Are there not LGBTQ in the Texas Legislature?

Why not say...ONLY WHITE, Straight, Evangelical Christians are allowed rights to speech, business ownership, be actors/actresses, teachers, etc. All OTHERS need not even think about it!

But, you can be sure it's the direction they're going in...and the wonderful people of Texas have just guaranteed this mans agenda!

Please don't go on about not all the people in Texas are like this...I realize that...but the majority of the people in Texas are exactly like that...we can blame gerrymandering...we can blame many things...but the fact is that Texas has a majority of bigots, racists, and "Christians" who base their beliefs on hatred!

Florida is pretty much the same...controlled by bigots!!!

karl rove's end game.

... he's trying to inflict on everybody else. Maybe he needs to un-nail the closed door on his own personal, dark, secret closet.

give him something to talk about.

I'm sure it'll be Dade Phelan, but the far right is trying to push their Christofacists in.

anyway. that's going nowhere.

i didn't click you could probably tell. however i do see he's in Texas.

OR (even worse) Monty Python.

him to prove that he isn't if he is ever in public. I mean he should stand up for the law he wants to enact right?


Here is his contact information


Jared Patterson can be reached at Jared.Patterson@House.Texas.Gov, (214)494-6498, or (512)463-0694. Make sure you reach out to him and give him a piece of your mind.

prove he was wearing "Manly undies and not the lace ones and girdle" that I am certain he is wearing.

I mean he has to abide by the law he is trying to enact right?

And I didn't record it.

The man said it was OK for a man to wear lace panties under their pants. And it was OK for women to wear pants. Also when I suggested that Jared Patterson wore lace panties under his suit because that is what transphobic people do he just said he did not know what Mr. Patterson wore under his pants.

Oh and wearing Kilts is OK. And Drag Queen bingo is OK as long as there is no alcohol served.

I had him on the phone for a few minutes and spoke with my best deep Texas accent, (I'm from Jersey but I can accent). I ended up by telling him to have a "Blessed day"


I may call back for more clarification. Like if the man has to be wearing makeup to be guilty of this new law because Donald Trump wears a lot of makeup right? And would Mr. Patterson reject any makeup if he were televised to be consistent with what this new law he wants to enact? And shat if someone just wears a dress with no makeup? Because if it is any sort of plaid it could certainly be considered a kilt right? And we wouldn't want to insult our Americans of Scottish heritage right?

Damn my mind is racing right now.

in Mozart's opera The Marriage of Figaro if the opera were performed in Texas. The character Cherubino is a teenage boy, and the role was always intended to be, and always has been, sung by a woman. And there are many other such so-called "trouser roles" in opera: Hansel in Hansel and Gretel, Orpheus in Gluck's Orpheus and Eurydice, Octavian in Der Rosenkavalier, and Prince Orlofsky in Der Fledermaus, to name a few. The wording of this bill would make performing these roles as they were intended illegal, because women performing as men is as illegal as men performing as women. And then there are Shakespeare's plays, in which all female roles were played by men at the time, and sometimes still are for the sake of versimilitude.

But somehow I don't think the GOPers in the TX legislature are much into either Shakespeare or opera.

Link to tweet