4 ms·

My heart goes out to those lonely people. I think, though, the reality is that politics (and concomitant voting choices) has consequences on the lives of other

by Frondo 9y ago

My heart goes out to those lonely people. I think, though, the reality is that politics (and concomitant voting choices) has consequences on the lives of others, and this pattern of some social isolation is in turn a consequence of that. It isn't Star Wars vs Star Trek, it's whether Jim the SRE can marry his long-term boyfriend Mike, or whatever. It's not just politics. It never is. Votes make a difference in people's lives. What do conservatives expect, when society is moving away from the social views their party has aligned itself with? And, to remain solution-focused, how should the rest of us befriend them when the conservative party in this country has such views? What's the common ground we can look for? To go with gay issues (I have a lot more gay friends than people of color friends, so I'm more sympathetic to their issues day-to-day), to you folks out there who oppose gay marriage now, or supported Reagan when AIDS was decimating the gay community in the 80s, or any number of examples... How may I find common ground with you when your politics and votes have hurt so badly the community so many of my friends are a part of?

vgh 9y ago
I think this is still a false dichotomy. Some of us just don't want the government subsidizing marriage at all. Why should any dual-income pair get tax benefits? I say this as a married person. The thought I'm guessing at the time was to encourage new families to build up society, but not even all straight, married couples are doing that. Why not just take the government out of the equation and let anyone declare any kind of relationship status they want. It's not like I have to take part in it.
- Frondo 9y ago
  Personally, I agree! I'd get the government out of marriage entirely, except to recognize whatever union you wanted. Because again there are real-world consequences, like being considered a family member if your loved one's in a hospital, or getting access to death benefits if your loved one dies in the line of duty, or whatever. But that's not what one of the two mainstream parties is saying: they're saying, "traditional marriage, and the rest of you can go sit on a fence." This stuff gets personal for so many people so quickly because, in effect, one political party is telling a lot of folks that their humanity is lesser or less deserving of access to government than the rest of us. How do you not take that personally (and make social choices based on), if you're in that group that's being told they should have less access to government?
  - vgh 9y ago
    Yeah, the hospital visitation rights and death benefits are good points. I'm not sure why those are so restrictive at all? Why even require a documented relationship? Just let people choose who can visit them, or get their death benefits. Is that a crazy stance?
- plandis 9y ago
  Pragmatically speaking, supporting Republicans who hate gay people because you don't think the government should be in the marriage business has the exact same effect as actually trying to block gay marriage: straight marriage is allowed; gay marriage isn't.
  - vgh 9y ago
    This is the exact us-vs-them mentality that we should avoid. "Republicans [...] hate gay people" "[If you're not on my side you're on theirs]"
    - Jtsummers 9y ago
      The "who" you elided is rather critical in that sentence. The GP is referring to specific "Republicans who hate gay people". They are not saying that all Republicans hate gay people. Take care in how you edit people's posts in a quote so that yours can remain honest. Otherwise, everything you've posted becomes suspect and will be dismissed easily.
    - plandis 9y ago
      It's not an us vs them mentality. Traditional marriage is a core Republican Party platform. > Foremost among those institutions is the American family. It is the foundation of civil society, and the cornerstone of the family is natural marriage, the union of one man and one woman. Its daily lessons — cooperation, patience, mutual respect, responsibility, self-reliance — are fundamental to the order and progress of our Republic. Strong families, depending upon God and one another, advance the cause of liberty by lessening the need for government in their daily lives. Conversely, as we have learned over the last five decades, the loss of faith and family life leads to greater dependence upon government. That is why Republicans formulate public policy, from taxation to education, from healthcare to welfare, with attention to the needs and strengths of the family. [1] Hate, dislike, enmity, love. Call it what you want but the end result is that the Republican platform explicitly calls out marriage between a man and a women good, between two people of the same sex bad and pragmatically they support taking away the rights of gay people. Also, just so we are clear. Im not saying all Republicans hate gay people. There are definitely some who do and those are the individuals that seem to drive the platform policy. [1] https://gop.com/platform/renewing-american-values https://gop.com/platform/renewing-american-values
corpMaverick 9y ago
But we should probably leave some of the wedge social issues to Hollywood. They are masters at it. (e.g. Will and Grace) I would like to see the Democratic party focus on issues like workers rights, fighting white and black poverty, healthcare, etc.

by Frondo 9y ago

vgh 9y ago

I think this is still a false dichotomy. Some of us just don't want the government subsidizing marriage at all. Why should any dual-income pair get tax benefits? I say this as a married person. The thought I'm guessing at the time was to encourage new families to build up society, but not even all straight, married couples are doing that. Why not just take the government out of the equation and let anyone declare any kind of relationship status they want. It's not like I have to take part in it.

Frondo 9y ago
Personally, I agree! I'd get the government out of marriage entirely, except to recognize whatever union you wanted. Because again there are real-world consequences, like being considered a family member if your loved one's in a hospital, or getting access to death benefits if your loved one dies in the line of duty, or whatever. But that's not what one of the two mainstream parties is saying: they're saying, "traditional marriage, and the rest of you can go sit on a fence." This stuff gets personal for so many people so quickly because, in effect, one political party is telling a lot of folks that their humanity is lesser or less deserving of access to government than the rest of us. How do you not take that personally (and make social choices based on), if you're in that group that's being told they should have less access to government?
- vgh 9y ago
  Yeah, the hospital visitation rights and death benefits are good points. I'm not sure why those are so restrictive at all? Why even require a documented relationship? Just let people choose who can visit them, or get their death benefits. Is that a crazy stance?
plandis 9y ago
Pragmatically speaking, supporting Republicans who hate gay people because you don't think the government should be in the marriage business has the exact same effect as actually trying to block gay marriage: straight marriage is allowed; gay marriage isn't.
- vgh 9y ago
  This is the exact us-vs-them mentality that we should avoid. "Republicans [...] hate gay people" "[If you're not on my side you're on theirs]"
  - Jtsummers 9y ago
    The "who" you elided is rather critical in that sentence. The GP is referring to specific "Republicans who hate gay people". They are not saying that all Republicans hate gay people. Take care in how you edit people's posts in a quote so that yours can remain honest. Otherwise, everything you've posted becomes suspect and will be dismissed easily.
  - plandis 9y ago
    It's not an us vs them mentality. Traditional marriage is a core Republican Party platform. > Foremost among those institutions is the American family. It is the foundation of civil society, and the cornerstone of the family is natural marriage, the union of one man and one woman. Its daily lessons — cooperation, patience, mutual respect, responsibility, self-reliance — are fundamental to the order and progress of our Republic. Strong families, depending upon God and one another, advance the cause of liberty by lessening the need for government in their daily lives. Conversely, as we have learned over the last five decades, the loss of faith and family life leads to greater dependence upon government. That is why Republicans formulate public policy, from taxation to education, from healthcare to welfare, with attention to the needs and strengths of the family. [1] Hate, dislike, enmity, love. Call it what you want but the end result is that the Republican platform explicitly calls out marriage between a man and a women good, between two people of the same sex bad and pragmatically they support taking away the rights of gay people. Also, just so we are clear. Im not saying all Republicans hate gay people. There are definitely some who do and those are the individuals that seem to drive the platform policy. [1] https://gop.com/platform/renewing-american-values https://gop.com/platform/renewing-american-values

corpMaverick 9y ago

But we should probably leave some of the wedge social issues to Hollywood. They are masters at it. (e.g. Will and Grace) I would like to see the Democratic party focus on issues like workers rights, fighting white and black poverty, healthcare, etc.