In Kansas, some critics questioned whether the measure would violate free speech and press rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment…
But critics of the bill, mostly Democrats, argued that the law could be interpreted broadly enough that LGBTQ+ teenagers could not access information about sexual orientation or gender identity because the legal definition of sexual conduct includes acts of “homosexuality.”
8 points
The stupidity is for pretending that it’s a side effect instead of the purpose.
11 points
I think that could just be the phrasing of the article, most of the local activists I follow are saying its that straight up
