Anti free speech in Education, Anti equal custody in Divorce.
Theme: Political Shenanigans
Author’s Note: Compiled by Jack with added input.
Length: 1,200 words
Reading Time: 4 minutes
Desantis on Divorce Custody 
Desantis just vetoed bill SB 1796 which would have erased permanent alimony and set up a formula based on the duration of the marriage. Part of the bill would have required judges to begin with a “presumption” that children should split their time equally between parents.
When Rick Scott was governor, he also vetoed a new formula for custody.
Creating an alimony structure based on how long the marriage lasted makes sense and is just.
Other states like Arkansas have passed reforms to their custody laws, creating a presumption of 50/50 custody.
Allowing for permanent alimony, regardless of how short the marriage was, is insane and unjust.
The reason for the veto?
In his rejection letter, DeSantis wrote,
“If CS / CS / SB 1796 were to become law and be given retroactive effect as the Legislature intends, it would unconstitutionally impair vested rights under certain preexisting marital settment agreements.”
It’s a fake excuse. He’s hiding behind the constitution to justify an unconstitutional position.
The Tampa Bay Times explains further.
“If signed into law, this legislation would have upended thousands upon thousands of settlements, backlogging the courts and throwing many Floridians’ lives into turmoil…”
So in his view, it’s better not to disturb the already broken system rather than to improve the system.
All because his constituency is afraid of change.
“As of Friday, the governor’s office had received 5,939 emails in support of the bill and 1,250 in opposition, along with 349 phone calls in favor and 289 against the measure.”
Yep, and I’ll bet that 100% of those opposing the overhaul are either divorced women or complementary Boomers sock puppeting the worn out gynocentric narrative for their wives.
DeSantis on Education 
Over the last 6 months or so, DeSantis has been pushing the Individual Freedom Act.
“The Individual Freedom Act prevents the teaching of content that could be deemed as racially divisive, or teaches that specific attributes compel discrimination at the K-12 and collegiate levels.”
I don’t see how such a law could be implemented in any meaningful way. It’s too subjective. What constitutes divisiveness? Slavery, holocaust, civil rights, internment camps? It’s a virtue signal that won’t have any real practical effect.
“Instead, the new law prompts American history to be taught on the foundation of individual freedom and choice.”
Entirely predictable, because it’s primarily females who care about education and curriculum, even though it’s a right wing issue right now.
“Students shall develop an understanding of the ramifications of prejudice, racism, and stereotyping on individual freedoms, and examine what it means to be a responsible and respectful person, for the purpose of encouraging tolerance of diversity in a pluralistic society and for nurturing and protecting democratic values and institutions,” the bill reads.
Right now Republicans proclaim to be pro-democracy and pro-rights, but they’re still stuck on The Enlightenment (as is all of the West). They still want to outlaw certain political speech: Not only CRT, but also flag burning (a form of speech). They have bills mandating education on communism (that will blow back for sure), forcing government contractors to not boycott Israel, and in many states they have a massive effort to eliminate the right to petition.
Opponents, however, argue that the bill restricts educators’ ability to teach in the classroom.
Yes, the arguments for censorship and restriction on speech are a two-pronged fork that both conservatives and liberals alike are wrestling with since Zuckerberg’s appearance before congress in 2019 and again in 2021.
- If you open up free speech, then it’s like hanging a big sign on an industrial strength fan saying, “Throw ALL your $h!t HERE!”
- If you close down free speech, then you get an altruistic hәll of political correctness subterfuged with all the annoying misleading lies typical of communist-style suppression.
Note that this is NOT a “choose your poison” scenario. Ultimately, the war over free speech all boils down to “Who’s version of the truth is going to be predominantly represented in free speech?”
This actually shows up in the arguments for and against this bill.
“The law protects students and workers from discriminatory indoctrination…”
“Nobody should be compelled to undergo trainings or lectures that stereotype individuals based on race or other innate characteristics.”
“United Faculty of Florida President Anthony Gothard accused the law of censoring professors to avoid offending conservative students, and warned that its enactment could have a “chilling” effect on speech.”
Translation: Chilling effect = Liberal code for inflicting well deserved shame on the unrighteous.
The cited article even comes out and says the bill is a stab at limiting speech.
“The nature of this law is designed to stop students and stop faculty from talking about subjects that conservative politicians dislike,” he stated, according to WUFT.”
Yes, exactly! Liberals have already created a Politically Correct call-out culture of ressentimented shame and doxing. It’s past time for a return to sanity. But this bill is not the way to do it. Instead, the whole educational system needs revamped.
Those of us who are Red Pill aware might be tempted to see this bill as a step away from racially charged Wokism. But it’s a mistake to interpret this as Red Pilled or even a return to normalcy. Instead, this should be seen as a hypocritical power grab that is not in accordance with constitutional and civil rights.
Republicans b!tch about taxes and big government. Democrats b!tch about racism and equal opportunity. All this rhetoric is composed of empty promises, and we’ve seen it again and again. It’s all a cathartic farce designed to appeal to their constituencies. Behind all the posturing, of course, they just want control and the squishy benefits of power, but the problem is that they want to use the power of the government to control the people. It’s time for us to see through the stage play.
We are prone to think of Progressives as being big bureaucracy, Big Brother™ socialists and are repelled from them as such. But when the pendulum swings back in the next few years, conservatism will be the long arm of big oligarchy, Big Brother™ socialism. And post-feminist Murica will fall for it in their fervor to take out the trash.
On a similar note, people think the Supreme Court is based because of the recent Dobbs v. Jackson decision, but they are fools. The conservative majority has eviscerated the double jeopardy clause over the last few years. Now you can be prosecuted for the same crime twice, so long as the prosecuting sovereign is different. On guns, the court didn’t adopt a literal interpretation of the second amendment, but said restrictions are valid if they are historical.
Desantis has demonstrated how even the most “based” political leaders hate younger men and do nothing for us. Instead, they cling to the more politically savvy move to placate geriatric Boomers and female voters, even at the harm of actual producers and men. It’s disgusting.
As far as the Red Pill, maybe we could say that politicians are using Machiavellian tactics, but the way they are going about getting elected is subversive and beta, and therefore very Blue Pilled and defeatist.
All in all, DeSantis is a product of his generation. He doesn’t like Wokeness in education, but supports the debacle of women’s rights. In essence, he’s trying to resurrect the whitewashed gynocratic American society of the 1980s. A true cluckservative!
- Tampa Bay Times: DeSantis vetoes controversial alimony overhaul bill (2022-6-28)
- Campus Reform: DeSantis’ new anti-woke law survives legal challenge (2022-6-30)