Those kinds of arguments are easier to fabricate than to actually assemble well thought out, evidence-backed positions. They're probably more effective too. This applies to both sides.
The Republican platform literally calls for conversion therapy for gay children, the overturning of nationwide gay marriage, rolling back civil rights protections for lgbt people, forcing transgendered people to use different bathrooms, and discouraging gay parents from adopting -- one token gay guy on stage doesn't change any of that.
It's not just liberals that think Republicans are homophobic, its gay people and Republicans too. Many in the party are proudly so. There's a reason their support from there lgbt population is ~0% (likewise with black, Hispanic, and Asian people as well).
My comment is obviously a simplification and was meant to be somewhat provocative. I also haven't run a survey of all republican voters, so I don't know, perhaps you're right. The crowd's reaction certainly seems to contradict you though.
And looking at say Trump's website -- https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions -- none of this is even mentioned. Sure, maybe in some outlier areas, mumbling something about overturning nationwide gay marriage will get you a few votes.
But I think that the average republican couldn't care less, and it's a shame the relatively minor outliers keep on being brought up, ruining any interesting discussion in the process.
I doubt it controls for age? (Also what's up with the tiny sample?)
To expand a bit on the age thing (and I'm sure I'll get downvoted for this again): for the older generation the default position was to be against gay marriage. Today, the default position is to be for it.
Does that mean today's generation is superior? Probably not, as I would guess most people haven't actually read the science/whatever on their own. They just parrot back the opinion of their social circle, unless it's an issue they actually care passionately about (then they might actually research it). Exactly like the older generation.
So basically... there's a difference in the initial conditions. Does it really matter? Would you be any different if brought up under the old conditions? Does whether you were told gay marriage is good or bad influence your ability to come up with a good economic policy?
I find it a little silly to have to wait for the older generations to die out so the percentage drops to a prettier level before we can have debates again.
And that's progress, too. But you're asking us to ignore decades of history because of one crowd at one event. That's not reasonable.
If the Republican Party wants us to believe that they're pro-LGBT now, let them prove it with legislation, not just cheers. I'll believe it once I see the majority of Republican lawmakers actively promoting full equality under the law for gay and trans people, not before.
What does "equality under law" mean? Vast bodies of law supported by either democrats or republicans are discriminatory by design(for example, affirmative action, religious exemptions, etc) - you would have to define what issues need to actually be addressed, otherwise it's a fairly empty statement.
For example, gay marriage is not "equality under law", as there are still plenty of prohibitions to marriage - for example, incestuous or polygamous relationships are prohibited from marriages in many a state, which means supporting gay marriage does not support "equality under law", but extending the privilege of marriage to a wider group.
As I've said in another comment, I would guess that being pro or anti LGBT is strongly correlated to age. Old generations were told it's bad, young generations are told it's good, and they vote accordingly -- only a few care enough to research it. It's hardly a good predictor for how good of a human being you are.
Therefore, this will naturally cease to be a problem as the old generations die out, and we're already seeing signs of it.
One would hope that we can thus move on and start discussing more interesting things (college republican/democrat debates, where you are automatically a monster if republican, I'm looking at you).
I think it's time that we stand up for our rights. That we go out on the streets and show that we are proud to be straight. No matter if we are an oppressed minority. No matter if they don't understand us. :D
That's a pretty positive thing which is unfortunately overshadowed by his endorsement of Trump. Yes, Peter Thiel endorses an overtly xenophobic and visibly sexist candidate.
22 comments
[ 4.3 ms ] story [ 11.3 ms ] threadthis is the current candidate for VP. but yeah, he looooves gay people, mhm.
It's not just liberals that think Republicans are homophobic, its gay people and Republicans too. Many in the party are proudly so. There's a reason their support from there lgbt population is ~0% (likewise with black, Hispanic, and Asian people as well).
And looking at say Trump's website -- https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions -- none of this is even mentioned. Sure, maybe in some outlier areas, mumbling something about overturning nationwide gay marriage will get you a few votes.
But I think that the average republican couldn't care less, and it's a shame the relatively minor outliers keep on being brought up, ruining any interesting discussion in the process.
[1] - http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-gaymarriage-i...
To expand a bit on the age thing (and I'm sure I'll get downvoted for this again): for the older generation the default position was to be against gay marriage. Today, the default position is to be for it.
Does that mean today's generation is superior? Probably not, as I would guess most people haven't actually read the science/whatever on their own. They just parrot back the opinion of their social circle, unless it's an issue they actually care passionately about (then they might actually research it). Exactly like the older generation.
So basically... there's a difference in the initial conditions. Does it really matter? Would you be any different if brought up under the old conditions? Does whether you were told gay marriage is good or bad influence your ability to come up with a good economic policy?
I find it a little silly to have to wait for the older generations to die out so the percentage drops to a prettier level before we can have debates again.
It's 2016 and they just had one guy say he's proud to be gay.
This is progress. It's still a long way from good enough.
If the Republican Party wants us to believe that they're pro-LGBT now, let them prove it with legislation, not just cheers. I'll believe it once I see the majority of Republican lawmakers actively promoting full equality under the law for gay and trans people, not before.
For example, gay marriage is not "equality under law", as there are still plenty of prohibitions to marriage - for example, incestuous or polygamous relationships are prohibited from marriages in many a state, which means supporting gay marriage does not support "equality under law", but extending the privilege of marriage to a wider group.
Therefore, this will naturally cease to be a problem as the old generations die out, and we're already seeing signs of it.
One would hope that we can thus move on and start discussing more interesting things (college republican/democrat debates, where you are automatically a monster if republican, I'm looking at you).
I want my rights now.
China blocks facebook. They harass Apple[1]. They force our companies to invest in there to get access.
Does that sound like "free trade" to you? Is asking them to stop "protectionism"?
[1]http://gizmodo.com/beijing-just-banned-the-iphone-6-17821566...