Why does the Republican Party still oppose LGBT rights?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 21, 2015 4:07 AM GMT
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/06/18/why-does-the-republican-party-still-oppose-lgbt-rights/
    ...Republicans still have no openly LGBT office holder, either nationally or even statewide. And the party’s leading presidential candidates rail against gay rights. Scott Walker says he wants a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Ted Cruz says that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality would be “fundamentally illegitimate.” Mike Huckabee, Marco Rubio, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, and Ben Carson have all made opposition to gay rights features of their campaigns...

    ...Why is the Republican Party so out of step with voters? Indeed, why is the American right so far behind similar parties in other democracies? The answer may rest on a distinctive idiosyncrasy: the GOP is often beholden to evangelical Christians...
  • Svnw688

    Posts: 3350

    Jun 21, 2015 5:29 AM GMT
    I could get into a lengthy social and legal discussion as to the dynamics of the GOP party, their shrinking tent, and the need to villanize "the gays," but it should suffice to say:

    The GOP are losers and don't like LGBT people. The end.
  • mar0302

    Posts: 273

    Jun 21, 2015 1:19 PM GMT
    Sad thing is.. generally speaking, smaller government means letting people do what they want.. not making differentiations between people and building in exclusive laws.. In theory, it should be Republican policy..

    But the Republicans like small government only when it suits them.. When it comes to whether or not gays can marry, or women get abortions, or teens getting birth control, then they want more government - not less.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14348

    Jun 21, 2015 2:15 PM GMT
    Because all the narrow minded bible thumping screwballs are still in charge of most of the GOP. Not only are these flaky fundamentalists opposed to gay and lesbian equality they are also fiercely opposed to equality for blacks, Hispanics, and women. These lunatics are known as equal opportunity bigots who will obstruct anyone who is not exactly like them. icon_mad.gif
  • jeepguySD

    Posts: 651

    Jun 21, 2015 2:48 PM GMT
    mar0302 saidSad thing is.. generally speaking, smaller government means letting people do what they want.. not making differentiations between people and building in exclusive laws.. In theory, it should be Republican policy..

    But the Republicans like small government only when it suits them.. When it comes to whether or not gays can marry, or women get abortions, or teens getting birth control, then they want more government - not less.


    I think you are exactly right. Conservatives want government to leave them alone, but at the same time they want government to dictate to anyone not exactly like themselves, such as LGBT people, how to live their lives, who to love, etc. I see it as just another blatant hypocrisy in Conservative thought and action.
  • 24hourguy

    Posts: 364

    Jun 21, 2015 3:01 PM GMT
    At the national level they know their platform is bullshit. So the only thing left to do is trot out the gays (and the Mexicans) to whip their base into a frenzy and set them loose like rabid dogs. -they make a lot of money off of us
  • TroyAthlete

    Posts: 4269

    Jun 21, 2015 3:45 PM GMT
    Because rational, intelligent, moral people change their minds and open their hearts when confronted with evidence that makes them question their worldview.

    The worldview of conservatives is hostile to change and hostile to facts, so Rethuglicans cling to bigotry even as the rest of the world grows and evolves.

    Young people, gays, blacks, Latinos, women, Asians and decent whites of good conscience reject conservatism for a good reason. Voting Republican is a mental disorder.
  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Jun 21, 2015 3:51 PM GMT
    con·serv·a·tive
    kənˈsərvədiv/
    adjective
    1.
    holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion.
    synonyms: traditionalist, traditional, conventional, orthodox, old-fashioned, dyed-in-the-wool, hidebound, unadventurous, set in one's ways; More
    noun
    1.
    a person who is averse to change and holds to traditional values and attitudes, typically in relation to politics.
  • jeepguySD

    Posts: 651

    Jun 21, 2015 4:09 PM GMT
    TroyAthlete saidBecause rational, intelligent, moral people change their minds and open their hearts when confronted with evidence that makes them question their worldview.

    The worldview of conservatives is hostile to change and hostile to facts, so Rethuglicans cling to bigotry even as the rest of the world grows and evolves.

    Young people, gays, blacks, Latinos, women, Asians and decent whites of good conscience reject conservatism for a good reason. Voting Republican is a mental disorder.


    I completely agree that conservatives are hostile to change and hostile to facts that do not fit into their world views, and that intelligence people are always open to changing their minds when confronted with compelling evidence.

    But I think your last statement about minorities rejecting conservatism paints with too broad a brush. The one group who voted mostly against same-sex marriage in California's Prop 8 in 2008 were African Americans: 75% of black women, and 63% of black men, voted against gay marriage. The next largest group were Latinos: 54% of Latino men, and 52% of Latino women voted against gay marriage. Only Asians and white women voted *in favor of* gay marriage, 51% and 53% respectively.

    http://www.madpickles.org/California_Proposition_8.html

    I do believe that the people you list do tend to vote more liberally on *most* issues, and I'm sure that attitudes about LBGT rights have changed somewhat since 2008, but it does seem that the African American community -- at least in California -- is not exactly pro-LGBT.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 21, 2015 4:44 PM GMT
    jeepguySD said
    mar0302 saidSad thing is.. generally speaking, smaller government means letting people do what they want.. not making differentiations between people and building in exclusive laws.. In theory, it should be Republican policy..

    But the Republicans like small government only when it suits them.. When it comes to whether or not gays can marry, or women get abortions, or teens getting birth control, then they want more government - not less.


    I think you are exactly right. Conservatives want government to leave them alone, but at the same time they want government to dictate to anyone not exactly like themselves, such as LGBT people, how to live their lives, who to love, etc. I see it as just another blatant hypocrisy in Conservative thought and action.


    Agree 100%
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 21, 2015 7:32 PM GMT
    In the old days, I could understand sticking to your guns (ha, pun), and keeping tradition. However, we live in changing times, and thus the conservative position is an anachronism.

    With science and technology advancing at such a fast rate, society has outgrown the traditions that may have once been considered wisdom. When things change, it is folly to resist it. In nature, elements which resist change are obliterated, or go extinct. Change conquers all.


    That's my profound philosophical/sociological/anthropological thought on the matter...as for the emotional angle, my dislike toward most conservatives comes from the sheer hypocrisy the party platform and most of its members seem to observe:

    "The Government should NOT dictate what we Can/Cannot do, so let's make a Law to be upheld by the Government to Enforce what we Can/Cannot do!"

    Anywho, here's a meme image directed towards conservatives to sum up all the typing I did:

    tumblr_lgdk6mM5Fd1qbaoqzo1_500.jpg


  • KissTheSky

    Posts: 1981

    Jun 21, 2015 7:42 PM GMT
    Statistically speaking, people in red states tend to be poorer, uneducated, have poor health, etc.
    They need a group of people to feel superior to. For years they oppressed black people in order to feel better about themselves.
    Now it's gay people. Red state conservatives have a worldview/identity that is built on this premise: "I may be a loser, but at least I'm better than the gays."
    That premise is now crumbling, as gay Americans are being treated by the law as equals, and depicted honestly in the media as normal, healthy people.
    Red state conservatives can't handle that, because it forces them to face their own place at the bottom of the ladder, being rapidly bypassed by history as society moves forward and leaves bigots behind.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 21, 2015 8:07 PM GMT
    I suppose its the same reason why Hillary supports gay extermination and conversion.

    Hillary supports the Sultan of Brunei who passed a law to execute gays by stoning. Hillary accepts money from Brunei and other Arab nations. Some of the countries sell young girls into slavery. Here's Hillary with the Satan who had a dinner in her honor:
    09-06-12-brunei-g-04.jpg

    Hillary also accepted $58,000 in Jewelry from the Satan.

    http://freebeacon.com/politics/the-clintons-and-the-sultan-of-brunei-have-a-history/

    http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/051414-700917-the-clintons-cozy-ties-to-shariah-loving-sultan-troubling.htm

    Here's Hillary with her former campaign manager and now NYC Mayor DeBlasio's wife. DeBlasio converted his wife from an out and proud Lesbian to a Heterosexual:

    clinton-de-blasio-families.jpg

    usa-politics.jpg

    Here's Hillary with Al Sharpton who likes to refer to us as "Faggots" and "Homos":
    Clinton-wth-Al-Shaprton1.png



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 21, 2015 8:07 PM GMT
    Kodiak saidIn the old days, I could understand sticking to your guns (ha, pun), and keeping tradition. However, we live in changing times, and thus the conservative position is an anachronism...


    +1


    Clearly since Obama (like him or not) the lines for gay acceptance is drawn. I will not vote for any thing that will not accept me and my husband.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14348

    Jun 21, 2015 8:34 PM GMT
    mx5guynj saidI suppose its the same reason why Hillary supports gay extermination and conversion.

    Hillary supports the Sultan of Brunei who passed a law to execute gays by stoning. Hillary accepts money from Brunei and other Arab nations. Some of the countries sell young girls into slavery. Here's Hillary with the Satan who had a dinner in her honor:
    09-06-12-brunei-g-04.jpg

    Hillary also accepted $58,000 in Jewelry from the Satan.

    http://freebeacon.com/politics/the-clintons-and-the-sultan-of-brunei-have-a-history/

    http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/051414-700917-the-clintons-cozy-ties-to-shariah-loving-sultan-troubling.htm

    Here's Hillary with her former campaign manager and now NYC Mayor DeBlasio's wife. DeBlasio converted his wife from an out and proud Lesbian to a Heterosexual:

    clinton-de-blasio-families.jpg

    usa-politics.jpg

    Here's Hillary with Al Sharpton who likes to refer to us as "Faggots" and "Homos":
    Clinton-wth-Al-Shaprton1.png



    The hapless Hillary ho doesn't give a shit where her financial contributions originate. All that bimbo cares about is attaining more money and feathering her own nest. She is just seeking the Presidency to make a name for herself and has zero interest in helping the American people. She has zero leadership ability and all her so called outstanding accomplishments were a result of her riding on the coat tails of other successful, effective politicians. Anyone who cannot see that cannot see clearly or must be living on another planet.
  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Jun 21, 2015 9:23 PM GMT
    People are in the Republican Party for various reasons. For some, it is just a matter of fear....fear of change...fear of the unknown....fear of people that are different than themselves. Fear is a very powerful emotion and politicians know how to use that to manipulate people into supporting them...look at George W. Bush's second term. I will say fear affects all of us to some degree.

    For example, I fear that the Supreme Court could become more conservative which could result in a lot more harm to people that can least afford to be harmed more.

    In regards to the poor supporting Republicans...it is the same thing...fear...people living on the edge facing a major change could be devastating to them. For some, they don't want change because there is a risk that it could get worse for them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 21, 2015 9:28 PM GMT
    mar0302 saidSad thing is.. generally speaking, smaller government means letting people do what they want.. not making differentiations between people and building in exclusive laws.. In theory, it should be Republican policy..

    But the Republicans like small government only when it suits them.. When it comes to whether or not gays can marry, or women get abortions, or teens getting birth control, then they want more government - not less.


    Spot on man, at least with regards to the base of the party. I have friends in both camps and am fully independent. I agree with a lot of the financial conservative ideas around taxes, fiscal responsibility and a smaller government. But once I dug a little deeper I realized that the general conservative notion of government and patriotism is focussed around a much narrower demographic and isn't very inclusive. And their religion seems to be a narrower, less inclusive God than the one I was raised to believe in as well.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 21, 2015 9:39 PM GMT
    metta8 said
    In regards to the poor supporting Republicans...it is the same thing...fear...people living on the edge facing a major change could be devastating to them. For some, they don't want change because there is a risk that it could get worse for them.

    No doubt about fear. But I would add ignorance and greed. Most 99-percenter Republicans are too stupid to realize they're digging their own holes with Right Wing policies. A few brighter ones recognize the hoax, but hope they'll be able to cash-in, too. Fewer will than won't.

    While the 1-percenter Republicans aren't stupid, but very aware, selfish & greedy. They understand exactly how this unfair system works, and don't want to surrender a penny of it to anyone. Rather, they want more, and more. And are willing to pay millions to buy politicians to make that happen, thanks to our Republican-dominated US Supreme Court.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 21, 2015 10:23 PM GMT
    mar0302 said...the Republicans like small government only when it suits them...

    Yes, suits their suit pocket.

    It isn't that they want pocketsize government, though that's what they say; rather, that they want government in their pocket. They'd hoped we'd not notice the difference.

    chtu.jpg

    They're not concerned with how much they dole out, their concern isn't about excessive volume at the expense of the public, rather it is about the number of outlets being fed from the stream.

    They don't want individuals to benefit from their own society; instead, they want corporations to funnel from individuals the benefits of society into the hands of the few.

    24hourguy saidAt the national level they know their platform is bullshit. So the only thing left to do is trot out the gays (and the Mexicans) to whip their base into a frenzy and set them loose like rabid dogs. -they make a lot of money off of us

    &
    Svnw688 said..the need to villanize "the gays,"...


    That's where they near the most disgusting aspect of themselves. They'd sell out their own lesbian grandmothers.

    TroyAthlete saidBecause rational, intelligent, moral people change their minds and open their hearts when confronted with evidence that makes them question their worldview.

    &
    metta8 saidcon·serv·a·tive
    kənˈsərvədiv/
    noun
    a person who is averse to change and holds to traditional values and attitudes, typically in relation to politics.


    That's hugely a big part of it. I view that aspect as part practical and part mind boggling stupid. If you've got new and irrefutable, solid evidence to the contrary, you alter your opinion accordingly. I don't know what stops them from self correction, some false sense of pride, some shame. To me, if a person puts more stock in belief than in knowledge, they shouldn't be allowed to drive. You can't see that the car won't fit but believe that maybe you can wedge it in. That just doesn't play well in the real world.

    The practical aspect to it, however, is applied like a brake of a car and to a degree, I'm okay with that. Being progressive is the accelerator. It gets us where we need to go. Being conservative is the brake, it holds us back from maybe going too fast around a sharp curve. So I can see some benefit to it. But also it can not just whiplash the passengers by applying itself too heavily and at the wrong time, but here's the real danger: it doesn't merely slow the system by creating friction which can be beneficial--to be reflective, to critique the left when not just being ridiculous; rather, it pulls back to whence we came, back to the worst parts of us all, into the darkness of inequality before our eyes were opened to this beautiful drive through the country before us.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 22, 2015 12:13 AM GMT
    Not sure if this has been thrown out there yet but I think it's a generational thing. Anyone under 40 no longer cares. It's the people over 40 who tend to control politics though. This isn't a permanent situation, I am confident.
  • Lincsbear

    Posts: 2605

    Jun 22, 2015 12:19 AM GMT
    The problem for the Republican party is that they have made a deal with all these Protestant evangelical fundamentalist Christians, and in return they have brought it money, organization, and sheer energy; and the party has gained from that. This is sometimes missed in these discussions. The Republican party has done very well on it so far. All internal critics have been silenced or marginalized.
    But there is a price with these people of conservative faith who operate on it and theology/ideology; they are not particularly concerned with the world, or reviewing their views in the light of new evidence. They know the truth, and it`s simple and for all time.
    I`m sure there are some in the Republican party who are very well aware of what is happening because of this deal, but can they extract the party from these colonizers before it is pulled down to a point where it is out of power?
    For now, though, the fundamentalists are dominant. What happens in the future will be morbidly and grotesquely entertaining.
    But it is bad news for American democracy to have one major party so dysfunctional.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 22, 2015 1:53 AM GMT
    The Republican Party has a lot of good ideas but it is being ruined by religion. The anti LGBT bias in the party is really terrible. I stopped calling myself a republican a few years ago when I fully accepted the fact that I am bisexual.

    Now I call myself an independent. I guess I just always have to have a foot in each camp. ;-) That just seems to be the way it always is with me. Ah, that double-edged sword of psychological complexity. It makes things interesting, but it also means there just aren't any easy answers in life.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 22, 2015 1:54 AM GMT
    theantijock saidhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/06/18/why-does-the-republican-party-still-oppose-lgbt-rights/
    ...Republicans still have no openly LGBT office holder, either nationally or even statewide. And the party’s leading presidential candidates rail against gay rights. Scott Walker says he wants a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Ted Cruz says that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality would be “fundamentally illegitimate.” Mike Huckabee, Marco Rubio, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, and Ben Carson have all made opposition to gay rights features of their campaigns...

    ...Why is the Republican Party so out of step with voters? Indeed, why is the American right so far behind similar parties in other democracies? The answer may rest on a distinctive idiosyncrasy: the GOP is often beholden to evangelical Christians...


    That's sort of like asking why does the DNC believe in income redistribution. The answer may rest on a distinctive idiosyncrasy: Democrats promise free stuff...


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 22, 2015 2:12 AM GMT
    desertmuscl said
    theantijock saidhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/06/18/why-does-the-republican-party-still-oppose-lgbt-rights/
    ...Republicans still have no openly LGBT office holder, either nationally or even statewide. And the party’s leading presidential candidates rail against gay rights. Scott Walker says he wants a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Ted Cruz says that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality would be “fundamentally illegitimate.” Mike Huckabee, Marco Rubio, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, and Ben Carson have all made opposition to gay rights features of their campaigns...

    ...Why is the Republican Party so out of step with voters? Indeed, why is the American right so far behind similar parties in other democracies? The answer may rest on a distinctive idiosyncrasy: the GOP is often beholden to evangelical Christians...


    That's sort of like asking why does the DNC believe in income redistribution. The answer may rest on a distinctive idiosyncrasy: Democrats promise free stuff...


    Thank you for your undigested contribution of horseshit but the only redistribution of the wealth in this country since the last time the wealthy crashed the economy has been all the wealth stolen from the middle classes and redistributed to the 1%, not the other way around. You've been duped. Wake the fuck up or remain an idiot. That decision is yours.

    Here's the middle class rebuilding this country from the last time the wealthy wrecked it.
    1929-1969.jpg

    And here is the redistribution of the wealth from the middle class to the wealthy just as they stole it the last time they wrecked the economy.
    1969-2008.jpg

    Look familiar?
    1917-1929.jpg

  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14348

    Jun 22, 2015 3:06 AM GMT
    donj499 saidThe Republican Party has a lot of good ideas but it is being ruined by religion. The anti LGBT bias in the party is really terrible. I stopped calling myself a republican a few years ago when I fully accepted the fact that I am bisexual.

    Now I call myself an independent. I guess I just always have to have a foot in each camp. ;-) That just seems to be the way it always is with me. Ah, that double-edged sword of psychological complexity. It makes things interesting, but it also means there just aren't any easy answers in life.

    Thank you, +200,000