Legislating against drag queen story hour: "If the law won’t protect children’s well-being, why have laws?"

To answer the “why have…” question: 1) This is what parents are for, and 2) Because using law to do what parents should do—and thus taking the decision-making away from parents—has consequences.

If Tennessee passed a law requiring written parent/guardian permission to attend DQSH, that would be a better move.

It’s important not to let the disgust we feel toward a practice move us to respond in counterproductive ways. It’s even worse to just use something your base is emotionally worked up about for political gain, which is what some of this is. Find something that raises ire, poke at it, turn it into tribal genuineness/virtue signaling. Get votes. One problem with that is that the other side is then encouraged to do whatever it is more, for equal and opposite reasons.

I anticipate one objection: Couldn’t you use the same logic to argue against abortion restrictions? Yes, and lots of libertarians do. But there’s a difference between “child might be influenced/corrupted in some way” (or might not) vs. “child will certainly be dead.” It’s a difference of both quality and degree.

….is that the Babylon Bee got it right; popularity of “drag queen story hour” drops precipitously when it’s renamed “man wearing lingerie wants to spend time with your kids hour.” I don’t believe they’ll be doing truth in advertising, though. There is also the issue that in many/most city libraries, having DQSH more or less means “see men in lingerie or don’t go to the library your tax dollars are paying for.”