North Carolina’s Anti-LGBTQ Repeal Effort Disintegrates Into A Giant Mess - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51564653] Remember this environment of sexual liberation has very little precedent in human history, and is still unheard of in most parts of the world today.[/QUOTE] Open homosexuality was common, if not downright celebrated, in a lot of historical cultures. If you're going to talk from atop an "educated" pillar, try and actually educate yourself first. For reference, the ancient Romans celebrated homosexual sex as the height of sexual intercourse, as women were second class citizens and to bugger or take court with a younger, athletic man was seen as a more noble way to sate one's urges, and the ancient Japanese had a very long history of manlove too. There's probably others I'm unaware of. It's only recent western Christian cultures that have explicitly begun to revile homosexuality. For other parts of the LGBTQ spectrum there's plenty of other historical cases for it too. It's only in the past three hundred years or so that LGBTQ people were persecuted on such a grand degree. In the past it just generally slipped past the radar -- both discrimination and acceptance. It wasn't a big deal. [editline]22nd December 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Chonch;51565151] Just out of curiosity, do you usually make your undergarments a subject of public discussion?[/QUOTE] It's hyperbole, my friend.

Because LGBT issues are more relevant to most young inidividuals than charter schools or prison reform. That aside, people can care about more than one thing. A person'a support of one issue does not disqualify them from supporting other issues. Don't be dense.

[QUOTE=Chonch;51565029]Can someone remind me what essential human right is being violated here?[/QUOTE] The basic right for you to post stupid shit like this. But do keep cherrypicking the posts you have an easier time debating with instead. You'd probably complain about "lack of intellectual discourse" too while you're at it.

[QUOTE=Chonch;51565151]I hadn't thought about it this way before. It does seem odd how much the young folks in particular are into the whole LGBT thing, but yet shy away from the more complicated issues like charter schools or privacy rights or prison reform. Maybe it's just a symptom of the democratization of political discussion--more people getting drawn to the clear-cut ethical issues first? [/QUOTE] "Why are young people more interested in things that directly affect them than things that aren't as likely to directly affect them?"

Oh, and Whoaly, don't forget that we lost Turing to LGBTQ persecution too. But I guess the loss of one of the greatest scientific minds of the 20th century is a small price to pay if it means that the average clam-lover is somehow.. uh.. slightly.. no, there's no payoff for it. You're still a tool. I posit to anyone who's in favor of this: [b]Who[/b] does LGBTQ persecution benefit? [b]What[/b] issues does it solve? [b]Why[/b] is it necessary to repeal perfectly sensible antidiscrimination laws? [b]When[/b] will LGBTQ people be accepted, then, if now is "not the time"? If you're so assured of your arguments you should have no issue answering [b]all[/b] of these, right?

[QUOTE=Chonch;51565151]I hadn't thought about it this way before. It does seem odd how much the young folks in particular are into the whole LGBT thing, but yet shy away from the more complicated issues like charter schools or privacy rights or prison reform. Maybe it's just a symptom of the democratization of political discussion--more people getting drawn to the clear-cut ethical issues first? [/QUOTE] The fact that you're ignoring all of the discourse and evidence to the contrary to instead pose some trite and poorly conceived inner reflection just shows how intentionally dense you're being here. Maybe we aren't "shying away" from things prison reform or privacy rights? How many young leftists do you genuinely know? You cant expect everyone to be invested and well educated in everything, but even then you're ignoring all of us that are.

[QUOTE=Chonch;51565029]Can someone remind me what essential human right is being violated here?[/QUOTE] If you genuinely don't know the details of the law, [url=http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article68401147.html]here's[/url] a breakdown by the Charlotte Observer, a local newspaper.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;51565236]If you genuinely don't know the details of the law, [url=http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article68401147.html]here's[/url] a breakdown by the Charlotte Observer, a local newspaper.[/QUOTE] This is very useful, thank you. Perhaps this or something similar should be appended to the OP?

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51564653]It might be in the West's future to be a more sexually accepting place, [B]or it might be just a passing phase,[/B] we just have to wait and see.[/QUOTE] You'll pry my rights from my cold dead hands. That should sound familiar to the conservative Right.

How do some people sleep at night knowing that they are trying their hardest to take away rights from people.

[QUOTE=MissingGlitch;51565375]How do some people sleep at night knowing that they are trying their hardest to take away rights from people.[/QUOTE] Because they equate being gay or trans with being immoral or sinful. They believe they're doing the right thing.

[QUOTE=MissingGlitch;51565375]How do some people sleep at night knowing that they are trying their hardest to take away rights from people.[/QUOTE] Because they are the fanatics our founding fathers warned us against. Their zealotry knows no bounds.

Good, good, let your hate devour your shitty bill! [QUOTE=Whoaly;51564756]I'll never understand how this issue genuinely seems to be the hill the 21st century left are prepared to die on, never.[/quote] Not just the left. I'm in full support of LGBT rights and I'm most certainly not left-leaning. It's just basic common fucking sense, hell, it's in the damn Pledge of Allegiance we have our kids recide every day at school. [quote]I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation indivisible, [b]with liberty and justice for all.[/b][/quote] With liberty and justice for all. Hmm. That doesn't say 'For straight people' or 'for white people'. It says 'For all'. All. As in everyone living in this country, be they black, latino, gay, trans, visiting tourists, aliens from Mars. Anyone living on US soil is included in the Pledge and has been for 80+ years. It's high time we live up to that. [quote]Far better achieved by economic populism and trade protectionism to dismantle globalization, a system in which the highest achievable aspirations of most people is a job at McDonald's.[/quote] If that's their highest aspiration they need to dream bigger. I have nothing past a high school degree, a year and a half total experience in the workforce, I live in Rural America next to a fairly small town, and I'm already making $12.50/hr. It ain't exactly a living wage, but ya know what? It's WAY more than a McD's worker gets, I have a progression tree with my company, and I have job security. In due time I'll be able to find a living wage here, [i]and I have fuck all helping me besides a desire to secure a living wage and a healthy work ethic.[/i] Zero sympathy for McD's workers, walmart workers(which I was, for 13 months), et al who have just given up and accepted life in poverty. Get your asses moving. If I can do it so can you. [quote]You you can advocate for LGBT "rights" if you want, but you should really file it under the "it would be nice to have" category rather than the "absolute essential pillar of human dignity" category. [/quote] Yeah, I'll file it right next to 'it'd be nice to never have to buy my lunch with bottlecaps' folder. [quote]What percentage of the population are LGBTQ? How does that demographic fall across the upper, middle, working and lower class strata? [/quote] Absolutely fucking irrelevant. [quote]It doesn't really seem to be an issue concerning the "common people".[/quote] I am one of the "common people" and it is an issue concerning me. [quote]There are far more important issues in the world[/quote] Not really. [quote], and I do believe that this is sucking way too much passion and energy away from dealing with those, especially among the younger generation.[/QUOTE] Getting this sussed out will bring forth a level of unity that will aid us in those other endeavors. We will never solve those issues if we're too busy fighting each other over more down-to-home things.

[QUOTE=MissingGlitch;51565375]How do some people sleep at night knowing that they are trying their hardest to take away rights from people.[/QUOTE] basically [img]https://deadhomersociety.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/republicanconvention.png[/img]

[QUOTE=TestECull;51565543]Zero sympathy for McD's workers, walmart workers(which I was, for 13 months), et al who have just given up and accepted life in poverty. Get your asses moving. If I can do it so can you.[/QUOTE] While I agree with most of your post, you do have to admit that even if everyone walks out of McD's, Walmarts, and other such low-paying positions, there just won't be flat enough positions for everyone that equals yours. What exactly makes your situation applicable to everyone and not just your stroke of luck? Anyway, you can reply to that in PM, since this is going off-topic.

[QUOTE=gufu;51565720]While I agree with most of your post, you do have to admit that even if everyone walks out of McD's, Walmarts, and other such low-paying positions, there just won't be flat enough positions for everyone that equals yours. What exactly makes your situation applicable to everyone and not just your stroke of luck?[/quote] Because it wasn't a stroke of luck, it was me throwing applications into the wind like confetti until a temp agency connected me with a warehouse that needed someone loading trailers. The only difference between me and them is I didn't give up and accept a fate of living in near poverty under that stupid blue vest of shame. I kept pushing for something better, and when that something arrived, I didn't hesitate.

[QUOTE=TestECull;51566292]Because it wasn't a stroke of luck, it was me throwing applications into the wind like confetti until a temp agency connected me with a warehouse that needed someone loading trailers. The only difference between me and them is I didn't give up and accept a fate of living in near poverty under that stupid blue vest of shame. I kept pushing for something better, and when that something arrived, I didn't hesitate.[/QUOTE] Hard for some people who are disadvantaged in other ways such as disabled or in a location where jobs are not always available for upwards mobility. It's circumstantial. Sure there are definitely some lazy people out there, but not everyone who works at minimum wage jobs is lazy or doesn't want to move upwards or get to a better job. Sometimes that's just what works for them or for their schedule or for their abilities then and there. Single moms sometimes sacrifice a job with upwards mobility for a min wage job that allows for them to spend more time with their kids. A spouse who has to take care of a disabled partner may have to stay in one central location at a crappier job because it allows them to maintain close proximity to doctor who is affordable and serves their spouse in the best way. I don't have sympathy for people who refuse to change and have nothing limiting them from doing better, but I have the utmost respect for those who have aspirations but simply cannot reach them because of their life situation. But you never know until you know.

[QUOTE=TestECull;51565543]Good, good, let your hate devour your shitty bill! Not just the left. I'm in full support of LGBT rights and I'm most certainly not left-leaning. It's just basic common fucking sense, hell, it's in the damn Pledge of Allegiance we have our kids recide every day at school. With liberty and justice for all. Hmm. That doesn't say 'For straight people' or 'for white people'. It says 'For all'. All. As in everyone living in this country, be they black, latino, gay, trans, visiting tourists, aliens from Mars. Anyone living on US soil is included in the Pledge and has been for 80+ years. It's high time we live up to that. If that's their highest aspiration they need to dream bigger. I have nothing past a high school degree, a year and a half total experience in the workforce, I live in Rural America next to a fairly small town, and I'm already making $12.50/hr. It ain't exactly a living wage, but ya know what? It's WAY more than a McD's worker gets, I have a progression tree with my company, and I have job security. In due time I'll be able to find a living wage here, [i]and I have fuck all helping me besides a desire to secure a living wage and a healthy work ethic.[/i] Zero sympathy for McD's workers, walmart workers(which I was, for 13 months), et al who have just given up and accepted life in poverty. Get your asses moving. If I can do it so can you. Yeah, I'll file it right next to 'it'd be nice to never have to buy my lunch with bottlecaps' folder. Absolutely fucking irrelevant. I am one of the "common people" and it is an issue concerning me. Not really. Getting this sussed out will bring forth a level of unity that will aid us in those other endeavors. We will never solve those issues if we're too busy fighting each other over more down-to-home things.[/QUOTE] it's good to see someone who seems to have more right wing views on economics recognize the basic realities of human rights. too many people accept Republican backwardsness on social issues because they economically identify with the party. it's time for that to change; either go libertarian or change the party's platform.

[QUOTE=Duck M.;51564807]Are you [I]really[/I] making LGBT rights a matter of globalization and economic populism? Am I reading this right? [/QUOTE] No, what I'm saying is that LGBT issues are NOT related to globalisation/economics, which are more important. [QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51564932]Because it's a matter of basic human rights. It is so fundamentally basic and important it is utterly ridiculous that anyone in the United States would oppose them. [/QUOTE] It's basically this: "I have certain sexual desires that I can't help and some people don't approve of, I would feel better if there was a bit less social stigma about it." It is an understandable sentiment, but nowhere near as important an issue as abolishing slavery, opposing unjust wars, or protecting the poor and destitute. When you get right down to it, homosexuality, and how people view it is in the same category, and of equivalent importance, to how some religions forbid the eating of pork, or how certain people might find it weird that a guy would be into bondage. [QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51564932]Because if they oppose gay rights, how the hell are we gonna get anything else? Universal basic income? Climate Change? If their ignorance is so much that they hate gay people because of their religion or whatever, how in god's name are we gonna get anything else done?[/QUOTE] Are you serious, do you even have the slightest conception of how absurd that statement is? Those issues have nothing to do with LGBTQ, zero, zilch. We are perfectly capable of pursuing those goals without ever giving a thought to stuff like Gay marriage. Did we need Gay marriage for the New Deal? no, they're completely unrelated. [QUOTE=Chonch;51565151]I hadn't thought about it this way before. It does seem odd how much the young folks in particular are into the whole LGBT thing, but yet shy away from the more complicated issues like charter schools or privacy rights or prison reform. Maybe it's just a symptom of the democratization of political discussion--more people getting drawn to the clear-cut ethical issues first? [/QUOTE] The first reason is actually quite simple; it's easier. The most ardent opponents of LGBTQ are (for now) declining institutions of conservative Christianity. They may have a lot of money but there appeal is increasingly limited to small towns in bumfuck Wyoming or Arkansas. The people LGBTQ activists have to fight against are just not that scary or powerful. But who do you go up against when you push for privacy rights, a higher minimum wage or reduced job outsourcing? Powerful governments and Corporations who are definitely not going anywhere and have the means to hurt people who become too obstructive. Just look at what people fighting for actually important issues have to deal with: Edward Snowden has made enemies with the most powerful spies on earth and is forced to live in exile, Bernie Sanders' campaign of economic populism was sabotaged by a supposedly "left-wing" party establishment and then there's Jeremy Corbyn, who's own supposedly "worker's party" is working tirelessly to undermine him because he actually seeks to pursue an anti-war, anti globalization platform. And who have the LGBTQ advocates had to deal with the past few years? A fat county clerk from the middle of nowhere, a couple of Christian bakers and a science fiction author. Is it any wonder that virtue signallers operating out of the comfort of their Uni-campuses might prefer to convince themselves that going after little people is a noble and just cause. They can step on people who can't do much to retaliate, and feel very good about themselves at the same time. [QUOTE=Pascall;51565190]Because LGBT issues are more relevant to most young inidividuals than charter schools or prison reform. That aside, people can care about more than one thing. [B]A person'a support of one issue does not disqualify them from supporting other issues.[/B] [/QUOTE] In theory it shouldn't, but it does seem to. Just look at the shitstorm raised when it was announced that Orson Scott Card would be writing a grand total of 2 issues of a Superman comic. Certain stores refused to stock the title and there was enormous pressure for DC to fire him. I cannot overstate the flack that he and DC got for that decision. And it worked. A huge explosion of negative energy all to make sure one guy didn't write a few comics. Maybe I'm just looking in the wrong places, but I don't see this kind of thing happening with other issues. Where was the outcry when the new Star Wars was being filmed in Abu Dhabi, generating money and publicity for a repressive regime whose crimes are far worse than anything Card has done or could do? [QUOTE=Arctic-Zone;51565091]Just to clarify something, Whoaly: I said "the common people" in the sense of the proletariat, not the majority group of a population.[/QUOTE] And again, what percentage of LGBTQ people are part of the working class? How does LGBTQ advocacy advance the cause of wealth redistribution? What does it have to do with creating worker-friendly regulations? How does it prevent job outsourcing? How does it help us get a higher minimum wage? It doesn't, it is a social issue that has relevance to a specific group, and does not tie into economic issues relevant to the wider working class in any meaningful way. [QUOTE=cis.joshb;51566902]it's good to see someone who seems to have more right wing views on economics recognize the basic realities of human rights. too many people accept Republican backwardsness on social issues because they economically identify with the party. it's time for that to change; either go libertarian or change the party's platform.[/QUOTE] He demonstrates a totally contemptuous attitude for people who are working a soul-destroying job because of an unfair economic system, but at least he's down with the gays.

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51568050]No, what I'm saying is that LGBT issues are NOT related to globalisation/economics, which are more important. It's basically this: "I have certain sexual desires that I can't help and some people don't approve of, I would feel better if there was a bit less social stigma about it." It is an understandable sentiment, but nowhere near as important an issue as abolishing slavery, opposing unjust wars, or protecting the poor and destitute. When you get right down to it, homosexuality, and how people view it is in the same category, and of equivalent importance, to how some religions forbid the eating of pork, or how certain people might find it weird that a guy would be into bondage. Are you serious, do you even have the slightest conception of how absurd that statement is? Those issues have nothing to do with LGBTQ, zero, zilch. We are perfectly capable of pursuing those goals without ever giving a thought to stuff like Gay marriage. Did we need Gay marriage for the New Deal? no, they're completely unrelated. The first reason is actually quite simple; it's easier. The most ardent opponents of LGBTQ are (for now) declining institutions of conservative Christianity. They may have a lot of money but there appeal is increasingly limited to small towns in bumfuck Wyoming or Arkansas. The people LGBTQ activists have to fight against are just not that scary or powerful. But who do you go up against when you push for privacy rights, a higher minimum wage or reduced job outsourcing? Powerful governments and Corporations who are definitely not going anywhere and have the means to hurt people who become too obstructive. Just look at what people fighting for actually important issues have to deal with: Edward Snowden has made enemies with the most powerful spies on earth and is forced to live in exile, Bernie Sanders' campaign of economic populism was sabotaged by a supposedly "left-wing" party establishment and then there's Jeremy Corbyn, who's own supposedly "worker's party" is working tirelessly to undermine him because he actually seeks to pursue an anti-war, anti globalization platform. And who have the LGBTQ advocates had to deal with the past few years? A fat county clerk from the middle of nowhere, a couple of Christian bakers and a science fiction author. Is it any wonder that virtue signallers operating out of the comfort of their Uni-campuses might prefer to convince themselves that going after little people is a noble and just cause. They can step on people who can't do much to retaliate, and feel very good about themselves at the same time. [/QUOTE] Uhhhh. You remember the shooting in the Pulse club, right? LGBT people are still facing [I]real and violent discrimination[/I] that economic reform will not fix.

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51568050]It's basically this: "I have certain sexual desires that I can't help and some people don't approve of, I would feel better if there was a bit less social stigma about it." It is an understandable sentiment, but nowhere near as important an issue as abolishing slavery, opposing unjust wars, or protecting the poor and destitute..[/QUOTE] Who the fuck is taking about sexual desires? Sexual desires and orientation are completely different things. And yes, it is as important as those things. Anything that is violating basic human rights is a big issue, no matter how you want to present it.

[quote]It's basically this: "I have certain sexual desires that I can't help and some people don't approve of, I would feel better if there was a bit less social stigma about it." It is an understandable sentiment, but nowhere near as important an issue as abolishing slavery, opposing unjust wars, or protecting the poor and destitute.[/quote] This isn't the suffering Olympics. It's very, very easy and possible to be able to do all those things. They don't oppose each other, in the slightest. I'd rather not have gay rights come at the cost for any of those things, when it doesn't even need to. As someone else mentioned describing someone's orientation as a desire is just plain odd. [quote] When you get right down to it, homosexuality, and how people view it is in the same category, and of equivalent importance, to how some religions forbid the eating of pork, or how certain people might find it weird that a guy would be into bondage.[/quote] Holy shit, talk about the worst false equivalency and comparison I've ever heard. Someone's sexual orientation is nothing like a belief in a religious practice or someone's kink; it's part of their basic identity. It's a natural part of who they are. You simply cannot compare them, and it is such a gross and backwards view of sexual orientation to do so. It diminishes the struggle of gay people. [quote]Are you serious, do you even have the slightest conception of how absurd that statement is? Those issues have nothing to do with LGBTQ, zero, zilch. We are perfectly capable of pursuing those goals without ever giving a thought to stuff like Gay marriage. Did we need Gay marriage for the New Deal? no, they're completely unrelated.[/quote] Do you realise how ridiculous your whole view on gay issues are? (See, I can play that game too, sunny). My point was is that someone who opposes gay marriage is also incredibly likely to oppose social movements like basic universal income and something like a new New Deal because their views are formed from ignorance. There is literally no logical argument you can make for opposing gay marriage or gay rights; the vast majority of time it's based on the illogical falicies of religious faith or the fact that "ew people are different." It is born and bigot of ignorance. And if someone is so ignorant to not tolerate the fact that two adult men or two adult women can truly love each other, how can we get to the more advanced and trickier to explain topics of social care?

[QUOTE=Arctic-Zone;51568116]Uhhhh. You remember the shooting in the Pulse club, right? LGBT people are still facing [I]real and violent discrimination[/I] that economic reform will not fix.[/QUOTE] Far more an issue concerning Islamic extremism, which anyone could fall victim to in any public place, regardless of sexuality. You may not care for "dem gud christen folk down south", but that tragedy had nothing to do with them or their views.

What are you even talking about. That attack was a direct attack on LGBT people and if you're going to say that that's not an important factor then boy do I have news for you. [editline]22nd December 2016[/editline] Nobody said anything about Christianity either, so I have no idea where the hell youre getting that from.

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51568161]This isn't the suffering Olympics. It's very, very easy and possible to be able to do all those things. They don't oppose each other, in the slightest. I'd rather not have gay rights come at the cost for any of those things, when it doesn't even need to.[/QUOTE] They don't, but I have simply never been satisfied with the proposition that something like Gay Marriage is anywhere in the same league as those issues. [QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51568161]My point was is that [B]someone who opposes gay marriage is also incredibly likely to oppose social movements like basic universal income and something like a new New Deal[/B] because their views are formed from ignorance.[/QUOTE] I take it you've never met a Moldovan Communist before.

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51568229]They don't, but I have simply never been satisfied with the proposition that something like Gay Marriage is anywhere in the same league as those issues.[/QUOTE] It's a basic human right, so it is in the same league.

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51564756]There are far more important issues in the world[/QUOTE] There are 7.4 billion people on this planet. I think we can multitask when it comes to human rights. Seriously, why the fuck do people constantly use this as an argument?

[QUOTE=Pascall;51568211]Nobody said anything about Christianity either, so I have no idea where the hell youre getting that from.[/QUOTE] There's always the implication that we should see the attacker as somehow cut from the same cloth as people like those Christian Bakers or others who are opposed to gay marriage. The whole attack just seemed to be another indicator of the dangers of Islamic terrorism. The victims may have been gay, and he may have targeted them partly for that, but there were huge differences between what drove his actions and, say, Kim Davis.

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51568248]There's always the implication that we should see the attacker as somehow cut from the same cloth as people like those Christian Bakers or others who are opposed to gay marriage. The whole attack just seemed to be another indicator of the dangers of Islamic terrorism. The victims may have been gay, and he may have targeted them partly for that, but there were huge differences between what drove his actions and, say, Kim Davis.[/QUOTE] Kim Davis failed to do her job as a public servant because of extreme/fundamentalist religious views. The Pulse shooter killed multiple people because of extreme/fundamentalist religious views.

[QUOTE=simkas;51568232]It's a basic human right, so it is in the same league.[/QUOTE] Who really think a small percentage of people not being allowed to marry is at all on the same level as countless people being slaughtered in wars, or individuals being treated like property? Really? You see an equivalence there?