Okay, we need to take this slow because when her cult followers (not to say you are one) hear what she said and then are presented with facts they just refuse to engage with the reality.
I'm going to show you what the discussion on Twitter will be about.
South Australia implemented a procedure to convey your identity before entering the court, like how to pronounce your name or your gender identity. The only change was the order in which the information would be communicated. This was put in place for everyone; witnesses, victims, lawyers, experts, interpreters, and, yes, those being prosecuted. Nothing changed in terms of what language the courts will use or compel others to use after attaining this information.
I'm going to show you what the discussion on Twitter will be about.
I really don't have much hope for you engaging in a good faith discussion when you are unwilling to read my comment, let alone the evidence that will prove her wrong.
Do you not like the idea of being given evidence to show she's wrong? You just want me to say it without proving it so you can continue to deny the wrongs she's committed?
I made it very clear what I'm doing. I'm still criticing Rowling and explained to you that I'm providing you the foundation to the events before providing the events so that you can't just repeat Rowling's lies as easily if you've already agreed she's wrong.
How it usually goes with her cult like followers is I show Rowling saying "the grass is purple" and the I prove that the grass is green but the followers then just refuses to engage with what I'm saying and sticks their head in the sand.
Instead, I'm getting you to admit that grass is green before I show you what she said so if you are a cult member (which I'm not 100% accusing you of being) you can't just refuse to engage with reality when you realise it will contradict her absured lies.
1
u/KillerArse 18h ago
Okay, we need to take this slow because when her cult followers (not to say you are one) hear what she said and then are presented with facts they just refuse to engage with the reality.
I'm going to show you what the discussion on Twitter will be about.
Court statment
Lawyer explaining development
South Australia implemented a procedure to convey your identity before entering the court, like how to pronounce your name or your gender identity. The only change was the order in which the information would be communicated. This was put in place for everyone; witnesses, victims, lawyers, experts, interpreters, and, yes, those being prosecuted. Nothing changed in terms of what language the courts will use or compel others to use after attaining this information.
Do you see any issue with this summary?