226
submitted 3 days ago by floofloof@lemmy.ca to c/politics@lemmy.world

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/54506028

cross-posted from: https://quokk.au/c/politics/p/1270828/iowa-dem-josh-turek-releases-anti-trans-ad-calling-for-a-federal-funding-ban-on-trans-care

On Saturday, Oct. 24, Josh Turek, the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate in Iowa, released a new ad targeting transgender people—perhaps the worst anti-transgender ad of the entire election cycle to come from a Democrat. The ad begins with Turek talking about his disability and the importance of not discriminating, before immediately turning to adopt discriminatory policies toward transgender people. One such policy is a sports ban, a position sadly becoming increasingly common among high-profile Democrats in competitive races, and one that alone would have made this yet another newsworthy anti-trans ad. But Turek then goes further, advocating for a new policy: a proposal to ban federally funded gender-affirming care in the United States, one that would impact a substantial number of transgender people and make their care difficult to impossible to receive.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] neuracnu@lemmy.blahaj.zone 22 points 3 days ago

Paraphrasing from elsewhere...

Here are some thoughtful questions I'd like to see the US Senate-hopeful from Iowa, Josh Turek, receive during this campaign season:

  • Would he shake the hand of a person who is HIV-positive? Would he use the same toilet after them?

  • What does he think about gay couples adopting children?

  • What does he think about public schools employing homosexual men as teachers?

These are all bad faith questions, loyalty tests, that were once lobbed at politicians. Their effectiveness relied on the inaccurate and undeniably cruel presumptions that gay people are inherently unclean or unfit to care for children.

For a while this worked. Fearful of abandonment by a prejudiced constituency, would-be leaders hemmed and hawed and furrowed their brows at these kinds of questions. At best, they would find strategic ways to dodge them. At worst, they would give in to laziness, play along with those cruel presumptions and pander to a popular false narrative.

Eventually all of those narrative were found to be false, cynically constructed to prey upon fears against those who can not help but look and act different than the majority. It took the bravery of millions of people, risking their livelihoods and relationships, sharing their inner lives and living their truths to shatter those falsehoods. It took a lot more than a single child's insight to prove that emperor was wearing no clothes.

And here we go again. Another time, another false narrative: segregating transgender girls is fair and right.

This may feel like it makes sense, just as it may feel risky to use the same toilet seat as a person with a life-impacting sexually transmitted infection. But in both cases, two important facts cut them down to size: a) they're both completely false, and b) the scenarios presented aren't happening often enough for any of it to matter in the first place. They're veiled attempts to codify prejudice into law, plain and simple.

Please instruct Senate-hopeful Turek that his party is not the one that does that.

this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2026
226 points (95.2% liked)

politics

31574 readers
2893 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS