3 ms·
>His personal choices to support legislation that will deny basic human rights from the LGBTQ community is a BIG clue. Personal views legitimately expressed in
by noisem4ker 6y ago
>His personal choices to support legislation that will deny basic human rights from the LGBTQ community is a BIG clue.
Personal views legitimately expressed in totally distinct political matters should absolutely not be factored in.
- nnf 6y agoAttempting to deny rights to an entire class of human beings should not be classified as simply “personal views legitimately expressed.”
- gruez 6y agoI still fail to see how it's any different than any other moral disagreement. eg. If I were a evangelical christian, and he supported abortion rights for women, I can claim that he's literally trying to kill babies.
- onyva 6y agoRight to happiness is not a moral question that needs to be debated every time someone on Fox News needs to generate mass hysteria for profit. I think the average person can differentiate between what’s moral and what’s immoral and where are the boundaries between the two. The USA is in a complete meltdown because some still insist on staying blind.
- LordDragonfang 6y agoBut you're describing what a large subset of evangelicals actually do, so that doesn't really help your point.
- gilrain 6y agoIs it fair to call an action which materially supported oppression of people "personal"? The goal of that action was to deny people the right to marry.