Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
So was Clinton I, back in the 90s.
How is it specifically different from earlier platform?
The 2012 platform did not have anything like this in it."Democrats applaud last year's decision by the Supreme Court that recognized that LGBT people -- like other Americans -- have the right to marry the person they love," the platform says. "But there is still much work to be done. LGBT kids continue to be bullied at school, restaurants can refuse to serve transgender people, and same-sex couples are at risk of being evicted from their homes. That is unacceptable and must change."
It's because of the Republicans stonewalling and forcing Dems to compromise. They did the same thing with healthcare reform, too. Every time the Dems propose a progressive measure, the Repubs throw a fit and block it entirely, or force the Dems to strip it down to almost nothing.So was Clinton I, back in the 90s.
What we got was DOMA, DADT, and other such.
I'm a supporter of Clinton, but well aware of the lying and throwing under buses. I was among them and I do remember.
Tom
The 2012 platform did not have anything like this in it.
This goes further. Particularly in defence of non-discrimination.In 2012, Democrats, or their platform, did not support same-sex marriage?
This goes further. Particularly in defence of non-discrimination.
Nah, the Dems are fully on board with trans rights.The political expediency of supporting LBG is settled and I am confident that the Clinton's support is now rock solid. Because I trust them to be politically expedient.
The T thing, not so much. There is still a lot of controversy about that and I would not bank on their support after the election unless people are ready to hold their toes to the fire.
Tom
The gay community thought the same thing in the mid90s.Nah, the Dems are fully on board with trans rights.
I'd rather take my chances with the Dems than with what we have seen from the Reps and Pence.The gay community thought the same thing in the mid90s.
What happened after that was not at all "as advertised "
YMMV
Tom
If he had such a great relationship with gays, one of them would have taken care of that hairpiece long ago...Trump has a great relationship with the gays. Believe me folks. We're going to win again. We're going to win so big.
The sad thing is that isn't a hair piece. He chooses to have his own natural hair like that.If he had such a great relationship with gays, one of them would have taken care of that hairpiece long ago...
Trump has a great relationship with the gays. Believe me folks. We're going to win again. We're going to win so big.
I think you meant to say "win bigly".Trump has a great relationship with the gays. Believe me folks. We're going to win again. We're going to win so big.
I do have to admit though, he really owns the image of it, and it's become a very essential part of his image, like Nietzsche's walrus mustache, or Engel's treebeard of a beard, or Marx's hair and beard that merged into one.The sad thing is that isn't a hair piece. He chooses to have his own natural hair like that.
You know I totally agree. The Dems are light years ahead of the Reps. I'm just saying that I don't trust the Clintons after they get elected. You have to watch them and hold them to the terms of the platform. Queers are not a big constituency and easy to forget as I found out.I'd rather take my chances with the Dems than with what we have seen from the Reps and Pence.