Random Politics & Religion #09

Sounds like a good place to pick up crazy women.

So we can expect to see you hanging around the next DNC and/or RNC convention in your psych wardhome state?

Eh. She's kinda...pointy.

Conehead pointy?

Conehead pointy?

It's a sideline article. And only 1.

Trump doesn't even have to say a word, others say it for him and there's multiple articles and opinion pieces associated with that one faux-outrage issue.

What happened with the PA AG is more newsworthy than what Trump had for breakfast this morning.

I’m comfortable with people who are uncomfortable with gays, as long as they don’t want to kill us, maim us or throw us off rooftops. (Permission for lesser violence is available upon application.) For leftists, the reverse appears to be true — they’re uncomfortable with people who are uncomfortable with gays, unless they want to kill us and maim us and throw us off rooftops.

Thus, decline to bake a cake for some lesbians and you are a heinous bigot. Murder 50 *** and injure 50 more and you’re a tragic victim, probably reacting to islamophobia, whose dad will be invited to stand behind Hillary Clinton at a rally.

There’s no diplomatic way to put it. In this historic announcement, Donald Trump has dramatically overtaken the chronically Muslim-friendly Democratic Party on gay rights. I predict conservatives across the west will soon follow suit. The right is quickly realising that, thanks to the silence on Islam, it is they and not the left who are destined to safeguard women, gays, and minorities from the barbarians of the East.

I think that's a rather narrow view that forgets about a good deal of conservatives who are only civil with homosexuals because they have to be for reasons of public pressure to do so.

I never really understood why the family members of awful people take the fall for what the person their related to did...

If your brother murders someone should everyone be looking at you like you're a murderer too?

What, you can't believe that conservatives can finally accept people being gay?

Trump is for black people

Is that why he's been sued in the past for discrimination in his housing units

Even if I take your statement at face value KN, Republicans have done a ***job of convincing blacks and hispanics that their the winning team. Care to explain why that is?

In a word? No.

It's more complicated than that, but you'd have to fracture the party in order for me to buy it.

As it is, the right is too dependent upon the evangelical/religious right's vote, and they hate them some gays.

Bring back a fiscally conservative, socially laissez faire GOP, then maybe.

Any messages portrayed by the right is mainly religious freedom more than gay-bashing.

This would be an argument if it had to do with religious recognition of marriage, which is (for all intents and purposes) a non-issue.

The entire gay marriage issue has to do with civil equality, not religious equality/freedoms.

The Republican's message isn't to outlaw homosexuality. Far from it.

Gay marriage isn't the only issue regarding religious vs. gay rights.

Remember that baker who refused to sell to that gay couple a wedding cake, but was forced to do so by the state? (I believe it was in California, but I could be mistaken).

Republican's message was freedom of religion at that point. The left portrayed that message as bashing gay rights.

You're right. Their message is "go back to doing it discretely like so many of us. Don't make a thing about it. Shut up and do it quietly, off to the side, and get a trophy wife and have a few kids as a front."

You want to be treated like everyone else? Ok, we can accept that

Gay marriage isn't the only issue regarding religious vs. gay rights.

Remember that baker who refused to sell to that gay couple a wedding cake, but was forced to do so by the state? (I believe it was in California, but I could be mistaken).

Republican's message was freedom of religion at that point. The left portrayed that message as bashing gay rights.

Colorado, but not necessarily relevant.

There's a lot of thing that touches. The key point is that the state law prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation (actual or percieved), and therefore whether or not religious beliefs trump secular law.

The baker was not forced to bake the cake. But they weren't able to avoid the consequences for breaking secular law due to religious beliefs.

No, you can accept that.

The royal "we" -- as pertains to the GOP and the entirety of its constituency -- clearly cannot.

I think what they should have gone with, was their legal right to refuse business to anyone, without choosing, or saying why they refused business. (When you choose a reason to refuse business to a potential customer, you have to be careful what those reasons are, even if they seem like a non-issue to an outsider, they can have major repercussions)
Or even politely declined with a lie like "We're booked solid because it's marriage season, Perhaps we can recommend someone who is available."