Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-12-2016, 02:50 AM
 
Location: Ohio
13,933 posts, read 12,902,340 times
Reputation: 7399

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clark Park View Post
The latest news coming out of the inner circles of the Republican Party is that it's platform committee will not be softening it's positions on issues important to the LGBT community. Historically the GOP has been hostile to gay rights in obedience to the evangelicals and social conservatives.
.
For the record, I consider this a seriously stupid move on Republicans part in a year of stupid moves that never seem to end. Young Republicans like myself don't see this as an issue worth fighting for and many of us even support gay marriage.... But on a few of your points specifically....
Quote:
Republican legislators will be introducing a bill that will legalize discrimination against LGBT citizens by businesses and individuals based on one's religious beliefs.
Why can't we live in a world where gay people can get married AND religious people can decline to bake them a cake for that wedding? Why does it have to be either / or? Both can be accommodated. Why does each side have to be "the only one left standing"...? Why does it only qualify as a victory if one side has vanquished anyone who disagrees with them?
Quote:
Multiple sources are reporting a major Republican Party platform will endorse passing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to outlaw same sex marriages throughout all 50 states. This contradicts the claim of some Republican politicians who have stated that each state should decide it's own laws concerning same sex marriage.
It doesn't contradict politicians who've said states should decide, because that's no longer an option now. The only way to remedy that at this point is to pass a Constitutional amendment. Again, I say this as a Republican who supports gay marriage, and as someone who would oppose this amendment, as it would be the first Constitutional amendment that actually would take rights away, rather than expand them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-12-2016, 04:41 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,060 posts, read 44,877,895 times
Reputation: 13718
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88 View Post
Why can't we live in a world where gay people can get married AND religious people can decline to bake them a cake for that wedding? Why does it have to be either / or? Both can be accommodated. Why does each side have to be "the only one left standing"...? Why does it only qualify as a victory if one side has vanquished anyone who disagrees with them?
I agree. And that's the beauty of living in a nation of diversity. Both can coexist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 05:28 AM
 
Location: Jamestown, NY
7,840 posts, read 9,205,646 times
Reputation: 13779
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan4 View Post
It's almost like there's a conspiracy...to...get...Hillary...elected...
By RW Pubbies who profess to hate her.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 05:35 AM
 
Location: Jamestown, NY
7,840 posts, read 9,205,646 times
Reputation: 13779
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88 View Post
Why can't we live in a world where gay people can get married AND religious people can decline to bake them a cake for that wedding? Why does it have to be either / or? Both can be accommodated. Why does each side have to be "the only one left standing"...? Why does it only qualify as a victory if one side has vanquished anyone who disagrees with them?
Why can't we live in a world where whites can still force blacks to ride in the back of the bus and send their children to separate schools?

Oh, yeah, because of the Fourteenth Amendment. Read it and weep:

Quote:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 05:41 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,060 posts, read 44,877,895 times
Reputation: 13718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda_d View Post
Why can't we live in a world where whites can still force blacks to ride in the back of the bus and send their children to separate schools?
We do. They're called BLUE (Democrat) states.

The most segregated schools may not be in the states you’d expect
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...youd-expect-2/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 06:07 AM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,229 posts, read 17,865,913 times
Reputation: 4585
The GOP probably should give up on their bigotry ... it's no longer as popular as it was.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 06:34 AM
 
Location: Home is Where You Park It
23,856 posts, read 13,761,687 times
Reputation: 15482
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
That's not the only case in which a Muslim's religious objection will clash with SSM. Another example that will happen at some point... a Muslim public employee clerk or elected official is asked to issue a permit for a SSM, and objects and declines on religious grounds. Now what?
Same thing that happened to Kim Davis. Why is that so hard to understand? It already happened!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 06:36 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,060 posts, read 44,877,895 times
Reputation: 13718
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqueg View Post
Same thing that happened to Kim Davis. Why is that so hard to understand? It already happened!
So does that mean Muslim school girls, who are allowed to wear their hijabs for religious purposes even though schools prohibit hats, etc., for everyone else, will not be able to religiously object to changing/showering in front of anatomical males at school?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 06:45 AM
 
Location: NJ
23,566 posts, read 17,245,407 times
Reputation: 17615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clark Park View Post
The latest news coming out of the inner circles of the Republican Party is that it's platform committee will not be softening it's positions on issues important to the LGBT community. Historically the GOP has been hostile to gay rights in obedience to the evangelicals and social conservatives.

Republican legislators will be introducing a bill that will legalize discrimination against LGBT citizens by businesses and individuals based on one's religious beliefs. The bill will be introduced on July 12th, the month anniversary of the Orlando massacre at a gay nightclub.

Multiple sources are reporting a major Republican Party platform will endorse passing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to outlaw same sex marriages throughout all 50 states. This contradicts the claim of some Republican politicians who have stated that each state should decide it's own laws concerning same sex marriage. Sen. Ted Cruz (R - Texas) has already drafted a bill to begin the passage of a constitutional amendment limiting marriage to opposite sex individuals.
Maybe they are pandering to the muslim voters. why heck, Obama and hrc have embraced the folks that outright hate LGBT.


Right, the repubs are going to ban gay marriage..... and obama will create a war so he can stay for a 3rd term.....


In nj, a dem legislator proposed a law that made telling a lie to gain a woman's favor, rape. So that means all dems want any guy who lies, charged with rape. even if it was a single bill proposed by some backwoods dolt, it is meaningless.


Even false headlines are good to cement lies in the heads of the befuddled readers that can vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 06:48 AM
 
9,911 posts, read 7,706,694 times
Reputation: 2494
GOP needs a pro abortion (But pro life just can't control s person) could win it with I'll make it an ammendment to make abortions a Constitutional right. Also needs to be pro LGBT let people do what they want when they want. Be 3 amazing finishes to seal the deal pro State market health insurance, for abolishing the Death Penalty, and doing away with the Federal income tax.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top