-"Christian" nationalists/white supremacists happen to be on the same side as the Muslim parents at the protest on this specific issue, they are antithetical to everyone who is non-white and/or has any religious beliefs that aren't their particular brand. If anybody at the protest had asked me, I would have said: Don't ally with people who believe you have no right to exist, because you will lose even if you win.

Why jump all the way to that conclusion? Why assume that people who want to opt-out think you have no right to exist?

There are other reasons to opt out, which are far more benign. Some of the books contain sexual content that families may not want to expose their children to at a young age. Is that denying existence? No. That’s just upholding a different belief. It’s simple to lump everybody who disagrees into one “they are bad people” category, but the world doesn’t work that way. That’s why Mink’s comments are so concerning.

I personally would not opt out my own children, but I can respect the views of others. I am also against labeling people, which is happening FAR too frequently lately.

How do you think Christian nationalists and white supremacists feel about Muslim-Americans?

I just posted saying that I don’t support labels or assumptions, and you ask me a question that contains both.

Since I don’t think all people feel the same way about any topic, I’m going to have a hard time answering that question.

How do you think KKK members feel about African-Americans? How do you think Nazis feel about Jews? How do you think Hindu nationalists feel about Muslims in India? How do you think Burmese Buddhist nationalists feel about Muslims in Burma?

I simply told you I don’t label people or make assumptions about their beliefs. For some reason, I think you found my reasonable and respectful approach to life insulting.

I watched the video of Mink’s comments, which made assumptions and labeled people. I simply stated that it’s too elementary to look at the opt-out group and label them as siding with white supremacists.

I’m going to continue being open-minded to those around me regardless of your extreme line of questioning. I see the attempt to paint me into a corner here.

I'm not the PP, but in this specific case, one subset of the Muslim American community DID align themselves with white supremacists by joining a court case with them.

Did the SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink is referring to join this court case? Or do you just believe that all Muslims are friends and anything one Muslim does reflects on all Muslims?

The SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink was referring to were at a joint protest with "Moms For Liberty".

No, she said "some Muslim families" - she wasn't referring to the specific people at the protest. She was referring to any Muslim people that oppose having books about LGBTQ+ people in schools. Not the Latino, White or Black people that oppose these books. The MUSLIM people.

NP, but if your argument depends on equating "some Muslim families" to her saying "any Muslim families" you're not representing what she said in good faith. She was very clear that she didn't think all Muslims were siding with white supremacists, and she was very clear that she would not put the people who spoke at the meeting in the same category as white supremacists. It was a nuanced statement and you're misrepresenting it.

I literally said, "some Muslim families". She was not referring to specific Muslims who were at the protest or joined a court case. She was referring to the MUSLIMS that agree with people who think that kids should not be reading certain books in schools. Now the Latino, Black and White people who oppose these books are not White supremacists, no, but the Muslims are.

Yes you said "some Muslim families" and then you said "She was referring to any Muslim people that oppose having books about LGBTQ+ people in schools." I guess I misquoted you slightly and changed that last "people" to "families," but I didn't misrepresent what you said at all. You meanwhile have changed Mink's statement that this issue has "unfortunately put, it does put, some, not all of course, but some Muslim families on the same side of an issue as white supremacists" into her saying that Muslims who oppose the books ARE white supremacists. She also said the people she'd talked to at the meeting, who are opposed to the books were not people she'd put in that category and that she was trying to understand their perspective. You're turning all that on its head to claim that she said the Muslims opposed to these books were white supremacists, which isn't what she said, and no person watching the video with an open mind would think she said that.

Anonymous wrote:By the way I'm guessing none of you thought Trump was being "nuanced" when he said "And some, I assume, are good people."

Only progressives can be nuanced. You should know this by now.

By the way I'm guessing none of you thought Trump was being "nuanced" when he said "And some, I assume, are good people."

Btw, I know she didn't intend this, but her comments come across as a threat to Muslims. She's saying, I know all these White, Latino and Black people also don't like these books, but YOU, you specifically, will be labeled as being equivalent to White supremacists - e.g. you are Muslim extremists. Do any of you know or remember what happened to Muslims after 9/11? It was traumatic. It's simply not okay to label Muslims that hold views commonly held by other Americans as being extremist. It's untrue that these views are rare and it's dangerous to Muslims to support singling them out as extremists.

Btw it's hilarious you are accusing me of misrepresenting Mink's comments in the same breath where you literally say I said something I did not say.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's clearly out of her depth. This is what happens when you elect an activist with no actual policy experience.

She lives in a binary world. You are either with her or against her. There is no middle ground.

Agree or disagree with her, she is very passionate about her activism. She’s a great activist! She cares deeply about trans LGBTQ issues.

What she is not, is a good council woman. She should never have gone into it, and she should not run again. She should keep her focus on her passion projects, where she will be very effective for them.

I browse her Twitter and you can tell what she cares about. I don’t see the apology on there, unless I missed it in one of her threads.

If you live in her district, and if she runs again, here's what you can do: vote for a different candidate. If you don't live in her district? *shrug*

Meanwhile the substance of what she said is correct. Even if the so-called-"Christian" nationalists/white supremacists happen to be on the same side as the Muslim parents at the protest on this specific issue, they are antithetical to everyone who is non-white and/or has any religious beliefs that aren't their particular brand. If anybody at the protest had asked me, I would have said: Don't ally with people who believe you have no right to exist, because you will lose even if you win.

Why jump all the way to that conclusion? Why assume that people who want to opt-out think you have no right to exist?

There are other reasons to opt out, which are far more benign. Some of the books contain sexual content that families may not want to expose their children to at a young age. Is that denying existence? No. That’s just upholding a different belief. It’s simple to lump everybody who disagrees into one “they are bad people” category, but the world doesn’t work that way. That’s why Mink’s comments are so concerning.

I personally would not opt out my own children, but I can respect the views of others. I am also against labeling people, which is happening FAR too frequently lately.

How do you think Christian nationalists and white supremacists feel about Muslim-Americans?

I just posted saying that I don’t support labels or assumptions, and you ask me a question that contains both.

Since I don’t think all people feel the same way about any topic, I’m going to have a hard time answering that question.

How do you think KKK members feel about African-Americans? How do you think Nazis feel about Jews? How do you think Hindu nationalists feel about Muslims in India? How do you think Burmese Buddhist nationalists feel about Muslims in Burma?

I simply told you I don’t label people or make assumptions about their beliefs. For some reason, I think you found my reasonable and respectful approach to life insulting.

I watched the video of Mink’s comments, which made assumptions and labeled people. I simply stated that it’s too elementary to look at the opt-out group and label them as siding with white supremacists.

I’m going to continue being open-minded to those around me regardless of your extreme line of questioning. I see the attempt to paint me into a corner here.

I'm not the PP, but in this specific case, one subset of the Muslim American community DID align themselves with white supremacists by joining a court case with them.

Did the SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink is referring to join this court case? Or do you just believe that all Muslims are friends and anything one Muslim does reflects on all Muslims?

The SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink was referring to were at a joint protest with "Moms For Liberty".

No, she said "some Muslim families" - she wasn't referring to the specific people at the protest. She was referring to any Muslim people that oppose having books about LGBTQ+ people in schools. Not the Latino, White or Black people that oppose these books. The MUSLIM people.

NP, but if your argument depends on equating "some Muslim families" to her saying "any Muslim families" you're not representing what she said in good faith. She was very clear that she didn't think all Muslims were siding with white supremacists, and she was very clear that she would not put the people who spoke at the meeting in the same category as white supremacists. It was a nuanced statement and you're misrepresenting it.

I literally said, "some Muslim families". She was not referring to specific Muslims who were at the protest or joined a court case. She was referring to the MUSLIMS that agree with people who think that kids should not be reading certain books in schools. Now the Latino, Black and White people who oppose these books are not White supremacists, no, but the Muslims are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's clearly out of her depth. This is what happens when you elect an activist with no actual policy experience.

She lives in a binary world. You are either with her or against her. There is no middle ground.

Agree or disagree with her, she is very passionate about her activism. She’s a great activist! She cares deeply about trans LGBTQ issues.

What she is not, is a good council woman. She should never have gone into it, and she should not run again. She should keep her focus on her passion projects, where she will be very effective for them.

I browse her Twitter and you can tell what she cares about. I don’t see the apology on there, unless I missed it in one of her threads.

If you live in her district, and if she runs again, here's what you can do: vote for a different candidate. If you don't live in her district? *shrug*

Meanwhile the substance of what she said is correct. Even if the so-called-"Christian" nationalists/white supremacists happen to be on the same side as the Muslim parents at the protest on this specific issue, they are antithetical to everyone who is non-white and/or has any religious beliefs that aren't their particular brand. If anybody at the protest had asked me, I would have said: Don't ally with people who believe you have no right to exist, because you will lose even if you win.

Why jump all the way to that conclusion? Why assume that people who want to opt-out think you have no right to exist?

There are other reasons to opt out, which are far more benign. Some of the books contain sexual content that families may not want to expose their children to at a young age. Is that denying existence? No. That’s just upholding a different belief. It’s simple to lump everybody who disagrees into one “they are bad people” category, but the world doesn’t work that way. That’s why Mink’s comments are so concerning.

I personally would not opt out my own children, but I can respect the views of others. I am also against labeling people, which is happening FAR too frequently lately.

How do you think Christian nationalists and white supremacists feel about Muslim-Americans?

I just posted saying that I don’t support labels or assumptions, and you ask me a question that contains both.

Since I don’t think all people feel the same way about any topic, I’m going to have a hard time answering that question.

How do you think KKK members feel about African-Americans? How do you think Nazis feel about Jews? How do you think Hindu nationalists feel about Muslims in India? How do you think Burmese Buddhist nationalists feel about Muslims in Burma?

I simply told you I don’t label people or make assumptions about their beliefs. For some reason, I think you found my reasonable and respectful approach to life insulting.

I watched the video of Mink’s comments, which made assumptions and labeled people. I simply stated that it’s too elementary to look at the opt-out group and label them as siding with white supremacists.

I’m going to continue being open-minded to those around me regardless of your extreme line of questioning. I see the attempt to paint me into a corner here.

I'm not the PP, but in this specific case, one subset of the Muslim American community DID align themselves with white supremacists by joining a court case with them.

Did the SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink is referring to join this court case? Or do you just believe that all Muslims are friends and anything one Muslim does reflects on all Muslims?

The SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink was referring to were at a joint protest with "Moms For Liberty".

No, she said "some Muslim families" - she wasn't referring to the specific people at the protest. She was referring to any Muslim people that oppose having books about LGBTQ+ people in schools. Not the Latino, White or Black people that oppose these books. The MUSLIM people.

You're taking her words out of context.

No I'm not, you're just upset that her words directly contradict your argument.

Eh? No. This isn't ancient history, it happened just last week.

Okay? Just to review, in her comments she said, "It does put some Muslim families, not all of course, but some Muslim families on the same side of an issue as white supremacists and outright bigots". She was absolutely NOT referring simply to the specific people who were at the protest. Why is she fixating on Muslims? Does she not realize how many Christian people, whom nobody is calling "White supremacists and outright bigots", don't like these books? I wish it weren't true but transphobia and homophobia are widespread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's clearly out of her depth. This is what happens when you elect an activist with no actual policy experience.

She lives in a binary world. You are either with her or against her. There is no middle ground.

Agree or disagree with her, she is very passionate about her activism. She’s a great activist! She cares deeply about trans LGBTQ issues.

What she is not, is a good council woman. She should never have gone into it, and she should not run again. She should keep her focus on her passion projects, where she will be very effective for them.

I browse her Twitter and you can tell what she cares about. I don’t see the apology on there, unless I missed it in one of her threads.

If you live in her district, and if she runs again, here's what you can do: vote for a different candidate. If you don't live in her district? *shrug*

Meanwhile the substance of what she said is correct. Even if the so-called-"Christian" nationalists/white supremacists happen to be on the same side as the Muslim parents at the protest on this specific issue, they are antithetical to everyone who is non-white and/or has any religious beliefs that aren't their particular brand. If anybody at the protest had asked me, I would have said: Don't ally with people who believe you have no right to exist, because you will lose even if you win.

Why jump all the way to that conclusion? Why assume that people who want to opt-out think you have no right to exist?

There are other reasons to opt out, which are far more benign. Some of the books contain sexual content that families may not want to expose their children to at a young age. Is that denying existence? No. That’s just upholding a different belief. It’s simple to lump everybody who disagrees into one “they are bad people” category, but the world doesn’t work that way. That’s why Mink’s comments are so concerning.

I personally would not opt out my own children, but I can respect the views of others. I am also against labeling people, which is happening FAR too frequently lately.

How do you think Christian nationalists and white supremacists feel about Muslim-Americans?

I just posted saying that I don’t support labels or assumptions, and you ask me a question that contains both.

Since I don’t think all people feel the same way about any topic, I’m going to have a hard time answering that question.

How do you think KKK members feel about African-Americans? How do you think Nazis feel about Jews? How do you think Hindu nationalists feel about Muslims in India? How do you think Burmese Buddhist nationalists feel about Muslims in Burma?

I simply told you I don’t label people or make assumptions about their beliefs. For some reason, I think you found my reasonable and respectful approach to life insulting.

I watched the video of Mink’s comments, which made assumptions and labeled people. I simply stated that it’s too elementary to look at the opt-out group and label them as siding with white supremacists.

I’m going to continue being open-minded to those around me regardless of your extreme line of questioning. I see the attempt to paint me into a corner here.

I'm not the PP, but in this specific case, one subset of the Muslim American community DID align themselves with white supremacists by joining a court case with them.

Did the SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink is referring to join this court case? Or do you just believe that all Muslims are friends and anything one Muslim does reflects on all Muslims?

The SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink was referring to were at a joint protest with "Moms For Liberty".

No, she said "some Muslim families" - she wasn't referring to the specific people at the protest. She was referring to any Muslim people that oppose having books about LGBTQ+ people in schools. Not the Latino, White or Black people that oppose these books. The MUSLIM people.

NP, but if your argument depends on equating "some Muslim families" to her saying "any Muslim families" you're not representing what she said in good faith. She was very clear that she didn't think all Muslims were siding with white supremacists, and she was very clear that she would not put the people who spoke at the meeting in the same category as white supremacists. It was a nuanced statement and you're misrepresenting it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's clearly out of her depth. This is what happens when you elect an activist with no actual policy experience.

She lives in a binary world. You are either with her or against her. There is no middle ground.

Agree or disagree with her, she is very passionate about her activism. She’s a great activist! She cares deeply about trans LGBTQ issues.

What she is not, is a good council woman. She should never have gone into it, and she should not run again. She should keep her focus on her passion projects, where she will be very effective for them.

I browse her Twitter and you can tell what she cares about. I don’t see the apology on there, unless I missed it in one of her threads.

If you live in her district, and if she runs again, here's what you can do: vote for a different candidate. If you don't live in her district? *shrug*

Meanwhile the substance of what she said is correct. Even if the so-called-"Christian" nationalists/white supremacists happen to be on the same side as the Muslim parents at the protest on this specific issue, they are antithetical to everyone who is non-white and/or has any religious beliefs that aren't their particular brand. If anybody at the protest had asked me, I would have said: Don't ally with people who believe you have no right to exist, because you will lose even if you win.

Why jump all the way to that conclusion? Why assume that people who want to opt-out think you have no right to exist?

There are other reasons to opt out, which are far more benign. Some of the books contain sexual content that families may not want to expose their children to at a young age. Is that denying existence? No. That’s just upholding a different belief. It’s simple to lump everybody who disagrees into one “they are bad people” category, but the world doesn’t work that way. That’s why Mink’s comments are so concerning.

I personally would not opt out my own children, but I can respect the views of others. I am also against labeling people, which is happening FAR too frequently lately.

How do you think Christian nationalists and white supremacists feel about Muslim-Americans?

I just posted saying that I don’t support labels or assumptions, and you ask me a question that contains both.

Since I don’t think all people feel the same way about any topic, I’m going to have a hard time answering that question.

How do you think KKK members feel about African-Americans? How do you think Nazis feel about Jews? How do you think Hindu nationalists feel about Muslims in India? How do you think Burmese Buddhist nationalists feel about Muslims in Burma?

I simply told you I don’t label people or make assumptions about their beliefs. For some reason, I think you found my reasonable and respectful approach to life insulting.

I watched the video of Mink’s comments, which made assumptions and labeled people. I simply stated that it’s too elementary to look at the opt-out group and label them as siding with white supremacists.

I’m going to continue being open-minded to those around me regardless of your extreme line of questioning. I see the attempt to paint me into a corner here.

I'm not the PP, but in this specific case, one subset of the Muslim American community DID align themselves with white supremacists by joining a court case with them.

Did the SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink is referring to join this court case? Or do you just believe that all Muslims are friends and anything one Muslim does reflects on all Muslims?

The SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink was referring to were at a joint protest with "Moms For Liberty".

No, she said "some Muslim families" - she wasn't referring to the specific people at the protest. She was referring to any Muslim people that oppose having books about LGBTQ+ people in schools. Not the Latino, White or Black people that oppose these books. The MUSLIM people.

You're taking her words out of context.

No I'm not, you're just upset that her words directly contradict your argument.

Eh? No. This isn't ancient history, it happened just last week.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's clearly out of her depth. This is what happens when you elect an activist with no actual policy experience.

She lives in a binary world. You are either with her or against her. There is no middle ground.

Agree or disagree with her, she is very passionate about her activism. She’s a great activist! She cares deeply about trans LGBTQ issues.

What she is not, is a good council woman. She should never have gone into it, and she should not run again. She should keep her focus on her passion projects, where she will be very effective for them.

I browse her Twitter and you can tell what she cares about. I don’t see the apology on there, unless I missed it in one of her threads.

If you live in her district, and if she runs again, here's what you can do: vote for a different candidate. If you don't live in her district? *shrug*

Meanwhile the substance of what she said is correct. Even if the so-called-"Christian" nationalists/white supremacists happen to be on the same side as the Muslim parents at the protest on this specific issue, they are antithetical to everyone who is non-white and/or has any religious beliefs that aren't their particular brand. If anybody at the protest had asked me, I would have said: Don't ally with people who believe you have no right to exist, because you will lose even if you win.

Why jump all the way to that conclusion? Why assume that people who want to opt-out think you have no right to exist?

There are other reasons to opt out, which are far more benign. Some of the books contain sexual content that families may not want to expose their children to at a young age. Is that denying existence? No. That’s just upholding a different belief. It’s simple to lump everybody who disagrees into one “they are bad people” category, but the world doesn’t work that way. That’s why Mink’s comments are so concerning.

I personally would not opt out my own children, but I can respect the views of others. I am also against labeling people, which is happening FAR too frequently lately.

How do you think Christian nationalists and white supremacists feel about Muslim-Americans?

I just posted saying that I don’t support labels or assumptions, and you ask me a question that contains both.

Since I don’t think all people feel the same way about any topic, I’m going to have a hard time answering that question.

How do you think KKK members feel about African-Americans? How do you think Nazis feel about Jews? How do you think Hindu nationalists feel about Muslims in India? How do you think Burmese Buddhist nationalists feel about Muslims in Burma?

I simply told you I don’t label people or make assumptions about their beliefs. For some reason, I think you found my reasonable and respectful approach to life insulting.

I watched the video of Mink’s comments, which made assumptions and labeled people. I simply stated that it’s too elementary to look at the opt-out group and label them as siding with white supremacists.

I’m going to continue being open-minded to those around me regardless of your extreme line of questioning. I see the attempt to paint me into a corner here.

I'm not the PP, but in this specific case, one subset of the Muslim American community DID align themselves with white supremacists by joining a court case with them.

Did the SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink is referring to join this court case? Or do you just believe that all Muslims are friends and anything one Muslim does reflects on all Muslims?

The SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink was referring to were at a joint protest with "Moms For Liberty".

No, she said "some Muslim families" - she wasn't referring to the specific people at the protest. She was referring to any Muslim people that oppose having books about LGBTQ+ people in schools. Not the Latino, White or Black people that oppose these books. The MUSLIM people.

You're taking her words out of context.

No I'm not, you're just upset that her words directly contradict your argument.

Btw, I know she didn't intend this, but her comments come across as a threat to Muslims. She's saying, I know all these White, Latino and Black people also don't like these books, but YOU, you specifically, will be labeled as being equivalent to White supremacists - e.g. you are Muslim extremists. Do any of you know or remember what happened to Muslims after 9/11? It was traumatic. It's simply not okay to label Muslims that hold views commonly held by other Americans as being extremist. It's untrue that these views are rare and it's dangerous to Muslims to support singling them out as extremists.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's clearly out of her depth. This is what happens when you elect an activist with no actual policy experience.

She lives in a binary world. You are either with her or against her. There is no middle ground.

Agree or disagree with her, she is very passionate about her activism. She’s a great activist! She cares deeply about trans LGBTQ issues.

What she is not, is a good council woman. She should never have gone into it, and she should not run again. She should keep her focus on her passion projects, where she will be very effective for them.

I browse her Twitter and you can tell what she cares about. I don’t see the apology on there, unless I missed it in one of her threads.

If you live in her district, and if she runs again, here's what you can do: vote for a different candidate. If you don't live in her district? *shrug*

Meanwhile the substance of what she said is correct. Even if the so-called-"Christian" nationalists/white supremacists happen to be on the same side as the Muslim parents at the protest on this specific issue, they are antithetical to everyone who is non-white and/or has any religious beliefs that aren't their particular brand. If anybody at the protest had asked me, I would have said: Don't ally with people who believe you have no right to exist, because you will lose even if you win.

Why jump all the way to that conclusion? Why assume that people who want to opt-out think you have no right to exist?

There are other reasons to opt out, which are far more benign. Some of the books contain sexual content that families may not want to expose their children to at a young age. Is that denying existence? No. That’s just upholding a different belief. It’s simple to lump everybody who disagrees into one “they are bad people” category, but the world doesn’t work that way. That’s why Mink’s comments are so concerning.

I personally would not opt out my own children, but I can respect the views of others. I am also against labeling people, which is happening FAR too frequently lately.

How do you think Christian nationalists and white supremacists feel about Muslim-Americans?

I just posted saying that I don’t support labels or assumptions, and you ask me a question that contains both.

Since I don’t think all people feel the same way about any topic, I’m going to have a hard time answering that question.

How do you think KKK members feel about African-Americans? How do you think Nazis feel about Jews? How do you think Hindu nationalists feel about Muslims in India? How do you think Burmese Buddhist nationalists feel about Muslims in Burma?

I simply told you I don’t label people or make assumptions about their beliefs. For some reason, I think you found my reasonable and respectful approach to life insulting.

I watched the video of Mink’s comments, which made assumptions and labeled people. I simply stated that it’s too elementary to look at the opt-out group and label them as siding with white supremacists.

I’m going to continue being open-minded to those around me regardless of your extreme line of questioning. I see the attempt to paint me into a corner here.

I'm not the PP, but in this specific case, one subset of the Muslim American community DID align themselves with white supremacists by joining a court case with them.

Did the SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink is referring to join this court case? Or do you just believe that all Muslims are friends and anything one Muslim does reflects on all Muslims?

The SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink was referring to were at a joint protest with "Moms For Liberty".

No, she said "some Muslim families" - she wasn't referring to the specific people at the protest. She was referring to any Muslim people that oppose having books about LGBTQ+ people in schools. Not the Latino, White or Black people that oppose these books. The MUSLIM people.

You're taking her words out of context.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's clearly out of her depth. This is what happens when you elect an activist with no actual policy experience.

She lives in a binary world. You are either with her or against her. There is no middle ground.

Agree or disagree with her, she is very passionate about her activism. She’s a great activist! She cares deeply about trans LGBTQ issues.

What she is not, is a good council woman. She should never have gone into it, and she should not run again. She should keep her focus on her passion projects, where she will be very effective for them.

I browse her Twitter and you can tell what she cares about. I don’t see the apology on there, unless I missed it in one of her threads.

If you live in her district, and if she runs again, here's what you can do: vote for a different candidate. If you don't live in her district? *shrug*

Meanwhile the substance of what she said is correct. Even if the so-called-"Christian" nationalists/white supremacists happen to be on the same side as the Muslim parents at the protest on this specific issue, they are antithetical to everyone who is non-white and/or has any religious beliefs that aren't their particular brand. If anybody at the protest had asked me, I would have said: Don't ally with people who believe you have no right to exist, because you will lose even if you win.

Why jump all the way to that conclusion? Why assume that people who want to opt-out think you have no right to exist?

There are other reasons to opt out, which are far more benign. Some of the books contain sexual content that families may not want to expose their children to at a young age. Is that denying existence? No. That’s just upholding a different belief. It’s simple to lump everybody who disagrees into one “they are bad people” category, but the world doesn’t work that way. That’s why Mink’s comments are so concerning.

I personally would not opt out my own children, but I can respect the views of others. I am also against labeling people, which is happening FAR too frequently lately.

How do you think Christian nationalists and white supremacists feel about Muslim-Americans?

I just posted saying that I don’t support labels or assumptions, and you ask me a question that contains both.

Since I don’t think all people feel the same way about any topic, I’m going to have a hard time answering that question.

How do you think KKK members feel about African-Americans? How do you think Nazis feel about Jews? How do you think Hindu nationalists feel about Muslims in India? How do you think Burmese Buddhist nationalists feel about Muslims in Burma?

I simply told you I don’t label people or make assumptions about their beliefs. For some reason, I think you found my reasonable and respectful approach to life insulting.

I watched the video of Mink’s comments, which made assumptions and labeled people. I simply stated that it’s too elementary to look at the opt-out group and label them as siding with white supremacists.

I’m going to continue being open-minded to those around me regardless of your extreme line of questioning. I see the attempt to paint me into a corner here.

I'm not the PP, but in this specific case, one subset of the Muslim American community DID align themselves with white supremacists by joining a court case with them.

Did the SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink is referring to join this court case? Or do you just believe that all Muslims are friends and anything one Muslim does reflects on all Muslims?

The SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink was referring to were at a joint protest with "Moms For Liberty".

No, she said "some Muslim families" - she wasn't referring to the specific people at the protest. She was referring to any Muslim people that oppose having books about LGBTQ+ people in schools. Not the Latino, White or Black people that oppose these books. The MUSLIM people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's clearly out of her depth. This is what happens when you elect an activist with no actual policy experience.

She lives in a binary world. You are either with her or against her. There is no middle ground.

Agree or disagree with her, she is very passionate about her activism. She’s a great activist! She cares deeply about trans LGBTQ issues.

What she is not, is a good council woman. She should never have gone into it, and she should not run again. She should keep her focus on her passion projects, where she will be very effective for them.

I browse her Twitter and you can tell what she cares about. I don’t see the apology on there, unless I missed it in one of her threads.

If you live in her district, and if she runs again, here's what you can do: vote for a different candidate. If you don't live in her district? *shrug*

Meanwhile the substance of what she said is correct. Even if the so-called-"Christian" nationalists/white supremacists happen to be on the same side as the Muslim parents at the protest on this specific issue, they are antithetical to everyone who is non-white and/or has any religious beliefs that aren't their particular brand. If anybody at the protest had asked me, I would have said: Don't ally with people who believe you have no right to exist, because you will lose even if you win.

Why jump all the way to that conclusion? Why assume that people who want to opt-out think you have no right to exist?

There are other reasons to opt out, which are far more benign. Some of the books contain sexual content that families may not want to expose their children to at a young age. Is that denying existence? No. That’s just upholding a different belief. It’s simple to lump everybody who disagrees into one “they are bad people” category, but the world doesn’t work that way. That’s why Mink’s comments are so concerning.

I personally would not opt out my own children, but I can respect the views of others. I am also against labeling people, which is happening FAR too frequently lately.

How do you think Christian nationalists and white supremacists feel about Muslim-Americans?

I just posted saying that I don’t support labels or assumptions, and you ask me a question that contains both.

Since I don’t think all people feel the same way about any topic, I’m going to have a hard time answering that question.

How do you think KKK members feel about African-Americans? How do you think Nazis feel about Jews? How do you think Hindu nationalists feel about Muslims in India? How do you think Burmese Buddhist nationalists feel about Muslims in Burma?

I simply told you I don’t label people or make assumptions about their beliefs. For some reason, I think you found my reasonable and respectful approach to life insulting.

I watched the video of Mink’s comments, which made assumptions and labeled people. I simply stated that it’s too elementary to look at the opt-out group and label them as siding with white supremacists.

I’m going to continue being open-minded to those around me regardless of your extreme line of questioning. I see the attempt to paint me into a corner here.

You don't label people, even when they label themselves? That certainly is open-minded.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's clearly out of her depth. This is what happens when you elect an activist with no actual policy experience.

She lives in a binary world. You are either with her or against her. There is no middle ground.

Agree or disagree with her, she is very passionate about her activism. She’s a great activist! She cares deeply about trans LGBTQ issues.

What she is not, is a good council woman. She should never have gone into it, and she should not run again. She should keep her focus on her passion projects, where she will be very effective for them.

I browse her Twitter and you can tell what she cares about. I don’t see the apology on there, unless I missed it in one of her threads.

If you live in her district, and if she runs again, here's what you can do: vote for a different candidate. If you don't live in her district? *shrug*

Meanwhile the substance of what she said is correct. Even if the so-called-"Christian" nationalists/white supremacists happen to be on the same side as the Muslim parents at the protest on this specific issue, they are antithetical to everyone who is non-white and/or has any religious beliefs that aren't their particular brand. If anybody at the protest had asked me, I would have said: Don't ally with people who believe you have no right to exist, because you will lose even if you win.

Why jump all the way to that conclusion? Why assume that people who want to opt-out think you have no right to exist?

There are other reasons to opt out, which are far more benign. Some of the books contain sexual content that families may not want to expose their children to at a young age. Is that denying existence? No. That’s just upholding a different belief. It’s simple to lump everybody who disagrees into one “they are bad people” category, but the world doesn’t work that way. That’s why Mink’s comments are so concerning.

I personally would not opt out my own children, but I can respect the views of others. I am also against labeling people, which is happening FAR too frequently lately.

How do you think Christian nationalists and white supremacists feel about Muslim-Americans?

I just posted saying that I don’t support labels or assumptions, and you ask me a question that contains both.

Since I don’t think all people feel the same way about any topic, I’m going to have a hard time answering that question.

How do you think KKK members feel about African-Americans? How do you think Nazis feel about Jews? How do you think Hindu nationalists feel about Muslims in India? How do you think Burmese Buddhist nationalists feel about Muslims in Burma?

I simply told you I don’t label people or make assumptions about their beliefs. For some reason, I think you found my reasonable and respectful approach to life insulting.

I watched the video of Mink’s comments, which made assumptions and labeled people. I simply stated that it’s too elementary to look at the opt-out group and label them as siding with white supremacists.

I’m going to continue being open-minded to those around me regardless of your extreme line of questioning. I see the attempt to paint me into a corner here.

I'm not the PP, but in this specific case, one subset of the Muslim American community DID align themselves with white supremacists by joining a court case with them.

Did the SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink is referring to join this court case? Or do you just believe that all Muslims are friends and anything one Muslim does reflects on all Muslims?

The SPECIFIC Muslim people Mink was referring to were at a joint protest with "Moms For Liberty".