Southern Utah Professor Sues Over Mandatory Use of Pronouns

There is an interesting new lawsuit out of Southern Utah University where theater professor Richard Bugg has refused to use plural pronouns for a nonbinary student.  It is only the latest such challenge on free speech grounds by those who reject the use of different pronouns for religious, social, or purely grammatical reasons. There are a couple of aspects of the case that are particularly interesting.

Bugg has had a distinguished career in the arts, including his founding of the Neil Simon Festival. (The Simon family later changed to the SimonFest Theatre Company in 2019).

The student submitted a formal complaint to the school’s Title IX Office on Sept. 15, 2021. A second student also submitted a complaint stating to have been offended by the professor’s refusal to use they/them pronouns.

The University requires faculty to adhere to the chosen pronouns of students. The University’s Undergraduate Handbook states:

“Gender Identify Announcement. Students have the right to express their gender identity freely. The faculty are committed to creating a safe positive learning environment for each and every student. If a student would prefer that we use a specific gender pronoun, please let faculty know during class introductions, office hours, or by email.”

In a free speech challenge, most courts would be dubious about a claim based on a uniform policy in favor of pronoun election by students. The use of pronouns is not generally viewed as content basis regulation of speech. Indeed, Bugg is only objecting to the use of the plural pronoun as opposed to singular pronouns of the student’s choice:

“Although the Plaintiff Professor willingly agreed to refrain from using any gender-based pronouns to address that student, and affirmatively offered to address that student either by the student’s name or by the traditional singular pronouns of the student’s choice, his refusal to acquiesce in the student’s demands resulted in an order that any future refusal to acquiesce in those demands would result in severe discipline including the professor’s dismissal, among other possible sanctions.”

Yet, that raises an interesting question. Professor Bugg is saying that he was willing to simply refrain from using any gender-based pronouns and use the student’s name. We have discussed that option in earlier posts. Indeed, this position led to a settlement in the Meriwether case. Thus, Bugg is arguing that he was seeking to use an alternative to the pronouns while not insisting on using what he considered the appropriate pronouns. Many faculty have tried to stop using pronouns entirely to avoid such objections.

Bugg admitted he occasionally made a mistake on the use of pronouns but that he “unintentionally did so two or three times.”

Kevin Price, SUU’s assistant vice president of human resources, imposed sanctions against Bugg. As part of those sanctions, Bugg must take a course on gender-neutral language or face potential termination.

I was able to secure the complaint, attachments, and a key memo in the case.  The final appeal document states that it was not good enough to avoid pronouns.  Bugg had to make a good-faith effort to use them:

“If Professor Bugg continues to refuse to make a good faith effort to use preferred pronouns it will be considered an additional violation of policy 5.60 and 5.27 and may result in further sanctions up to and including termination.”

The final appeal also includes an additional sanction for a syllabus statement that, in my view, violates Professor Bugg’s academic freedom and free speech rights. The sanction followed Bugg’s inclusion of the following statement:

“This is a class dedicated to teaching the craft of acting. It is not a forum for social justice causes, nor a microcosm for political action movements. The discussion of all philosophies is welcome here, so long as it is part of our efforts to understand the craft and further the development of the acting characters we are creating. Please do not demand of your classmates any political or social compliance to your particular philosophy. The class will be a safe space in this definition only: We will attempt to create an atmosphere in which each student feels safe to risk failure in creating a character, expressing that character’s motivations, and fighting against that character’s obstacles – both physical and emotional.  Please don’t expect to be “safe” from exposure to ideas or expressions that might be counter to your own views. You will best be served if you approach this class experience with an open mind and a loving respect for freedom of thought and speech.”

Provost Jon Anderson stated in the final appeal document that 

“Each academic course includes learning outcomes that should be accomplished by students who complete the course. It seems there is significant inconsistency in the syllabus statements and policies related to various versions of the course under scrutiny. Some of these variations (as included in various testimonies) show significant differences in introductory syllabus statements. It seems reasonable that statements included in Richard Buggs syllabus should be similar to the syllabi statements included in other sections of the same course, or, at least be compliant with departmental guidance. In fact, one reading of Richard Bugg’s introductory statement in the syllabus on political neutrality could read as if Richard was inviting political debate rather than focusing the language on the process of acting.”

Anderson made the following finding in light of that record:

“Professor Richard Bugg must review, and edit as necessary, his syllabus language to ensure it aligns with department guidance related to gender pronouns, and submit the syllabus for approval by the Department Chair two weeks before the start of the Fall 2022 semester.”

I found that finding deeply troubling. First, it is very common for faculty today to incorporate social justice and ideological elements in their classes. Indeed, some faculties encourage such inclusion.  Professors are even denouncing math and statistics as racist. There is rarely objections to such inclusions.

Second, Anderson’s interpretation seems strained and counterintuitive. Bugg is anticipating that some discussions of acting could touch on political or social issues. That would seem obvious as the class discusses how characters are depicted or the underlying works. Yet, Anderson objects that Bugg appears to be “inviting political debate rather than focusing the language on the process of acting.” That is not a fair reading in my view but also this would seem well protected under academic freedom. His statement mirrors the “Chicago Rule” on free speech that some academics (including myself) support.

Finally, I do not see why a university should be able to force uniformity in syllabi. That is precisely what academic freedom is about. We recently discussed a related issue with regard to “land acknowledgment” statements. Professor Bugg should be able to post a statement on his teaching philosophy even if it is unique or other faculty do not agree.

This is a case worth watching, particularly on the school’s position that it is not enough to avoid “misgendering” or misidentifying students over pronouns. The further requirement to affirmatively require the use of pronouns could give a court pause.
Professor Bugg is being represented by Utah attorney Jerome Mooney.
Here are the documents in the case:


114 thoughts on “Southern Utah Professor Sues Over Mandatory Use of Pronouns”

  1. If someone insists on being addressed as “they/them” does that mean when they go to a movie, fly, or go to a concert, they are charged for more than one ticket?

    The rule is an example of absurdity posing as compassion: “Gender Identify Announcement. Students have the right to express their gender identity freely. The faculty are committed to creating a safe positive learning environment for each and every student. If a student would prefer that we use a specific gender pronoun, please let faculty know during class introductions, office hours, or by email.”

    This is a phase that will surely pass, but in the meantime this foolishness is distracting us from dealing with important issues.

  2. “Bugg must take a course on gender-neutral language or face potential termination.”

    Trigger a snow flake, and you, too, can have your career destroyed.

    This is a prime example of the virulent emotionalism wrecking academia.

  3. Meanwhile, back in the real world. The entitled, pampered students will have a rude awakening when they find out that the world does not rotate around them. I have plenty of scars from the school of hard knocks and have survived hostile work environments and toxic leaders. Right now there is still a need for workers. I am old enough to remember what it was like to get a job in the late 1970s and early 1980s. If you had a job, you were damned lucky and thankful. The world goes in cycles and there will come a time when it will get tough again and the students and workers will not be so entitled. There are already five million foreigners who have entered our nation in the past two years. Many of them (I am sure) that know and understand what it is like to have the wolf howling at the door and a good deal of them will be willing to sacrifice to have that job. Many more jobs will be replaced by machines and AI. What then?

    I met a fellow from India in the 1970s who competed for a position in a training program. He was up against thousands of applicants for ten positions. He felt like he won the lottery when he was chosen. He did not achieve this accomplishment by accident.

  4. If these students demand that the Professor address them using the name and/or pronoun they insist on, the Professor should demand the same right for himself. He should announce that it works both ways.. From now on the students will address him as ‘Your exalted Highness’. Let’s see if things REALLY work both ways. Students: Try asking other classmates to address you as ‘Master’ or Madame’ and see if they object to YOUR request. As for calling math and statistics ‘racist’….well, let’s see ‘those people’ devise a workable alternative to those fields of study, such as ‘POC Math’ and ‘POC Statistics’. Then use those to design and fly an airplane or spacecraft. Come on, put your money where your mouth is. See if it flies after using NO standard math or statistics. We’re waiting….

    1. Idi Amin claimed the title: “His Excellency, President for Life, Field Marshal Al Hadji Doctor Idi Amin Dada, VC, DSO, MC, CBE, Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Seas and Conqueror of the British Empire in Africa in General and Uganda in Particular”

      I’d insist on something similar.

      1. Made me laugh. I must be too old world in that I don’t quite understand why our attempts to be respectful to all are not enough. It seems we are wasting a lot of time and talent on personal hurt feelings instead of developing strength of character and commanding respect from others by being your most effective self and not by suggesting how others should treat us.

  5. This whole pronoun thing should be turned around against these students. All students who demand use of specific pronouns should be forced to wear signs affixed to their foreheads displaying their preferred pronouns at all times in all areas of the university. This way the onus will be placed squarely where it belongs.

    1. Maybe it would be easier to have them wear arm bands? Or perhaps some kind of symbol on their clothing…

    2. They have been wearing badges and bracelets. That would be playing into their little childish game.

      No, what needs to be done is a first day lesson, repeated every week, where the basics is interpersonal communication are covered and an exam each time. Achieving less than 99% on the exam will result in lines for the rest of the week.

      The basics being:
      1. No one “owns” or “has” individual pronouns except so far as they use the 1st person pronouns when speaking about themselves….eg “I, Me, Mine”. This is so very inclusive as *everyone* uses them.
      2. Only the Monarch can use third person pronouns when referring to themselves. This is historical in reflecting the “body political” and the “body private”. No one else has that right.
      3. Persons when communicating with a subject, will use 2nd person pronouns or the subject’s name. There should not be any reason to use 3rd person pronouns when speaking directly to a subject who demands everyone uses specific “3rd person” pronouns for them.
      4. A person can pretend to be whatever they like. Their right to do that *stops* the moment they demand, whether through social pressure, menaces or threats to job, life or limb or invoking punishment through legal means, that *everyone else* must comply with their self deluded perception of themselves. This is particularly the case when that self perception denies the reality that everyone else is seeing.
      5. The use of “3rd person plural” is for very specific reasons. Usually where the speaker and the speakee do not *know* anything about the subject. Or the speaker is using a hypothetical, generic “person” (as I’ve used in the first sentence – the “they” there could be for one or multiple generic persons). 3rd person pronouns are rarely used about a person in their presence.
      It used to be the case that if a person did use 3rd person pronoun when the subject referenced was present, the response would have been “Who is “she”, the cat’s mother?” implying that “she” was not present in the conversation. It is deemed rude and offensive. Why are we allowing society to use rude and offensive terms.

      So on grounds of grammar, 3rd person pronouns should only be chosen and used by the speaker as those terms reflect the speaker’s observations and knowledge. 3rd person pronouns are sex based…And here we move to the biology part of that first lesson.

      Sex is immutable and binary. As is the associated sex class.
      Humans come in two types:
      Female and Male. = the sex, Based on karyotype and DNA chromosomes. Each sex has two sex classes which are solely dependent on maturity/age.
      Female: Girl (juvenile); Woman (Adult)
      Male: Boy (juvenile); Man (Adult).
      No one can switch from Female to Male and No one can switch from Girl to Boy or Woman to Man or vice versa. Nor can one move from adult sex class to Juvenile sex class in either sex or between the sexes.
      (Anyone with a DSD – insultingly named “intersex” – proves the binary. As these are (1) a chronic chromosomal condition thus can be viewed as a disability due to the wide reaching affects of some of the conditions (2) they are *sex specific*. Thus these are not relevant in any discussion of “gender identity”).

      A human can no more change sex or sex class than they can change species.

      So, what lines should a person be made to repeatedly write if they fail the test?

      The story of The Emperor’s New Clothes. Which tells us how a society can fall for lying,

      As an aside. Any educator and medical professional who supports the concept of changing sex and the start of “pronouns” should be fired from their job for life. They are lying.

      Society needs to come down very hard on this kind of lying. Then this insanity may stop.

  6. Professor addressing individual students at Wokeily U,
    “What is the answer them, first row third chair”?
    “Yes, them, third row sixth chair”.
    “Did you move them?”
    Of course, using certain pronouns could also be problematic, “All those in favor”.

  7. Eh I see both sides on this issue. On the one hand, calling people by the pronoun that they prefer is a sign of respect and asks little of the speaker. This is even more so important now that gender identity is a protected class. But that being said, is refusal to do that really discrimination? It does seem somewhat like compelling free speech but then again the professor is an employee and if he doesn’t follow regulations laid down by his employer, he can be terminated. Tricky.

    1. Yea, it’s compelled speech as a pretext for termination of “undesirables.” I think the Supreme Court would see through that kind of workplace discrimination, especially in publicly funded universities. I doubt Clarence Thomas would be tricked.

      1. It will not get to SCOTUS.
        The U will lose this at the lowest level.
        They are near certainly violating their own speech code.

    2. Southern Utah University is a public college that is thus an arm of the state. A state school IS subject to the 1st Amendment. This issue is not whether following personal pronouns is difficult is not the issue. The state cannot dictate language nor prohibit language. Both violate the 1st Am. Once this gets to a court that understands the 1st Amendment, Southern Utah University will lose, and Utah citizens will have paid for the University’s ignorance. We have already seen a case on this exact ISU age of pronouns end in favor of the professor, and the professor was awarded damages. If a professor wants to use proper English or simply use a student’s name instead of my personal pronoun “Zim” (even Apple doesn’t believe in the pronoun “zim”. iPhone spell check kept changing my personal pronoun which was devastating trigger and shows Apple gives no shit about an individuals and feelings and thus should be cancelled) that should be acceptable or at least tolerated. Look at some of the personal pronouns being used. You need a chart to keep track of them and new made-up stuff is constantly being added.

    3. Again respect is not a right, it is something that is earned.
      And for many it does come at a cost.
      We are not all the same. I can not remember the names of people who are not close friends
      and you expect me to also remember their prefered pronouns ?

      If you want me to treat you with respect – earn it. Then I will call you whatever you want.
      Before that – YOU choose how you present, and I will use the pronouns that match that.
      If your chosen pronouns and your appearance do not match – do you even respect yourself ?

      The professor is an employee at a collage that has a free speech code, they all do,
      that is part of his binding contract.
      FIRE wins suits like this all the time.

      1. How would a fully “woke” professor respond if a student used the pronouns “we/us”?

    4. “. . . calling people by the pronoun that they prefer is a sign of respect . . .”

      When you indulge your feelings, then demand that others change their thinking and action based on those feelings, you do not deserve respect. You deserve scorn and ridicule. Fortunately, some here are very talented at both.

  8. A gender-neutral pronoun is baby, good for Jack, good for Jill, good for all human lives that matter from conception, from the glimmer in a wife and husband’s eyes. It is fetus, a technical term of art, if you’re a doctor, abortionist, cannibal, or subscribe to the Pro-Choice ethical religion to socially distance yourself.

    1. It worked for Austin Powers. He said “Yeah, baby” to both male, female, and other unknown genders at that time. Then again, how many birthing persons 🤢would object if a male professor called her baby?

    1. Well if you are referring to my “How many of you are there” comment, it was actually a reference to the Star Trek Original Series episode “All Our Yesterdays” where there were multiple copies of a certain librarian named Mr. Atoz.

      Kirk: “You’re a very agile man, Mr. Atoz. Just how many of you are there?”

  9. What I said on May 17 applies to this post and discussion as well: “What seems to be missing in the anaysis in JT’s post and the discussion that has followed is that the Supreme Court in the 2020 Bostock majority opinion written by Gorsuch held that the prohibition of sex discrimination in employment (title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) includes sexual orientation and gender identity. How to apply Bostock to the Title 9 prohibition on sex discrimination in education programs will be a key consideration for the courts in this described pronoun situation and other gender identity situations.”

    1. Maybe, but can’t we have a little fun with it in the interim? For all we know, Shakespeare may be converted from a conciliatory challenge (“Et tu, Brutus?”) to an outright insurrection, (“Et they, Brutus?”), yikes!
      Upstate Farmer, currentsitguy, hullbobby and Darren have all made me laugh during this rainy afternoon and canceled plans.

      1. Lin,
        “to an outright insurrection, (“Et they, Brutus?”), yikes!”
        HA! Good one!
        Glad we could bring a little humor to your day.

        As a farmer, rainy afternoons and canceled plans are not a bad thing. Rain makes thing grow. An afternoon inside is a good time to get caught up on correspondence or a good book.
        I, I am prepping Pate Fermentee to make French Bread for tomorrow.

        Make good use of everyday, be it sunny, raining, or snowing. Share the day with family, friends, good food, good drink, good music and good conversation!

      2. -AND S. Meyer and ZDoc (whose fun comments came after I first perused the thread). Thanks for the fun, guys/girls/its!

    2. With respect – Gorsuch was wrong.

      While the prohibitions against private discrimination in the civil rights act are bad law – they do not and can not bar what they claim to, they can only prohibit people from discriminating openly.

      This is worse. Race and sex are immutable. Gender atleast as used by the left is not.

      Discrimination is another word for choose. People have to make choices all the time.
      It is improper, and bad law and likely unconstitutional, to bar people from making free choices in response to the free choices that others make.

      The best of supreme court justices make mistakes.

  10. Using correct pronouns is about respecting and not insulting people. This prof is suing for the right to be a dick to his students. He should lose.

    This is a other example of “conservatives” just showing everyone what a POS they are.

    1. Nice name calling, fool! I will never call one person THEY. I am fine calling you whatever gender you wish, but plural is plural and words still have meaning. If you want to play games just pretend you are a cat and leave us all alone. Moron!

      1. Hullbobby, I agree, I will be courteous and call them whatever they like (if it’s not too cringy), but we know and they know the real issue isn’t about courtesy. It’s about a whole dumpster fire of decadent, leftwing garbage, like drag queen story hour as an alternative to Moses and Santa Claus. That’s one lap no child should be forced to sit in.

      2. If you engage with me, you will be called whatever you appear to be.
        You are not entitled to force me or anyone else to sort out what you want to be called.

        Compelled speech is immoral.

    2. My correct pronoun is “sir,” not “d***.”

      You’re demanding that we respect you, not that you respect us. After Biden’s harangue this week, nobody has any illusions about the subtext here. The subtext is the power to shame and control the narrative.

    3. He is suing because no one can force someone to use the language they demand. Rights not fought for are lost, and Freedom of speech is the most important Right we have. The 1st Amendment doesn’t only apply when we say nice things.

    4. “Using correct pronouns is about respecting and not insulting people.”ou a
      But the left denies there is such a thing as “correct” pronouns.

      No one is entitled to respect. Respect is earned.
      It is not insulting to call someone by a pronoun that is consistent with the way one presents.
      If I show up in public wearing a dress – I expect I will be called her.

      You are very effectively demonstrtating the problems with leftism.

      It is a demand to control OTHERS, to have respect without earning it, and to constantly force others to know your mind to avoid insulting you.

      “This prof is suing for the right to be a dick to his students.”
      Or because his students are being dick’s

      “He should lose.”
      They should lose.

      “This is a other example of “conservatives” just showing everyone what a POS they are.”

    5. Paraphrasing Stephen Crane

      A Man Said to the Universe
      A man said to the universe:
      “Sir, I an “zer”!”
      “However,” replied the universe,
      “The fact has not created in me
      A sense of obligation.”

      It is not disrespect or insult to reject your claims to entitlement.

      1. I thought Rome crumbled because of rampant lead poisoning but we have mainly excluded it from our diet and we are collectively going mad.
        Why are we indulging this lunacy?

    6. Rubbish! We have language for a reason, to communicate ideas not to allow for the self actualization of mentally disturbed students.
      Where does this idiocy end?
      I a student decides that the only appropriate pronoun is “grand puba” should the faculty be forced to use that as a salutation?
      The best they deserve is “you” which is singular and plural.
      The frigging inmates are running the asylum

      1. Our individuality is reflected in our given name, our personality, and our unique way of viewing the world around us. This foolishness of ever-changing pronouns is a distraction and will be looked back on with disgust – similar to how we moderns view the Salem Witch Trials on the 1600s.

    7. Deciding what is or is not “correct” speech is not up to you. You have your opinion and it’s as good, or as bad as anyone else’s. I will not refer to someone as anything other than what they are, be it a male or a female, there are no other sexes – period.

  11. Southern Utah University is a public institution, distinct from private property which may “claim and exercise” dominion, and it must strictly adhere to the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.

  12. Instead of encouraging these gender-confused individuals to seek help, colleges attempt to normalize this pathology. This is consistent with their notion of equity, or “equality of outcomes” ideology. All students will be equally stupid when they graduate.

    1. RE:”Instead of encouraging these gender-confused individuals to seek help, colleges attempt to normalize this pathology.” Academia at all levels of educational pursuit is finding the need to ‘board the train’, virtue-signal to the minority by imbibing the Kool-Aid, and serve it up to the student body and faculty. We are reaching the point where there is no where to run..

  13. This pronoun usage has gotten beyond insane.
    Historians will look back and try to determine what was it that brought about the decline of a major world power?
    Pronoun usage.

    We need a divorce as a country. You take your pronoun crazy your way, I will go my way and we politely ignore each other.

    1. Absolute proof that even high-ranking academics can be extremely stupid – in fact, bordering on mental illness. The college has truly lost its collective mind.

    2. I swear 2 years of COVID has given us 2 decades of progress toward complete insanity.

    3. Upstate, you better start being concerned. What happens if a cow accuses you of misgendering? 🙂

      1. RE:”Upstate, you better start being concerned. What happens if a cow accuses you of misgendering? 🙂 Yah!!….and that’s no bull, either!!

    4. JUDICIAL REVIEW – “…to determine the legitimacy of the acts of the executive and the legislative branches….”

      According to the communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs) since 1860, DIVORCE, or secession, is unconstitutional.

      Of course, secession is not prohibited by the Constitution and is reserved to the People, or to the States, and vice versa.

      DIVORCE and secession were and are irrefutably constitutional; secession is a natural and God-given right which the Founders availed themselves of.

      Everything “Crazy Abe” and his suck-cess-ors did was and remains illegitimate and illicit.

      Lincoln was Karl Marx’s “earnest of the epoch” leading America Progressively toward “the RECONSTRUCTION of a social world.”

      Letter of congratulation and commendation from Marx to Lincoln:

      Like a physically abused wife, southern States were forced to stay with the abusive husband, “Crazy Abe,” he beat the —- out of them, and were denied fully constitutional secession, an act undertaken by the American Founders in 1776.

      Where the —- is the Supreme Court with its power of Judicial Review?

      Judicial Review in the United States

      The doctrine of judicial review holds that the courts are vested with the authority to determine the legitimacy of the acts of the executive and the legislative branches of government.

      – Office of Justice Programs, DOJ

      1. George,
        Okay, how about an unofficial divorce?
        Form our own schools, colleges, banks, etc. that run in parallel. Restaurants that cater to a chosen political leaning. With some neutral who are willing do biz with both or who welcome non-woke minorities of any kind. Perhaps, a sign that says, “Check your politics at the door.”
        If there was a woke restaurant who discouraged non-woke from patronizing their establishment, I would say, “Okay, good on ya.” I would respect that more so and I would not protest their presence.
        You want to have drag queen story hour, or brunch or whatever? Have at it!
        You do you over there, I will do me over here.
        Fair enough? Why all this antagonism at each other? Just, walk away. Better than heated words, anger, and better on ones BP.

        1. RE:”Okay, how about an unofficial divorce?” Here ya go! Enter the ‘Jim Woke’ era. Sign at the front door of a supper club reading ‘Binary Only’. Sign as the side door. ‘Non-binary and others’ ‘Please ‘have identify card’ ready. If identity as a plural, please state number so cover charge can be calculated and seating arranged.

      2. I know you disagree with the decision but there was judicial review of the 1860/61secession. In Texas v White (1869), the Supreme Court held that States do not have a right to secede.

        1. Certainly not for rights of slavery, diversity [dogma], progressive confusion, redistributive change, feminism/masculinism, and wicked solutions.

        2. RE:”In Texas v White (1869), the Supreme Court held that States do not have a right to secede.” You will likely come to learn that George doesn’t care. He’ll find a way.

        3. “. . . States do not have a right to secede.”

          Citing a SC decision means that a person does not grasp the meaning of the concept “secession.”

          1. While you may think the decision is inconsistent with the meaning of secession in general or in the 1860/61 situation, the SC said there is no “constitutional” right for a State to secede under the “constitution”.

    5. It coming Biden threatened and demonized at a minimum 75 million citizens. Just like Hitler did the Jews. But then the Jews didn’t have 700 million guns. 700 million gun in circulation according to the ATF.

      Biden thinks we need an F15 or a F35. If the lying loudmouth thug coward had gone to Vietnam he would realize what a man and a rifle can do. Image millions of people with rifles?

      Apparently the WOKE and the National Socialist Democrat Party are unaware we will not go silently into the night.

      My new pro nouns. Say/When

      1. I pay almost no attention to Biden.

        To the extent I do he is pitiful.
        My father suffered from Dementia and watching Biden is painful for me.

        If his family gave a damn about him – he would never have run for anything again much less president.

        Regardless, I do not assume anything he says is coming from him – on the times he manages to get anything coherent out.

        Trump engaged in some offensive rhetoric.

        But there are several distinctions.

        Trump punched up. He went after those who went after him. Not half the country.
        Trump did not act on his words.
        Today the FBI/DOJ as well as Social Media in collaboration with govenrment are going after the people Biden is targeting.

        Trump abused words, he did not abuse power.

      2. Does Biden think that F35 Pilots are going to straffe Citizens politically at odds with the party in power ?

        1. After his withdraw from Afghanistan, open southern border, and most divisive speech demonizing some 75 million Americans, I would not put it past him.

          1. This is not about Biden. it is about our institutions.

            There is much wrong with them. DOJ and FBI are drowning in political biases.
            Our military brass is drowning in woke nonsense, leaving doubt as to whether they are up to the job of defending the country.

            But do you actually believe that officers in our military are prepared to murder citizens over political differences with our president ?

            Countries topple when the police and military will no longer use force against citizens over political disagreements.

            For almost a century the USSR put down dissent through force.
            And then one day in 1989, the police and military refused. The Berlin wall fell and withing a short time the USSR was no more.

            As the declaration of independence makes clear – the legitimacy of government rests on the trust of the governed.

            Elections in the US are the means of assuring that consent. That requires conducting elections such that nearly all of us trust the results.

            Numerous polls for different reasons show that the 2020 election does not have the trust of most people.

        2. Biden doesn’t do much thinking at all, especially while reading a teleprompter. From Biden’s comments the day after his rant he seems not to remember calling Trump supporters ‘enemies’ at all. Is Biden’s mental capacity so impaired he will say whatever is put in front of him? In my view, the entire Biden regime is hopelessly inept. Vote Republican this November – we need to clean house.

          1. ” Is Biden’s mental capacity so impaired he will say whatever is put in front of him?”

            Yes, but it is worse than that. The left acts like the Borg.

          2. I have very little personal interest in Biden.

            I do not expect him to last to the end of his first term.
            His family should have dragged him home to Delaware to finish his life as peacefully as possible several years ago.
            But they are too busy selling him as their cash cow, to let him decline in peace.

            But all that means is that the children running our government are responsible for What Biden says and does.
            And those words and actions are reprehensible.

            We are asked as in the Wizard of Oz to “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain” – but it is those loading the Teleprompter, those drafting the orders that are responsible for the bad acts of this govenrment.

      3. ZZClancy,
        I am sure you have read my previous statements about how civil war is a path we must NOT take.

        Howerver, in light of Biden’s recent divisive speech, with the Man In The High Castle back drop, I fear we are going down your new pronouns path.

        1. The decision as to whether there is civil war rests with the left, not the right.

          Biden said that maga republicans do not accept the constitution – that is laughably absurd coming from a president that just unconstitutionally spent between 300B and 1T dollars without congress. Who makes Treaties with foreign countries without seeking the approval of the senate.

          There will be a civil war if the left continues to impose its will by force on the rest of us ignoring the constitutional constraints for doing so.

          The american revoltion was the result of the british destruction of the trust of colonists in their governance.
          It was the result of their tyranical acts.

          As the declaration states – we can not jump to violence over each instance of tyranny.

          But either the left backs down or a tipping point will be reached.

          So much of Biden’s remarks were absurd.
          It is not the duty of citizens to trust government – to trust election results.
          It is the duty of government to conduct itself, and particularly elections such that they are trusted if not liked.

          We trust our institutions, we trust government, we trust law enforcement, because whether they make mistakes or not, they act worthy of trust.

      4. RE:”Biden threatened and demonized..” Analogy well made.. Biden essentially encapsulated in his harangue, everything the Democrat party actors have been doing in the sociopolitical and economic theatre since 2015. If Trumps’ MAGA Republicans, “HRC’s Basket of Deplorables, and yet unaligned others of that ilk, are astute enough to assure that the November elections’ ‘back door knob’ will hit him where the good Lord split him, his time at the podium will have been well spent.

        1. What is a huge problem is that so many on the left beleive this nonsense.

          They literally believe that opposing them is evil.

  14. Binary sexes: male and female. Binary genders (i.e. sex-correlated attributes e.g. sexual orientation): masculine and feminine, respectively. And a transgender (i.e. state or process of divergence) spectrum.

  15. People are utterly confused. People’s pronouns are chosen by me based on my biological observation and proper language and grammar. If anyone is offended, then they should seek the services of a psychiatrist.

    1. “ If anyone is offended, then they should seek the services of a psychiatrist.”

      I could not agree more with you my friend. But the trouble today with one of these things going to see a shrink, so many of them today would wind up siding with the student. As for myself I will never ever use any kind of pronouns under no circumstances.

    2. RE:”People are utterly confused” Agree! Dazed and confused, if I may borrow from popular culture. Consider the complexity surrounding an individual identifying as ‘they’, ‘They’ should be required to determine how many of ‘them’ there are and make it known. ‘They’ should be obliged to pay more than one admission fee to a venue. ‘They’ might find themselves in a situation where there is only room for ‘one’. Other than ‘he,she, him,or her’, ‘IT’ should satisfy all other scenarios. Much easier to find a place for ‘IT” than one where ‘They’ might not be accommodated. Federal and state population studies from 2016 estimate that 1.4 million to 1.65 million U.S. adults – or 0.6%-0.7% of the U.S. population – identify as transgender, according to the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law. For this 99.3% of the population of the U;S. obliged to jump through hoops. If this were TRULY a democracy, and the majority ruled, “THEY’ wouldn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell at Southern Utah, or anywhere else, for that matter. But NO! Now the tail wags the dog.

      1. If anyone were to tell to to call them “they” the 1st question I’d ask is “Just exactly how many of you are there?”.

              1. Oh, just FYI, in light of current prices of meat, I would opt for chicken breast to veal.
                Slit the breast, stuff with a wide piece of honey or maple ham, and goat cheese. Swiss does well too.
                Do a flour, egg wash, panko crum flash fry till just brown, then finish in a pre-heated oven at 350 for about 20-35 minutes.
                Make a marsala, onion, mushroom, capers, light cream gravy using a bechmeal sauce as a thickner.
                Serve on a bed of egg noodles or garlic mashed potatoes or a bed of whilted greens and the pasta or potatoes on the side.
                A light red wine or chardonnay goes best.

                1. Upstate, you are making me hungry. Are you the cook in your family because that sounds good. We are going out with a bunch of friends to a fancy restaurant, but I’ll bet the food tastes better at your place.

                2. RE:”I would opt for chicken breast to veal..” Too much work. The 10 chicken thighs I’ll purchase tomorrow will get a light seasoning of salt, pepper, garlic powder and paprika, and hit the 400F for 20-25 minutes timed and turned every five and were done!! Proper frozen veggies, cole slaw and avanti!! The Yorkies will beg the dickens for their share. They always win!.

                3. I tend to run to a grocery store right across the state line in West Virginia where I can get Porterhouse or New York Strip for about $5 a pound if you’re willing to buy the whole roast and slice it yourself. I’ve got a bone saw and a vacuum sealer so I don’t mind, particularly since I like mine cut a bit thicker than what the average store does.

                  The deep freeze in the garage is packed full of anything that walks, flies or swims, probably at least a year’s worth. Thinking I may spend the next two days ensconced by the smoker, scotch and cigar in hand.

        1. I worked at a movie theatre and someone refers to himself as “they” I will charge them for more than one ticket. LOL – then look for another job – but, it would be worth it.

Comments are closed.