Nancy Pelosi to make LGBT Equality Act top priority if Democrats take House - Polidicks

Let's forget about how they can tackle multiple issues at the same time for a second. How can ensuring EVERYONE has equal rights be portrayed as a bad thing? I would love to hear a legit answer without any sort of prejudice or religious based reasoning.

Read before you respond you imbecile

Civil rights are a top priority because it's something that should never be attacked yet republicans are attacking them right now and everyone ignoring that only cares about civil rights when it affects them Which means they have no idea what its like to have your rights threatened and they pedanticly tell thoses who do "stop making a big fuss about this, dont campaign about it, its not high priority" implying gouvernements cant do multiple things at once which is a lie. For the millionth time, this is an issue only because republicans went out of their way to make it one and spend time they could have spend on anything else attacking civil rights. It's a right of existence as who you are that's at stake, not some rainbow starbucks cups.

Yes, but this woman is saying LGBT equality is her top priority. What I am saying is that global warming and climate change are just more important right now.

and what everyone else is saying is those two are literally right behind it. You can have a main objective while pushing for others, climate change has always been on dem top priority since the 90s. Its just recently that we have a government attacking a minority group directly, so protections for the LGBT has been pushed up.

have you considered the recent news regarding the trump administration's desire to essentially remove transgenderism as an acknowledged thing or did you just jump in the thread hoping to come with a jab and get clapped on your shoulder?

It's even in the article my dude.

Yes and climate change should still be the top priority. You can have LGBT stuff right behind it. No, top priority implies it comes before everything else. She said it was her top priority, not one of the top priorities. Semantics matter and you need to be clear when making a statement.

Semantics do matter, that is why her spokesperson said "a top priority", implying that it shares this status with other individual top priorities, and not "the top priority". It's okay to not like Pelosi, it's even okay not to like the Democratic party, but this is getting starting to get pathetic. I can't believe I have to explain this shit.

I do not like or dislike Pelosi, my problem is with how the title is worded and the implications it brings. That's why I said semantics matter. Most of this thread could have been avoided if the title had been clearer. When I read the original article, I misread the title due to the one here and was left with the wrong impression.

Nancy Pelosi to make LGBT equality act a top priority (among a bunch of other things) might not have the same ring to it.

most of this thread could have been avoided if two people weren't being purposefully obtuse and forgetting how words work to feign concern for the Democrats in the midterms.

How exactly did we forget how words work? The title of the thread gave us a wrong impression due to it's wording.

Misleading headlines have been a problem for as long as the world has has had newspapers but I guess the problem is worse now that we have a zillion headlines a day.

At least it was probably not intentionally misleading.

Oh I certainly agree this should be part of their policy, just announced as a "top priority." Trans issues are something that make certain conservatives froth at the mouth and use nonsense words that have become divorced from meaning like "virtue signaling" and "identity politics" (to demonstrate the point, it has already happened in the thread). Now normally, I'd advocate the ignoring of people with stupid opinions. However, people with stupid opinions vote in great numbers and I think the best way to help people right now is to make sure Republicans lose power.

Yeah there's also the fact that instating protections for LGBT people is probably a much quicker fix than "solve climate change forever". So even if the Government had to focus on one thing at a time, this would still be a smart move because it's simple and would be out of the way quickly.

I think the hardcore conservative base is actually pretty small, they just have shitloads of money.

I think this is less of a "hardcore conservative" thing than you think. For instance, both my and my girlfriend's normally left-leaning parents came down on Kavanaugh's side on the nomination issue. I had a coworker who has met Trump personally more than once (he's a golf pro and we're right by a Trump course) and during the election said whenever Trump walked into a room everything he did just seemed slimy. Then he also said that the country is going to the dogs because now "men are allowed to go into the women's bathroom" and if he ever caught someone doing that while one of his daughter's were in there he'd kick their ass. Granted, this guy is conservative-learning generally, but the point is he's not your hardcore Trump supporter. Quite a few people who aren't rabid Trump supporters are still old-fashioned on modern social issues.

A top priority NOT THE top priority A top priority NOT THE top priority A top priority NOT THE top priority A top priority NOT THE top priority Are we CLEAR yet?

Of course LGBT rights should be a top priority. LGBT is not a tiny subset of people. You can't legalise things and then suddenly start reversing that progress. People have started their lives now, we can't go back as a society. Protections have to be put in place to end these threats for good. People can't plan their lives around reactionaries, fuck them, people need stability to build their lives on without arseholes trying to smash the foundations out from under them as soon as they've been given the green light to build a future.