Trump SCOTUS pick would have gays jailed

[SKANK 14,288]

5 minutes ago, Bebe said:

Like I have said to everyone who continuously talked about how Trump loves gay people and how he doesn't care if gay people marry! 

I don't care what he says. He picked a hugely homophobic anti-lgbt vice president during the race and we all saw what Supreme Court judges he was considering and all of them where anti-lgbt. I mean when it comes to gay marriage it's the supreme court judges that matter, so if he is going to continue appointing anti-lgbt judges then gay marriage is at risk  

Any LGBT person who voted for Trump did so against their best interests

 

When it comes to LGBT Rights Trump's personal beliefs are historically liberal for a Republican president. Period.  How appointed members of his administration or how his appointed Supreme Court Justices use their position of power to negatively impact LGBT Rights is another conversation.

Not all gay people are single issue voters, not all gay people cast their vote with the sole intention of bettering their own lives. Voting against your own best interests can be an act of selflessness.

 

Just now, AJH219 said:

North Carolina, my home state, still has it on the books even though its been ruled unconstitutional. In fact, many Southern states do. 

 

Yup, there are about a dozen states that keep unenforceable anti-sodomy laws on the books. Mississippi only just ratified the 13th Amendment banning slavery.

[Lion Heart 15,041]

Closet homosexual

[Bebe 17,289]

Just now, SKANK said:

 

When it comes to LGBT Rights Trump's personal beliefs are historically liberal for a Republican president. Period.  How appointed members of his administration or how his appointed Supreme Court Justices use their position of power to negatively impact LGBT Rights is another conversation.

Not all gay people are single issue voters, not all gay people cast their vote with the sole intention of bettering their own lives. Voting against your own best interests can be an act of selflessness.

"Tump's personal beliefs are historically liberal for a Republican president. Period. "

Absolutely.

"How appointed members of his administration or how his appointed Supreme Court Justices use their position of power to negatively impact LGBT Rights is another conversation."

I don't think so - it's fair to talk about. We all knew the supreme court justices he was suggesting,  we all knew what their past records were, we all know they are the only ones that can overturn gay marriage. 

"Not all gay people are single issue voters, not all gay people cast their vote with the sole intention of bettering their own lives."

Of course not, but no doubt a vote for Trump was against their best interests - just looking at the decisions he had said he would make that concern LGBT rights and considering the people he surrounded himself with.

"Voting against your own best interests can be an act of selflessness."

Of course it can.

[pink sushi 4,351]

WTF  

[Ikvs 2,576]

I'm gonna have gay sex while looking at his nude pictures. Bye.

[SKANK 14,288]

4 minutes ago, Bebe said:

"Tump's personal beliefs are historically liberal for a Republican president. Period. "

Absolutely.

"How appointed members of his administration or how his appointed Supreme Court Justices use their position of power to negatively impact LGBT Rights is another conversation."

I don't think so - it's fair to talk about. We all knew the supreme court justices he was suggesting,  we all knew what their past records were, we all know they are the only ones that can overturn gay marriage. 

"Not all gay people are single issue voters, not all gay people cast their vote with the sole intention of bettering their own lives."

Of course not, but no doubt a vote for Trump was against their best interests - just looking at the decisions he had said he would make that concern LGBT rights and considering the people he surrounded himself with.

"Voting against your own best interests can be an act of selflessness."

Of course it can.

 

 

I never said it was unfair to talk about the homophobic beliefs held by his Supreme Court picks or the members of his administration. Obviously it's incredibly important to talk about that. Stories like this should be spread like wildfire.

What is unfair is to say you "don't care what he says" when it comes to LGBT Rights. You are ignoring the historical significance a Republican President holding public beliefs which are notably progressive. At this point in time we have no idea what impact of Trump's personal beliefs may or may not have in the way his administration handles LGBT Rights.

If you don't take into consideration what Trump has said and continues to say about LGBT Rights while discussing the future actions of his administration than you aren't having an honest conversation, you are just painting with a broad, ignorant, partisan brush.

 

 

[AquaFire Witch 160]

Who said Trump is going to pick this guy? He's not even president yet. Can people reserve judgement once he actually has some policies under his belt?

If that's possible.

Trump is not going to appoint anybody that will hurt the LGBTQ community and I firmly believe that despite what twitter and the lame stream media report.

[Bette Davis 12,742]

[Bebe 17,289]

7 minutes ago, SKANK said:

 

 

I never said it was unfair to talk about the homophobic beliefs held by his Supreme Court picks or the members of his administration. Obviously it's incredibly important to talk about that. Stories like this should be spread like wildfire.

What is unfair is to say you "don't care what he says" when it comes to LGBT Rights. You are ignoring the historical significance a Republican President holding public beliefs which are notably progressive. At this point in time we have no idea what impact of Trump's personal beliefs may or may not have in the way his administration handles LGBT Rights.

If you don't take into consideration what Trump has said and continues to say about LGBT Rights while discussing the future actions of his administration than you aren't having an honest conversation, you are just painting with a broad, ignorant, partisan brush.

 

 

Let me be clear, what I meant by what I wrote was more so "I care more about the actions he is taking and the actions he (and his VP) have said he will take, than I care about him saying he is cool with gay marriage."

What I am saying is that "you can't convince me that Trump is not a threat to gay marriage when he is actively taking steps that would threaten gay marriage."  What I am saying is a response to those Trump fans who have been telling me that he is good for LGBT rights based on what he has said, when what he has proposed clearly shows otherwise.

That statement wasn't meant to be taken seperately from the rest of what I wrote. It was not meant to mean "A Republican president who is talking about how he isn't bothered by gay marriage and how trans people should be able to use whatever bathroom they want isn't significant"

[SKANK 14,288]

2 minutes ago, Bebe said:

Let me be clear, what I meant by what I wrote was more so "I care more about the actions he is taking and the actions he (and his VP) have said he will take, than I care about him saying he is cool with gay marriage."

What I am saying is that "you can't convince me that Trump is not a threat to gay marriage when he is actively taking steps that would threaten gay marriage."  What I am saying is a response to those Trump fans who have been telling me that he is good for LGBT rights based on what he has said, when what he has proposed clearly shows otherwise.

That statement wasn't meant to be taken seperately from the rest of what I wrote. It was not meant to mean "A Republican president who is talking about how he isn't bothered by gay marriage and how trans people should be able to use whatever bathroom they want isn't significant"

 

In other words, what you said isn't really what you meant. And really, what is more helpful in this political climate than dismissive divisiveness.

[Bebe 17,289]

15 minutes ago, SKANK said:

 

In other words, what you said isn't really what you meant. And really, what is more helpful in this political climate than dismissive divisiveness.

No what I'm saying is that I was misinterpreted and had to clarify

If what I wrote wasn't clear then I apologise, I'm glad I got to clear up what I meant, but I thought it was clear that I was talking about his actions speaking louder than his words, not about how it's not at all significant that Trump's more progressive than previous Republican leaders.

I thought it was clear that my use of the phrase "I don't care" was being used in a completely different context.

I was saying:

"In this particular instance, I don't care what Trump's personal views on Gay marriage are. They are not relevant - what is relevant are his actions and proposals."

I wasn't saying:

"I don't care about Trump's personal views on gay marriage at all. His personal opinions on gay marriage reflect nothing important and are completely irrelevant."

You've taken a quote that was applied in a very particular case and applied it to a more generalised argument. @SKANK

 

[SKANK 14,288]

16 minutes ago, Bebe said:

No what I'm saying is that I was misinterpreted and had to clarify

If what I wrote wasn't clear then I apologise, I'm glad I got to clear up what I meant, but I thought it was clear that I was talking about his actions speaking louder than his words, not about how it's not at all significant that Trump's more progressive than previous Republican leaders.

I thought it was clear that my use of the phrase "I don't care" was being used in a completely different context.

I was saying:

"In this particular instance, I don't care what Trump's personal views on Gay marriage are. They are not relevant - what is relevant are his actions and proposals."

I wasn't saying:

"I don't care about Trump's personal views on gay marriage at all. His personal opinions on gay marriage reflect nothing important and are completely irrelevant."

You've taken a quote that was applied in a very particular case and applied it to a more generalised argument. @SKANK

 

 

 

I don't need a semantic dissection of your post, you literally said that you don't care what he has to say. If what you said isn't what you meant than just be more clear in the future. 

As your avatar, signature, and posts have suggested, you are not interested in having honest and rational political conversations. Which is perfectly fine, but not my bag. Enjoy your night Bebe.

 

[Bebe 17,289]

2 minutes ago, SKANK said:

 

 

I don't need a semantic dissection of your post, you literally said that you don't care what he has to say. If what you said isn't what you meant than just be more clear in the future. 

As your avatar, signature, and posts have suggested, you are not interested in having honest and rational political conversations. Which is perfectly fine, but not my bag. Enjoy your night Bebe.

 

I mean you clearly did, considering that you lifted my quote and pulled it out of context

It's fine, this conversation is going nowhere. Sweet dreams Skank.

[SKANK 14,288]

4 minutes ago, Bebe said:

I mean you clearly did, considering that you lifted my quote and pulled it out of context

It's fine, this conversation is going nowhere. Sweet dreams Skank.

 

Don't write something that you don't mean and you won't have to worry about it being "lifted."

If you always have to have the last word you are far to aggro and confrontational to be a moderator.

 

 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

 

1 hour ago, Bebe said:

Let me be clear, what I meant by what I wrote was more so "I care more about the actions he is taking and the actions he (and his VP) have said he will take, than I care about him saying he is cool with gay marriage."

What I am saying is that "you can't convince me that Trump is not a threat to gay marriage when he is actively taking steps that would threaten gay marriage."  What I am saying is a response to those Trump fans who have been telling me that he is good for LGBT rights based on what he has said, when what he has proposed clearly shows otherwise.

That statement wasn't meant to be taken seperately from the rest of what I wrote. It was not meant to mean "A Republican president who is talking about how he isn't bothered by gay marriage and how trans people should be able to use whatever bathroom they want isn't significant"

This makes perfect sense.