Good Times Good Times
Active Member
One thing that confuses me is why the Republican party does what it does on social issues. A lot of it is to the right of Trump.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/13/us/politics/republican-convention-issues.html
"Republicans moved on Tuesday toward adopting a staunchly conservative platform that takes a strict, traditionalist view of the family and child rearing, bars military women from combat, describes coal as a “clean” energy source and declares pornography a “public health crisis.”
"And what Republicans will probably end up with when they formally vote next week to ratify the platform approved in committee on Tuesday is a text that can seem almost Victorian in its moralizing and deeply critical of how the modern American family has evolved.
The platform demands that lawmakers use religion as a guide when legislating, stipulating “that man-made law must be consistent with God-given, natural rights.”
I mean...............REALLY? Are muslim legislators supposed to do this or only Christian? As someone who has Christian beliefs.......I don't think I should impose my faith on those of you who do not believe. I need to be a legislator of all the people, NOT just those who've voted for me. I can still practice my faith but why do I inject it into public policy of the people? My understanding is that Greg isn't into "formal religion" so wouldn't that be unfair of me to do TO him (this is just an example, and if I'm wrong Greg I'll certainly remove this example).
It also encourages the teaching of the Bible in public schools because, the amendment said, a good understanding of its contents is “indispensable for the development of an educated citizenry.”
Not just the teaching of it..........but IN the PUBLIC schools. Basically, I'm literally supposed to believe, that an educated citizenry is IMPOSSIBLE apart from Bibles in the public schools.
"The pornography provision was not in an initial draft that the Republican National Committee drew up and released on Sunday. But delegates added it on Monday at the same time they were inserting many of the amendments opposing gay and transgender rights. It calls pornography “a public menace” that is especially harmful to children."
I know every last one of you are ALL victim to this public menace!
"Much of the most combative debate centered on language in the platform that describes gay and transgender people, and efforts to strip those words out and replace them with language proposed by a minority contingent of socially moderate delegates."
The platform calls for overturning the Supreme Court marriage decision with a constitutional amendment and makes references to appointing judges “who respect traditional family values.”
“Has a dead horse been beaten enough yet?” asked Annie Dickerson, a committee member from New York, who chastised her colleagues for writing language offensive to gays into the platform “again and again and again.”
We can't listen to the moderate wing........and their "use respectable language" stuff. Believe it or not there are people that live "non-traditional" lifestyles that are fiscally conservative. The Donald is probably quite liberal on LGBT issues. I doubt he cares if same-sex couples marry & raise a family. After all, they could be his clients when he goes back to his business holdings.
My question is.........how do they not know this is the stuff that loses elections? I mean........do they honestly believe their platform has appeal to VERY large voting bases (latinos, LGBT community, blacks)? Do you all truly believe this doesn't alienate ( ) large voting blocks?
Is there something I'm missing? Is this just that the Koch brothers paid good money for a double down, so.....this is it?
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/13/us/politics/republican-convention-issues.html
"Republicans moved on Tuesday toward adopting a staunchly conservative platform that takes a strict, traditionalist view of the family and child rearing, bars military women from combat, describes coal as a “clean” energy source and declares pornography a “public health crisis.”
"And what Republicans will probably end up with when they formally vote next week to ratify the platform approved in committee on Tuesday is a text that can seem almost Victorian in its moralizing and deeply critical of how the modern American family has evolved.
The platform demands that lawmakers use religion as a guide when legislating, stipulating “that man-made law must be consistent with God-given, natural rights.”
I mean...............REALLY? Are muslim legislators supposed to do this or only Christian? As someone who has Christian beliefs.......I don't think I should impose my faith on those of you who do not believe. I need to be a legislator of all the people, NOT just those who've voted for me. I can still practice my faith but why do I inject it into public policy of the people? My understanding is that Greg isn't into "formal religion" so wouldn't that be unfair of me to do TO him (this is just an example, and if I'm wrong Greg I'll certainly remove this example).
It also encourages the teaching of the Bible in public schools because, the amendment said, a good understanding of its contents is “indispensable for the development of an educated citizenry.”
Not just the teaching of it..........but IN the PUBLIC schools. Basically, I'm literally supposed to believe, that an educated citizenry is IMPOSSIBLE apart from Bibles in the public schools.
"The pornography provision was not in an initial draft that the Republican National Committee drew up and released on Sunday. But delegates added it on Monday at the same time they were inserting many of the amendments opposing gay and transgender rights. It calls pornography “a public menace” that is especially harmful to children."
I know every last one of you are ALL victim to this public menace!
"Much of the most combative debate centered on language in the platform that describes gay and transgender people, and efforts to strip those words out and replace them with language proposed by a minority contingent of socially moderate delegates."
The platform calls for overturning the Supreme Court marriage decision with a constitutional amendment and makes references to appointing judges “who respect traditional family values.”
“Has a dead horse been beaten enough yet?” asked Annie Dickerson, a committee member from New York, who chastised her colleagues for writing language offensive to gays into the platform “again and again and again.”
We can't listen to the moderate wing........and their "use respectable language" stuff. Believe it or not there are people that live "non-traditional" lifestyles that are fiscally conservative. The Donald is probably quite liberal on LGBT issues. I doubt he cares if same-sex couples marry & raise a family. After all, they could be his clients when he goes back to his business holdings.
My question is.........how do they not know this is the stuff that loses elections? I mean........do they honestly believe their platform has appeal to VERY large voting bases (latinos, LGBT community, blacks)? Do you all truly believe this doesn't alienate ( ) large voting blocks?
Is there something I'm missing? Is this just that the Koch brothers paid good money for a double down, so.....this is it?
Last edited: