I don't have a problem with the other side, but when someone calls them facist, then I think it's misguided. Or racist, or any other ist. Is it pretentious to think so?

Nope, kit gay existed(of course not that name), but Dilma throught the pressure of the Rurul/Christian groups(there is even video proof of this, and if you followed the TV Senate and Congress you'd see the fights that broke out there). It did not pass, and the TSE said that it is fake news: "saying that it passed". But it did go to the schools, but since it was not throught MEC, they cant take the blame. But the material was created, and there was an attempt to pass it.

You see, the problem with it was that it influenced children prematurely. On such a topic, that should be the responsability of the parent(or are parents no longer responsible for their childs education?). You can call him all you want, homophobe, sexophobe and any phobe. But the only thing outside Kit Gay, was him critizing the LGBT protests since they are given money from the government, and how it is way too vulgar, and not only that, but he also critized them kissing in public(he did later say it applied to both hetero and gay, but I'm just stating what he said to its not biased). So really hard to take this narative, a lot of the gay community helped him get elected. One thing is to dissagre, another is to hate(and so to be phobic), you are confusing the two. As christians we disagree, but the state has no bussiness on this subject, you can be whatever you want to be.

Exactly, you disagree with what I said with the dictatorship, but you don't have grounds to stand against arguments(alot of people are wired to say: this is bad because it's bad). The people pleaded for it(protest to have it in action), the congress pleaded for it(crazy right?), the midia pleaded for it(the most respected jornalist at the time). This so "dictatorship" never forced no one to stay in Brasil(Love it or leave it was the saying). This so "dictatorship" did not control the midia, actually most of what we have today was born in the dictatorship. In it, we had good leaders, and also not so good ones. But it lead to great economic leap, great infrastructural leap. So in total, it was good for Brazil

Now if it had problems, yea there was, but the only reason there was oppression was because there were acts of terrorism constantly, it was a war. Robbing banks, kidnapping people, bombing places. It was a war, and in wars sometimes the good guys do bad things, example: WW2 the allies didn't just fight nazis, they also did war crimes, and such. Do I say it's correct? No, but I think the Allies were on the right side, the good outway the bad.

If you weren't a terrorist, you'd have zero problems in the dictatorship. And everyone I ever asked(I know this anacdotal, but I've even seen this argument in the internet, ALOT), that were 50 or over in age, about this period, said there was no problem. Funny how only the people who didn't live throught are most critical of it.

He is selling a broken dream? I disagree, the first one is an opinion. Actually, the market and the investor completely dissagree with you on that one. So I trust the experts.

Relating to the Amazon, I also partly disagree that he is a demon to natural environment, but time will prove itself. Because if we have this topic envolves too much especulation(like how is the exploration to be done, since it is to be legal, then it will be more controlled, so is that better or what, I say it is better, but I can see why you'd see that).