February 13, 2026
Nashville’s NPR affiliate reports:
Tennessee lawmakers have advanced a host of anti-LGBTQ bills that would run counter to U.S. Supreme Court precedent. Two measures, both proposed by Rep. Gino Bulso, R-Franklin, would challenge landmark cases that legalized same-sex marriage and established protections for discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
Rep. Gloria Johnson, D-Knoxville, questioned the legality to going against Bostock v. Clayton County, which established that LGBTQ people are protected from discrimination under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Tom Lee, member of the Board of Directors of the Tennessee Pride Chamber, spoke against the bill, arguing that it could allow discrimination against LGBTQ couples.
“Imagine if under this bill a private employer said, ‘Well, you can’t take family leave because I, as a private citizen, don’t recognize — using the language of the bill — your purported marriage,’” Lee said. “Or a bank says, ‘You’ll pay the higher rate (for unmarried couples). We’re not bound by the 14th Amendment. You’re not married in our eyes.’”
From my January 2025 report:
The Banning Bostock Act would codify that laws prohibiting sex discrimination would not prohibit discrimination against a person for being homosexual or transgender, nor would it prohibit discrimination because of sexual orientation, sexual behavior, gender identity, or gender non-conforming behavior.
Meanwhile, the next bill would allow private citizens, businesses, and organizations to refuse to recognize same-sex marriage, and protect attorneys from being punished for refusing to celebrate or perform a same sex marriage.
Bulso first appeared here in February 2024 for his ultimately failed bid to ban Pride flags, which he is now attempting again. In April 2024, we heard from Bulso when he objected to a ban on marriages between first cousins because gays can’t make babies. Last year Bulso launched a failed bid to fill the US House seat left open by the abrupt resignation of Rep. Mark Green.
Category: Religion / Religious / Theocracy
Kansas Gov Vetoes Anti-Trans Bathroom Bounty Bill
Why is the most intense bigotry always seem to be pushed by Christians? I don’t understand the hate because no one is walking around nude in bathrooms, and women’s bathrooms do not have urinals just enclosed stalls. No one can see in the stalls. All the talk of protecting little girls is BS because if a man ws going to hurt a child he wouldn’t have to pretend to be trans, he would just walk in and do it. Nope this is all about making trans lives miserable and keeping them out of the public / society. This is all about forcing their religious views on everyone else. There church doctrines don’t accept trans people so no one can accept trans people or be trans in public according to them. They see no problem forcing their religious views on everyone else but scream to their highest heaven when they are told they have to respect other people’s views. Hugs
February 13, 2026
First, the backstory about the bill:
Just last week, the Kansas legislature passed some of the most far-reaching measures to push trans and gender-nonconforming people out of public life to date. Bathroom bans that bar trans people from restrooms aligned with their gender identity have become grimly common; over 20 states have such a law on the books. But Kansas’s new anti-trans bathroom bill adds a dangerous twist: a bounty hunter provision.
The law would permit private citizens to sue and seek monetary reward based on claiming to encounter a trans person in the bathroom. That’s on top of some of the harshest punishments of any existing bathroom bans, such as criminal charges, steep fines and even jail time.
The language of the bill, while vague, says that any person who alleges to be “aggrieved” by the presence of a trans person they encounter in a restroom facility can file a civil suit against that individual for “damages” of at least $1,000. Kansas Republicans rushed through the bathroom ban, skirting public comment by essentially sneaking the bill into another piece of legislation aimed at denying trans people correct government IDs.
Just in via press release:
The following veto message is from Governor Kelly regarding her veto of House Substitute for Senate Bill 244:
“This poorly drafted bill will have numerous and significant consequences far beyond the intent to limit the right for trans people to use the appropriate bathroom. Under this bill: If your grandfather is in a nursing home in a shared room, as a granddaughter, you would not be able to visit him. If your wife is in a shared hospital room, as a husband, you would not be able to visit her.
“If your sister is living in a dorm at K-State, as a brother, you would not be able to visit her in her room. If you feel you have to accompany your nine-year-old daughter to the restroom at a sporting event, as a father, you would have to either enter the women’s restroom with her or let her use the restroom alone.
“I believe the Legislature should stay out of the business of telling Kansans how to go to the bathroom and instead stay focused on how to make life more affordable for Kansans. “Therefore, under Article 2, Section 14(a) of the Constitution, I hereby veto House Substitute for Senate Bill 244.”
The bill passed with a veto-proof majority in both chambers, so an override is probably likely. The bill’s author is GOP Rep. Susan Humphries, whose bio notes that she is a graduate of Texas Christian University. Humphries last appeared here in 2024 for her bill that would somehow ban minors from visiting any website that mentions LGBTQs.
‘The Librarians’ focuses on America’s book-banning battle
This is simply a push by religious groups to force their church doctrines on the rest of the public. I also they think if kids don’t see representations of LGBTQ+ kids people in media they won’t become LGBTQ+ or accept others who are. They are incorrect. It is about a small group of people trying to force the majority of people to be at like them. These people don’t like letting other people be themselves, they demand the right to run other people’s lives and to manage other people’s kids. As the report says this is pushed hard by Christian nationalists who demand the right to enshrine their church doctrines into civil laws and force their religious views on the entire nation. Hugs
GAY MARRIAGE UNDER ATTACK: New campaign targets hard-won rights
Every creditable study done shows that kids of same sex couples do as well if not better than the kids of opposite sex couples. And of course what tool do they use, we ust protect the children. Every culture war issue these christian groups attack hey use we have to protect the children. Trans rights issues, books and media depicting LGBTQ+, and drag queens are all attacked using that same trope of protecting the children. It is a dodge because where were these save the kids people when school lunch programs were slashed, when food assistance was cut to the bone, where were they when kids had underfunded schools among some issues that affect kids? Hugs
Responding to Speaker Mike Johnson
ICE’s Grim Concentration Camps Exposed
Chuck Schumer Is So F***king Mad Now
Some posts I found while doing the cartoon / memes / news round up but the post was getting far too long. All I feel are important but I can’t all of them fully.
Texas sues Delaware nurse practitioner accused of mailing abortion pills across state lines
Texas is at the forefront of pushing Christian nationalism along with all its prejudices. Misogyny, strict gender stereotypes, and enforced being straight. They require young people to marry in opposet gender marriages and produce as many children as possible. Why? It promotes their faith while filling church pews which funds more money for the church. Hugs
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/27/texas-abortion-pill-prescriber-lawsuit
Suit against Debra Lynch is latest from Texas’s Republican attorney general amid ongoing attacks on abortion pills
Ken Paxton, Texas’s attorney general, outside the US supreme court in Washington DC on 1 November 2021. Photograph: Rod Lamkey/Newscom via Alamy
As part of its ongoing crusade against abortion pills, Texas sued a nurse practitioner on Tuesday, accusing her of shipping pills into Texas in defiance of the state’s abortion ban.
The nurse practitioner, Debra Lynch, operates a Delaware-based group called Her Safe Harbor, which mails abortion pills to women living in states with abortion bans. Now, Texas wants a court to block Lynch from “performing, inducing or attempting abortions” in Texas, on the grounds that Texas law only permits physicians to facilitate abortions in cases of medical emergencies.
Groups like Her Safe Harbor have proliferated in the four years since the US supreme court overturned Roe v Wade, as Delaware and a handful of other blue states have enacted so-called “shield laws”. These laws typically aim to protect abortion providers from out-of-state prosecutions, lending legal cover to providers who ship pills across state lines.
But such efforts have enraged anti-abortion advocates and sparked a legal war between states that protect abortion rights and states that ban the procedure. Texas has already sued a New York-based doctor, Margaret Carpenter, over allegations that she mailed abortion pills into the state, while Louisiana has indicted both Carpenter and a California-based doctor named Remy Coeytaux. Officials in New York and California, which also have shield laws on the books, have refused to cooperate with those efforts.
The safeguards offered by each state’s shield law vary. Eight states, including New York and California, clearly allow providers to use telemedicine to prescribe abortion pills to patients located in states where the procedure is banned. But legal experts have questioned whether Delaware’s shield law, which was first passed in 2022, always protects providers who offer telemedicine across state lines.
Delaware’s law was expanded in late 2025, in part to clarify that officials may not aid out-of-state investigations into abortion providers – a move that may offer Lynch additional protection. The Texas case may then depend on when, exactly, Lynch mailed abortion pills into the red state, according to Mary Ziegler, a professor at the University of California, Davis school of law, who studies the legal history of reproduction.
But, Ziegler added: “It doesn’t sound like they know when any of the abortions happened.”
The cases against Carpenter and Coeytaux largely rest on allegations of specific abortions. The Texas case against Lynch, however, focuses on media reports that feature Lynch saying she mails pills to Texans or advises Texans who want abortions.
After Ken Paxton, the Republican attorney general of Texas, sent a cease-and-desist letter to Her Safe Harbor and other abortion-providing groups in August, Lynch said she had no plans to stop mailing pills. In fact, in the hours after news of the letter broke, the group received more than 150 requests for pills from Texas, Lynch said at the time.
“None of our providers are primarily concerned with our own wellbeing or our own legal status,” Lynch previously told the Guardian. “All the horrors that women are facing because of these ridiculous bans and restrictions outweigh anything that could possibly happen to us as providers, in terms of a fine or a lawsuit or even jail time, if it were to come to that.”
Lynch did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.
House Republicans propose voting changes as Trump administration eyes the midterms
As republicans lose control due to the public being upset with what they are doing they don’t change their views / actions, but instead they try harder to restrict voters rights to vote. They don’t believe in democracy or being public servants; they believe in a one party rule where they are the party in control. Why? Because it gives them all they want, power, fame, fortune, and the ability to control how other people live. The goals of these people who are not interested in others living as who they are and having happy quailty lives but in having total control over how others live to force them to live according to the church doctrines of their version of the religion. But the thing about this SAVE act is it would keep married women from voting if they have not updated all of their identification and other requirements. I experienced this when Ron and I got married. I took his last name. I think everyone who reads the blog understands why. I had to change everything and then take all that documentation to the election supervisor’s office: my marriage certificate, my socialsecurity name change, and so much more. How many people fail to do that and then go to vote and can’t? Hugs
FILE- Voting booths are set up at a polling place in Newtown, Pa, April 23, 2024. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke, File)
Updated 9:04 PM EST, January 29, 2026House Republicans are proposing sweeping changes to the nation’s voting laws, a long-shot priority for President Donald Trump that would impose stricter requirements, including some before Americans vote in the midterm elections in the fall.
The package released Thursday reflects a number of the party’s most sought-after election changes, including requirements for photo IDs before people can vote and proof of citizenship, both to be put in place in 2027. Others, including prohibitions on universal vote-by-mail and ranked choice voting — two voting methods that have proved popular in some states — would happen immediately. The Republican president continues to insist that the 2020 election he lost to Democrat Joe Biden was rigged.
“Americans should be confident their elections are being run with integrity — including commonsense voter ID requirements, clean voter rolls, and citizenship verification,” said Rep. Bryan Steil, chairman of the House Administration Committee, in a statement.
“These reforms will improve voter confidence, bolster election integrity, and make it easy to vote, but hard to cheat,” said Steil, R-Wis.
The legislation faces a long road in the narrowly-split Congress, where Democrats have rejected similar ideas as disenfranchising Americans’ ability to vote with onerous registration and ID requirements. The effort comes as the Trump administration is turning its attention toward election issues before the November election, when control of Congress will be at stake.
The top Democrat on the House Administration Committee, Rep. Joe Morelle of New York, said Trump and the Republican Party are trying to “rig” the system.
“This is their latest attempt to block millions of Americans from exercising their right to vote,” Morelle said in a statement. He said he would “fight the bill at every turn.”
Republicans are calling their new legislation the “Make Elections Great Again Act” and say their proposal should provide the minimum standard for elections for federal offices.
The 120-plus-page bill includes requirements that people present a photo ID before they vote and that states verify the citizenship of individuals when they register to vote, starting next year.
More immediately, this fall it would require states to use “auditable” paper ballots in elections, which most already do; prohibit states from mailing ballots to all voters through universal vote-by-mail systems; and ban ranked choice voting, which is used in Maine and Alaska.
States risk losing federal election funds at various junctures for noncompliance. For example, states would be required to have agreements with the attorney general’s office to share information about potential voter fraud or risk losing federal election funds in 2026.
And starting this year, it would require states to more frequently update their voting rolls, every 30 days.
Stephen Richer, a Republican who clashed with Trump over the president’s false election conspiracy theories while he served as the recorder in Maricopa County, Arizona, posted on the social media site X that the bill is reminiscent of a Democratic effort to reshape national elections in the opposite direction that floundered during Biden’s term.
He wrote that the legislation “flattens federalism, and takes away many rights from the states.”
Similar Republican proposals have drawn alarm from voting rights group, which say such changes could lead to widespread problems for voters.
For example, prior Republican efforts to require proof of citizenship to vote have been criticized by Democrats as disenfranchising married women whose last names do not match birth certificates or other government documents.
The Brennan Center for Justice and other groups estimated in a 2023 report that 9% of U.S. citizens of voting age, or 21.3 million people, do not have proof of their citizenship readily available. Almost half of Americans do not have a U.S. passport.
Trump has long signaled a desire to change how elections are run in the United States. Last year he issued an executive order that included a citizenship requirement, among other election-related changes.
At the time, House Republicans approved legislation, the “Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act,” that would cement Trump’s order into law. That bill has stalled in the Senate, though lawmakers have recently revived efforts to bring it forward for consideration.
….
Associated Press writer Nicholas Riccardi in Denver contributed to this report.
Scottie's Playtime 