I support LGBT rights, to an extent, but I'm not going to make it one of my considerations when choosing a candidate. The reason for this is because LGBT people are, and will likely always be, a small minority of the U.S. population. Despite common estimates of 20-25% of the population being LGBT, actual statistics put the number at below 5% of the population. SOURCE- http://www.gallup.com/poll/183383/americans-greatly-overestimate-percent-gay-lesbian.aspx Simply put, I don't agree with the concept of making laws for the sake of a small minority when those laws do not reflect the will of the majority. That's not how democracy works.
I actually feel somewhat better now. Even though a mod on Canterlot.com abused their power and changed my avatar without my permission. Either way... The next 6 months shall REIGN. Spoiler
That is exactly why there are checks and balances in our government. To avoid always doing what the majority wants. Especially if it goes state by state... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority People can be bad, large groups of people can be horrible. You know how people are stocking up on guns and ammo because they are afraid the government is gonna take their guns? If Trump and Pence win, I'm stocking up on condoms. http://www.snopes.com/mike-pence-condoms-are-too-modern-and-liberal/ This guy just gets weirder and weirder. Let alone the forcing women to let the medical center or hospital have "final arrangements" for miscarriages. I'm just glad it was stopped a day before it went in effect. But he tried... Scary, scary man to have power.
Uh, no, we're not supposed to avoid doing what the majority wants. That's not how democracy works. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, remember? And to be perfectly frank, I agree with Pence. Abstinence is the best birth control. Kids shouldn't be taught to use condoms, they need to be taught to have a little bit of goddamn self-control.
You occasionally make hypocritical appeals to US law; Hillary Clinton is accused of violating the law with a private email server, yet what you state here blatantly violates the Equal Protection Clause enshrined in the Fourteenth Amendment. The USA was never set up to be a "pure" democracy where literally everything, including the rights of minorities who aren't harming anyone, is decided by a majority vote. Furthermore, since a narrow majority of Americans support a ban on "assault weapons" and "high capacity" magazines, by your logic, we should ignore any appeals to the Second Amendment (something you have cited in the gun control thread in the past) and go ahead and place a ban on further civilian sales of AR-15's, AK-47's, M14/M1A's, etc. Institutionalized discrimination doesn't get a free pass, even if there are cases in which a majority are not affected by it. And this is entirely aside from the argumentum ad populum fallacy at the center of your argument. Opposition to equal rights for LGBT and other minorities on the basis of "the will of the majority" is tantamount to siding with the bigots that oppress them.
I don't like the concept of "majority rule" because it parallels logic like "might makes right," but more so for the reason that the logic is handled by people, who can mishandle its use — either intentionally or unintentionally — in multiple ways even before we get around to assessing whether someone understands the concept in the first place. I'd prefer determinations to fall between such concepts as "the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" from the private end and "do what you want so long as it doesn't harm another" on the public end. What is this "America" that you are speaking of? I mean, geographically, sure, but beyond that I'd probably describe it as either a travesty or being overrated.
The thing is, though, the vast majority of Americans (83%) are Christians. Not surprising, when you consider that the majority of the Founding Fathers were Christian, and that most of our laws were made to reflect Christian values. From the current established Christian viewpoint, homosexuality is wrong. Not all Christians agree with this, but that is the "party line," so to speak. Therefore, to demand laws be changed for the good of a small percentage of Americans, especially when those laws are, in the eyes of many, immoral and wrong, is a violation of civil rights of the majority. And that is wrong. That's not how America is supposed to work. I'm not saying that LGBT people will never receive equal treatment, but they've got a long road ahead of them. To be blunt, LGBT is not normal, and society thrives on normalcy. It's not fair to them. Not in the least. But that's the way it is. That said, remember that there was a time when women weren't allowed to vote. There was a time when blacks were second class citizens. There was a time when natives were pests worthy of extermination. All these, which were once societal norms, are now simply relics of a less enlightened era. I have no doubt that there will be a time in the future when LGBT people are universally accepted, and modern conservative attitudes towards LGBT are looked back on as reminders of an ignorant past. But that time is not today. We're not there yet. Until the time comes when church finally understands that LGBT people are just as much God's children as "normal" people, then they're going to continue to receive unfair treatment. That's just how it is, and on behalf of sane conservatives everywhere, I'm sorry that they have to go through this.
It's a shame I don't have more spare time on my hands, as I would like to get involved with Pink Pistols and become a certified firearms instructor. Even if it ended up being volunteer work, I would enjoy teaching LGBT people how to shoot and prepare to obtain concealed carry permits. Even if Hillary ends up in office, its questionable if she will be able to pass any sort of federal "assault weapons" ban and anytime soon (there would still most likely be strong Republican opposition in the House and/or Senate) Even if she somehow got lucky and reinstated a permanent ban on "assault weapons" and "high capacity" magazines, handguns are so popular in the United States that it would most likely be political suicide to place a ban on them (I need to read up on the specifics, but it seems that a stipulation of Heller v. DC is that handguns cannot be banned as a class of firearm due to their popularity for defensive use). Chances are you will still be able to legally obtain a handgun when you get older regardless of who is in office. A cursory glance at American history shows this is patently false. Aside from the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment I mentioned above (this has also been covered before), there is the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment that clearly prohibits the government from the establishment of religion. Additionally, Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli clearly admits that "...the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion..." This document was unanimously ratified by the Senate. At bottom, the arguments above are a fig leaf employed in an attempt to justify the bigotry that such people put up with on a regular basis. Fortunately, the ground beneath the feet of conservatives is continuing to crumble. People are obviously moving to the left, as was proven by the mass support for the "socialism" of Bernie Sanders (HRC "won" in a rigged primary, and Trump even had to make opportunistic lip service to Sanders in the debates with Clinton). Most Americans support same-sex marriage. Demographics are changing rapidly, and it is estimated that whites will become a minority by 2042 (many of today's minorities are left-leaning). Religion is in decline in the United States. There may be a way to go, but the ball is definitely rolling. Things are going to continue to move forward regardless of who wins tomorrow's elections. The Republicans have been in crisis since 2008, and we are already seeing the beginning of a major crisis in the Democratic Party (Hillary Clinton is so rotten that a Trump victory cannot be ruled out tomorrow).
Not a seafood fan? And you call yourself a cat? Quit horsing around. ...Ah-ha! In reality, you're an equine, not a feline! Pony up for that bet that you'll conveniently not remember.
Not all cats like cold food, Nikkou. And if I were an equine, you can bet that I'd be prank-calling Francis the Talking Mule.
Due to circumstances you don't need to know about... My video game thought/experience blogs and my blogs in general will now be exclusive to this forum and this forum ALONE. Congratulations?
Kind of rude and uncalled for Rid. Not saying it isn't true, but you just give him more fuel for his everybody hates me stick.
