Clearly, to you actual lived oppression is less important than someone's opinion on the internet. Again, you say you're against it, but your arguments somehow keep defending it. I mean is it just accidental? Do you just prioritize the needs and rights of flesh and blood human beings below your ideological commitment to "the federal government can't do anything?"
Here your just making rhetoric up so it doesn't really make sense.
At this point, I simply don't believe you when you say you're against anything like DOMA passing again. When shown what the Trump administration is doing right now, you accused me of having a moral agenda, and didn't acknowledge that it documented how the Trump administration has been attacking LGBT people. I see where your priorities are.
Delegating such matters to the state isn't an attack, and would have prevented DOMA, an actual attack on the LGBT issue's.
Like I said, Clinton didn't veto it and that's on him. The fact is that it was passed by a majority Republican congress means that the Republican party was just as responsible as the Democratic party.
And I can damned well criticize Trump any time I like.
It shows the sheer double standard, actually signing into law legislation on a Federal Level is by far the highest actual action against the rights of the LGBT community, but your posts in comparison to the Republican party pales in comparison, whom you believe 'wants to exterminate you'.
The Snopes article and Hillary's own statements about how it went down actually paint both of them in a MORE positive light, in that there were those in the White House in the '90s who thought DOMA was the only logical defense mechanism to prevent a permanent Constitutional Amendment. And this is the exact reason no one should trust anything that originated from Julian Assange or Wikileaks.
Are people just not allowed to change their minds in your world?
Strange how we should accept Hillary 'just change her mind' on something she worked to legislate against, publicly was against all the way up to her advanced years prior it being inconvenient politically, and yet i would imagine such a standard wouldn't be applied to Trump.
Strange then that Hillary was against Gay marriage being recognized in New York, which had nothing to do with 'defending a constitutional amendment'.
Hillary Clinton is not the President.
During the campaign, she and Trump both claimed to be for LGBT rights. Trump won despite receiving far fewer votes. After he was sworn in he has NOT shown that he is for LGBT rights by any stretch as @BelleSorciere linked.
Would Hillary have turned against LGBT rights? Possibly. Probably not by any stretch but possibly. But what do we have? Trump is President and is actively working against LGBT rights and protections. LGBT people who voted for him should not be shocked once he announced his VP choice was Mike Pence. Trump recently "joked" that Mike Pence wants to hang all gay people. Haha right, not so much. If I was President and my VP wanted to hang all gay people, I'd think you fire the motherscratcher.
October 2006: Clinton told a group of gay elected officials that she would support same-sex marriage in New York if a future governor and Legislature chose to enact such a law.
It shows the sheer double standard, actually signing into law legislation on a Federal Level is by far the highest actual action against the rights of the LGBT community, but your posts in comparison to the Republican party pales in comparison, whom you believe 'wants to exterminate you'.
I did not say the Republican party wants to "exterminate me." I said the religious right advocates for the annihilation of LGBT people and I posted something like a dozen links to religious right types saying they were cool with executing gay people for being gay. Please try to keep up.
I don't have a double standard. You have a double standard - making extremely partisan posts while accusing others you disagree with of being "partisan" as if being partisan was itself a heinous crime.
Why are pushing so hard to silence criticism against Trump?
Strange then that Hillary was against Gay marriage being recognized in New York, which had nothing to do with 'defending a constitutional amendment'.
Hillary Clinton is not the President.
During the campaign, she and Trump both claimed to be for LGBT rights. Trump won despite receiving far fewer votes. After he was sworn in he has NOT shown that he is for LGBT rights by any stretch as @BelleSorciere linked.
Would Hillary have turned against LGBT rights? Possibly. Probably not by any stretch but possibly. But what do we have? Trump is President and is actively working against LGBT rights and protections. LGBT people who voted for him should not be shocked once he announced his VP choice was Mike Pence. Trump recently "joked" that Mike Pence wants to hang all gay people. Haha right, not so much. If I was President and my VP wanted to hang all gay people, I'd think you fire the motherscratcher.
There is NO chance Hillary would have turned against LGBT rights if elected. Hillary Clinton is almost pure political calculus. The Democratic coalition would have rioted (metaphorically) if any such actions took place. It would have been total anathema to the base. She may not be a good candidate, but she isn't stupid or suicidal.
Bill Clinton and Obama was, and they were against Gay marriage.
One happened to sign into law to that affect on the Federal level.
Why are you spamming the thread with this claim? It's been refuted repeatedly, but you keep snapping back to it. Do you have an argument here, or are you just trying to say Democrats are evil?
I did not say the Republican party wants to "exterminate me." I said the religious right advocates for the annihilation of LGBT people and I posted something like a dozen links to religious right types saying they were cool with executing gay people for being gay. Please try to keep up.
You made it clear you hold the party entire responsible and guilty for this.
I did not say the Republican party wants to "exterminate me." I said the religious right advocates for the annihilation of LGBT people and I posted something like a dozen links to religious right types saying they were cool with executing gay people for being gay. Please try to keep up.
You made it clear you hold the party entire responsible and guilty for this.
Why are pushing so hard to silence criticism against Trump?
I haven't, this discussion was a reply to jjstraka34 about any democrat let alone democrat President doing stuff like this.
Evidently not aware of history, because Bill Clinton signed into law against Gay marriage on the Federal level.
Why are you so against even talking about Democrat Presidents and Candidates that actually legislated against the LGBT community?
She is clearly not against talking about it since she (and I and @smeagolheart) have been willingly talking about it ad nauseam for the past 90 minutes in response to you making the exact same arguments. The idea that we are against talking about it flies in the face of the entire reality of the last two hours of our lives.
Strange how we should accept Hillary 'just change her mind' on something she worked to legislate against, publicly was against all the way up to her advanced years prior it being inconvenient politically, and yet i would imagine such a standard wouldn't be applied to Trump.
As I posted just a few minutes ago, Hillary Clinton was all for supporting same-sex marriage in New York if it was likely to become a thing.
And what does this have to do with Trump? Trump said he was pro-LGBT, but appointed Mike Pence (a virulently anti-LGBT politician) as his running mate, has had his administration take multiple shots at LGBT people (as documented in the article I linked, which I still do not believe you've read). Trump's gone to dinners hosted by literal anti-LGBT hate groups.
Trump's anti-LGBT and virulently so, any rational person can see it. Why propose something that's not going to happen (Trump shifting to actually be pro-LGBT) just to attack people again for criticizing Trump?
Strange then that Hillary was against Gay marriage being recognized in New York, which had nothing to do with 'defending a constitutional amendment'.
Hillary Clinton is not the President.
During the campaign, she and Trump both claimed to be for LGBT rights. Trump won despite receiving far fewer votes. After he was sworn in he has NOT shown that he is for LGBT rights by any stretch as @BelleSorciere linked.
Would Hillary have turned against LGBT rights? Possibly. Probably not by any stretch but possibly. But what do we have? Trump is President and is actively working against LGBT rights and protections. LGBT people who voted for him should not be shocked once he announced his VP choice was Mike Pence. Trump recently "joked" that Mike Pence wants to hang all gay people. Haha right, not so much. If I was President and my VP wanted to hang all gay people, I'd think you fire the motherscratcher.
There is NO chance Hillary would have turned against LGBT rights if elected. Hillary Clinton is almost pure political calculus. The Democratic coalition would have rioted (metaphorically) if any such actions took place. It would have been total anathema to the base. She may not be a good candidate, but she isn't stupid or suicidal.
I agree but for the sake of argument I was willing to say it MIGHT have happened. Many things MIGHT have happened if Hillary was President. She could have defeated ISIS with 30 days and achieved peace in the middle East or flown us to Mars or gotten us into a war with Iran. She's NOT the President and none of that DID happen. So it doesn't matter what MIGHT have happened. It didn't happen.
What matters is what IS happening. Whatabout x,y,z is irrelevant.
She is clearly not against talking about since she (and I and @smeagolheart) have been willingly talking about ad nauseam for the past 90 minutes in response to you making the exact same arguments. The idea that we are against talking about it flies in the face of the entire reality of the last two hours of our lives.
Then i expect a retraction on the same accusation on me, which you probably didn't realize thats why i wrote that lol.
As I posted just a few minutes ago, Hillary Clinton was all for supporting same-sex marriage in New York if it was likely to become a thing.
She's publicly stated to be against it in interviews when it was raised.
Why are you talking about Hillary and sharing edited videos with cherrypicked 30 seconds of a speech that she doesn't agree with anymore and then listen to someone tell you what to think about it? But anyway, it doesn't matter because
Trump is the President, Hillary isn't even though she received more than 3 million more votes.
I'm absolutely convinced any of the three of us could have scrolled back two pages and watched that video the from the first time it was posted. We know about her public statements, we know about the legislation, we also now know about what some of the behind the scenes reasons FOR that position were. We also know what her position is now. This isn't even an argument because we aren't even disagreeing with half of what you are saying, yet we keep talking about the exact same thing. Why??
Because i was replying to a question by jjstraka34, around this, anyone on the left, a democrat president or one who ran for it.
It amuses me how you all dogpile, when i see the extreme discomfort in showing the Democrat party actually signed into law against Gay marriage on the Federal level, and Obama, Hillary and Bill were against it throughout their career.
This sort of partisan breakdown is what i love seeing most.
I did not say the Republican party wants to "exterminate me." I said the religious right advocates for the annihilation of LGBT people and I posted something like a dozen links to religious right types saying they were cool with executing gay people for being gay. Please try to keep up.
You made it clear you hold the party entire responsible and guilty for this.
Why are pushing so hard to silence criticism against Trump?
I haven't, this discussion was a reply to jjstraka34 about any democrat let alone democrat President doing stuff like this.
Evidently not aware of history, because Bill Clinton signed into law against Gay marriage on the Federal level.
Why are you so against even talking about Democrat Presidents and Candidates that actually legislated against the LGBT community?
We've been talking about them ad nauseum. There's not much more to say than "yes, they did, but they've shifted their stances." You constantly repeat the same argument over and over again, with zero modification. There's no discussion here. We're answering your claims and you simply reassert them as if nothing has been said.
And you're also lying about not pushing so hard to silence criticism against Trump. You told me I couldn't criticize Trump ever again because you decided, based on terrible logic, that I was being hypocritical. You attacked @jjstraka34 repeatedly yesterday accusing him of spamming the thread. You demanded that the moderators make a new thread strictly for discussing Trump to remove the discussion from this thread.
So why are you doing this? Why does it pain you so much that anyone is against Trump and has literal facts on their side to support it?
We've been talking about them ad nauseum. There's not much more to say than "yes, they did, but they've shifted their stances." You constantly repeat the same argument over and over again, with zero modification. There's no discussion here. We're answering your claims and you simply reassert them as if nothing has been said.
And you're also lying about not pushing so hard to silence criticism against Trump. You told me I couldn't criticize Trump ever again because you decided, based on terrible logic, that I was being hypocritical. You attacked @jjstraka34 repeatedly yesterday accusing him of spamming the thread. You demanded that the moderators make a new thread strictly for discussing Trump to remove the discussion from this thread.
So why are you doing this? Why does it pain you so much that anyone is against Trump and has literal facts on their side to support it?
Its rather hypocritical of you all to keep replying to me, after you guys started the discussion line, and keep replying to me, and now want to move away because your uncomfortable with these facts of the Democrat party signing legislation against Gay marriage.
The part about Trump is that your criticism of Trump is hypocritical considering how much hand-waving your doing for Hillary and the Democrat party, actually i expected you to be just as against them as the Republicans but evidently not so.
This has now just turned into some twisted game, and I would say me and @BelleSorciere and @smeagolheart should just go to bed at this point, or literally do ANYTHING else but continue to feed whatever the hell is going on here.
Because i was replying to a question by jjstraka34, around this, anyone on the left, a democrat president or one who ran for it.
It amuses me how you all dogpile, when i see the extreme discomfort in showing the Democrat party actually signed into law against Gay marriage on the Federal level, and Obama, Hillary and Bill were against it throughout their career.
This sort of partisan breakdown is what i love seeing most.
You're lying about what we're saying. No one is experiencing any level of discomfort about Bill Clinton signing a law against same sex marriage. The issue is that you are stuck in 1996, and think that anything and everything that happened after doesn't matter. You seem to think that because the Clintons and Obama were against same sex marriage at one time that they're forever against it and their reversals don't count, and that they're as bad or worse than the Republicans who advanced DOMA in the first place, the Republicans who voted for DOMA, and the Republicans in power now who are doing their best to attack LGBT people and LGBT rights.
Obama was not against it throughout his career. He was for same sex marriage in 2012, which was four years before he left office as president. Hillary Clinton was not against it for her entire career - she changed her mind in 2013, and was secretary of state for another three years. Do these years not count as part of their careers? Can you please stop with the alternative facts?
You're lying about what we're saying. No one is experiencing any level of discomfort about Bill Clinton signing a law against same sex marriage. The issue is that you are stuck in 1996, and think that anything and everything that happened after doesn't matter. You seem to think that because the Clintons and Obama were against same sex marriage at one time that they're forever against it and their reversals don't count, and that they're as bad or worse than the Republicans who advanced DOMA in the first place, the Republicans who voted for DOMA, and the Republicans in power now who are doing their best to attack LGBT people and LGBT rights.
Pretty evident to me there's alot of queesiness going over these things.
Obama was not against it throughout his career. He was for same sex marriage in 2012, which was four years before he left office as president. Hillary Clinton was not against it for her entire career - she changed her mind in 2013, and was secretary of state for another three years. Do these years not count as part of their careers? Can you please stop with the alternative facts?
These flip flops indicate political changes rather then personal
Because i was replying to a question by jjstraka34, around this, anyone on the left, a democrat president or one who ran for it.
It amuses me how you all dogpile, when i see the extreme discomfort in showing the Democrat party actually signed into law against Gay marriage on the Federal level, and Obama, Hillary and Bill were against it throughout their career.
This sort of partisan breakdown is what i love seeing most.
You're lying about what we're saying. No one is experiencing any level of discomfort about Bill Clinton signing a law against same sex marriage. The issue is that you are stuck in 1996, and think that anything and everything that happened after doesn't matter. You seem to think that because the Clintons and Obama were against same sex marriage at one time that they're forever against it and their reversals don't count, and that they're as bad or worse than the Republicans who advanced DOMA in the first place, the Republicans who voted for DOMA, and the Republicans in power now who are doing their best to attack LGBT people and LGBT rights.
Obama was not against it throughout his career. He was for same sex marriage in 2012, which was four years before he left office as president. Hillary Clinton was not against it for her entire career - she changed her mind in 2013, and was secretary of state for another three years. Do these years not count as part of their careers? Can you please stop with the alternative facts?
This and repeatedly referring to "Democrat party" when you know better that they are the Democratic Party as has been explained at least three times by different people in this thread makes it seem like you are trolling, are you?
You make it clear even now you hold the Republican party guilty over such things.
Over which things?
The "execution" thing is almost entirely religious right figures, and I never said that the Republicans as a whole are for that.
Anti-LGBT legislation? Yes, I do hold the Republican party guilty over such things. They're doing those things in multiple states and on a federal level.
Its rather hypocritical of you all to keep replying to me, after you guys started the discussion line, and keep replying to me, and now want to move away because your uncomfortable with these facts of the Democrat party signing legislation against Gay marriage.
The part about Trump is that your criticism of Trump is hypocritical considering how much hand-waving your doing for Hillary and the Democrat party, actually i expected you to be just as against them as the Republicans but evidently not so.
You love that word "hypocrisy." I mean you literally lied about things I said, but it's my honesty that's under attack.
It's not hypocritical to keep replying to you. It may be a waste of time, because you just keep repeating the same arguments over and over and ignore, do not read, or do not understand what everyone in this thread has been telling you all night.
No one is uncomfortable with Bill Clinton signing DOMA. We all know it happened, we all acknowledge it happened. We also acknowledged that Bill Clinton's position on this has changed.
It's not hypocritical to criticize Trump for anti-LGBT actions. He's done those things, and it is simple to find documentation of them and point them out.
It's not hypocritical to not criticize Clinton, Obama, and the Democratic party in exactly the same way because Clinton, Obama, and the Democratic party as a whole have moved away from anti-LGBT legislation and policies. I do have a lot of criticism of the Democratic party, as well as of Clinton and Obama, but those criticisms have to do with other things and are not relevant here.
And finally, Trump's actions are relevant now because Trump is in office now and taking these actions now. The Republican party's politics are relevant now because they are in power now. The Democrats are far from perfect, but they are almost assuredly the lesser evil.
Comments
https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-secretly-opposes-equality/
During the campaign, she and Trump both claimed to be for LGBT rights. Trump won despite receiving far fewer votes. After he was sworn in he has NOT shown that he is for LGBT rights by any stretch as @BelleSorciere linked.
Would Hillary have turned against LGBT rights? Possibly. Probably not by any stretch but possibly. But what do we have? Trump is President and is actively working against LGBT rights and protections. LGBT people who voted for him should not be shocked once he announced his VP choice was Mike Pence. Trump recently "joked" that Mike Pence wants to hang all gay people. Haha right, not so much. If I was President and my VP wanted to hang all gay people, I'd think you fire the motherscratcher.
http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-says-mike-pence-wants-hang-all-gay-people-685759
One happened to sign into law to that affect on the Federal level.
NY Times article about this here. No, it makes sense. You may not like it, but it makes sense. They're not delegating such matters to the state. They're actively making policy decisions that have a national impact. I did not say the Republican party wants to "exterminate me." I said the religious right advocates for the annihilation of LGBT people and I posted something like a dozen links to religious right types saying they were cool with executing gay people for being gay. Please try to keep up.
I don't have a double standard. You have a double standard - making extremely partisan posts while accusing others you disagree with of being "partisan" as if being partisan was itself a heinous crime.
Why are pushing so hard to silence criticism against Trump?
Evidently not aware of history, because Bill Clinton signed into law against Gay marriage on the Federal level.
Why are you so against even talking about Democrat Presidents and Candidates that actually legislated against the LGBT community?
And what does this have to do with Trump? Trump said he was pro-LGBT, but appointed Mike Pence (a virulently anti-LGBT politician) as his running mate, has had his administration take multiple shots at LGBT people (as documented in the article I linked, which I still do not believe you've read). Trump's gone to dinners hosted by literal anti-LGBT hate groups.
Trump's anti-LGBT and virulently so, any rational person can see it. Why propose something that's not going to happen (Trump shifting to actually be pro-LGBT) just to attack people again for criticizing Trump?
What matters is what IS happening. Whatabout x,y,z is irrelevant.
Trump is the President, Hillary isn't even though she received more than 3 million more votes.
It amuses me how you all dogpile, when i see the extreme discomfort in showing the Democrat party actually signed into law against Gay marriage on the Federal level, and Obama, Hillary and Bill were against it throughout their career.
This sort of partisan breakdown is what i love seeing most.
I did say that much of the right wing is anti-LGBT and yes I do hold them responsible for this. Why shouldn't I? We've been talking about them ad nauseum. There's not much more to say than "yes, they did, but they've shifted their stances." You constantly repeat the same argument over and over again, with zero modification. There's no discussion here. We're answering your claims and you simply reassert them as if nothing has been said.
And you're also lying about not pushing so hard to silence criticism against Trump. You told me I couldn't criticize Trump ever again because you decided, based on terrible logic, that I was being hypocritical. You attacked @jjstraka34 repeatedly yesterday accusing him of spamming the thread. You demanded that the moderators make a new thread strictly for discussing Trump to remove the discussion from this thread.
So why are you doing this? Why does it pain you so much that anyone is against Trump and has literal facts on their side to support it?
Its rather hypocritical of you all to keep replying to me, after you guys started the discussion line, and keep replying to me, and now want to move away because your uncomfortable with these facts of the Democrat party signing legislation against Gay marriage.
The part about Trump is that your criticism of Trump is hypocritical considering how much hand-waving your doing for Hillary and the Democrat party, actually i expected you to be just as against them as the Republicans but evidently not so.
Obama was not against it throughout his career. He was for same sex marriage in 2012, which was four years before he left office as president. Hillary Clinton was not against it for her entire career - she changed her mind in 2013, and was secretary of state for another three years. Do these years not count as part of their careers? Can you please stop with the alternative facts?
The "execution" thing is almost entirely religious right figures, and I never said that the Republicans as a whole are for that.
Anti-LGBT legislation? Yes, I do hold the Republican party guilty over such things. They're doing those things in multiple states and on a federal level.
You love that word "hypocrisy." I mean you literally lied about things I said, but it's my honesty that's under attack.
It's not hypocritical to keep replying to you. It may be a waste of time, because you just keep repeating the same arguments over and over and ignore, do not read, or do not understand what everyone in this thread has been telling you all night.
No one is uncomfortable with Bill Clinton signing DOMA. We all know it happened, we all acknowledge it happened. We also acknowledged that Bill Clinton's position on this has changed.
It's not hypocritical to criticize Trump for anti-LGBT actions. He's done those things, and it is simple to find documentation of them and point them out.
It's not hypocritical to not criticize Clinton, Obama, and the Democratic party in exactly the same way because Clinton, Obama, and the Democratic party as a whole have moved away from anti-LGBT legislation and policies. I do have a lot of criticism of the Democratic party, as well as of Clinton and Obama, but those criticisms have to do with other things and are not relevant here.
And finally, Trump's actions are relevant now because Trump is in office now and taking these actions now. The Republican party's politics are relevant now because they are in power now. The Democrats are far from perfect, but they are almost assuredly the lesser evil.