I love our gay pedes (our based lesbian pedes too if there are any), but I love this letter. I don't see it as an anti-japanese let at all. I see it as a reductio ad absurdam argument - if we can't have statues that might offend you, you can't have anything that offend us. The left's only counter argument - if they were to engage with that letter seriously (but we both know the left is unwilling and unable to engage seriously) - would be to argue that the left's political indoctrination is "right" and "good." That's a losing argument for them.

Ultimately, if the left's arguments are correct and kids need to be shielded from symbols that contradict their desired world-view, then that applies across the board, including the LGB flag. The only way you can have a rule based on protecting students from subjectively offensive symbols but protect the LGB flag, would be to argue that the LGB flag is objectively inoffensive - i.e. correct.

Now, we would have to debate democratically about what is and isn't objectively offensive because if the leftists are right in principle, but wrong about what is objectively good, we would have a world where the LGB flag is banned, but the Confederate flag is allowed. The alternative is to concede that either all subjectively offensive material is banned or it's all allowed. Because everything will be subjectively offensive to some, logically we either have to democratically decide what is objectively good, or permit material that might be subjectively offensive. The first is impossible, therefore, we must maintain a policy that allows subjectively offensive symbols to remain.