Presidential hopeful Marco Rubio pledges to reverse Obama's LGBT rights order

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/12/07/presidential-hopeful-marco-rubio-pledges-to-reverse-obamas-lgbt-rights-order/

Pink News/By Nick Duffy   12/07/2015

"Republican Presidential hopeful Marco Rubio has pledged to reverse President Obama's executive order outlawing anti-LGBT discrimination.

After a federal law outlawing anti-LGBT discrimination was blocked by Republicans in Congress, last year Obama signed an Executive Order on the issue.]

The order outlawed homophobic discrimination among federal contractors, protecting LGBT workers for the first time – though it is still legal to fire someone for being gay in many states."

Oh what a load of nonsense.  A puzzling rambling dialogue about sin and bathrooms that once again paints the dominant christian ideology as threatened and victimized by people having protected civil rights.

First they say we are too pansified to serve in the military and then they say we are a menacing threat.

They are the ones that are confused.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rubio is picked by a lot of political pundits as the likely nominee for the Republican nomination next year. And given the popularity of their stand on taking in Middle East refugees and the unpopularity of the Democrat's stand, he has a good chance of winning.

That would be bad.

As someone who usually supports Republicans based on economic issues, if it was between Bernie and Rubio, Bernie gets my vote and me working for him. Hillary vs. Rubio, I drop out and start drinking heavily.

What the heck is wrong with these Republicans?  Didn't they see how incredibly popular the gay marriage ruling was?  They're cutting their noses to spite their faces, just so they can use their platform to whip homophobes into a frenzy of hatred and intolerance.  This is just disgusting.  And every single one of them claims to be christian.  Disgusting.

As somebody who usually supports Democrats based on... hmmm... let's say... everything that Hillary fails at except abortion, I'm planning to start drinking too.  Heavily?  No doubt.

Quote from: sparrow on December 07, 2015, 03:53:00 PM
What the heck is wrong with these Republicans?  Didn't they see how incredibly popular the gay marriage ruling was?  They're cutting their noses to spite their faces, just so they can use their platform to whip homophobes into a frenzy of hatred and intolerance.

Problem is that in order to get close to the White House, Rubio has to win the Republican nomination. These days you can only do that by pandering to the religious right.

Quote from: sparrow on December 07, 2015, 03:53:00 PM
What the heck is wrong with these Republicans?  Didn't they see how incredibly popular the gay marriage ruling was?  They're cutting their noses to spite their faces, just so they can use their platform to whip homophobes into a frenzy of hatred and intolerance.  This is just disgusting.  And every single one of them claims to be christian.  Disgusting.

As somebody who usually supports Democrats based on... hmmm... let's say... everything that Hillary fails at except abortion, I'm planning to start drinking too.  Heavily?  No doubt.

Trump and Bush have both stated the ruling is the law of the land and they will not attempt to overturn it (by constitutional amendment). Trump also stated that he supports banning employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. No mention of gender identity, but that statement was made before anyone even gave us a second thought (in re: anti-discrimination laws). I interpret that to mean he would sign ENDA. As dislikable as he may be, the thought of a Cruz, Huckabee, Christie, or (thanks to these comments) Rubio is downright scary.

Quote from: suzifrommd on December 07, 2015, 04:58:48 PM
Problem is that in order to get close to the White House, Rubio has to win the Republican nomination. These days you can only do that by pandering to the religious right.

You can win the nomination without due to the way the primaries are setup. The most liberal states are almost all winner takes all [delegates], while the most conservative states tend to use a proportional system. That is why in 2012, Santorum (?) won most of the mid-west, but netted less delegates than Romney got by winning Guam, where there were so few voters the election was held by gathering all the voters together in a room.

The problem is believe it or not winning the general election. Voter turnout NOT "swing voters" is what truly drives the general elections. In 2012, faced with voting for a Mormon or Obama, millions of Evangelicals sat out the election, while the Democrats upped their turnout. By comparison in 2004, Bush got 3.5 Million Evangelicals to vote who hadn't voted in 2000, securing his reelection. If the Evangelicals sit it out, the Republican will lose. If they show up in force, the Republican will win. That is why a Republican candidate has to at least pretend to be a "Good Christian".

Quote from: lisarenee on December 11, 2015, 06:48:17 PM
You can win the nomination without due to the way the primaries are setup. The most liberal states are almost all winner takes all [delegates], while the most conservative states tend to use a proportional system. That is why in 2012, Santorum (?) won most of the mid-west, but netted less delegates than Romney got by winning Guam, where there were so few voters the election was held by gathering all the voters together in a room.

The problem is believe it or not winning the general election. Voter turnout NOT "swing voters" is what truly drives the general elections. In 2012, faced with voting for a Mormon or Obama, millions of Evangelicals sat out the election, while the Democrats upped their turnout. By comparison in 2004, Bush got 3.5 Million Evangelicals to vote who hadn't voted in 2000, securing his reelection. If the Evangelicals sit it out, the Republican will lose. If they show up in force, the Republican will win. That is why a Republican candidate has to at least pretend to be a "Good Christian".

Really great analysis.

Have you considered writing for the news staff?

Alright this is really bothering me. Why is it alright to suddenly start treating groups of Americans as second class citizens all the sudden? If you don't agree with it due to religious reasons well to bad as its called separation of church and state for a reason. I mean we as a society seem to be going backwards in terms of acceptance now. It's making me really afraid of the future. I mean it's extreme to say this but reading what's going on with the rampant phobia against Transgender, gay and xenophobic speech by these people it's like watching the beginning of the Fourth Reich.

I'm sorry if I've upset anyone but I'm so upset at the way the US is going. I thought we were the land of the free. Not the land of you are alright if you fit my standards.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

sad , but true

You just need to understand what the majority understand "freedom of religion" to mean in America. 

It DOES NOT mean that all religions should be allowed equal expression.

It DOES NOT mean that religion should be separate from politics.

It DOES mean that evangelical Christianity, being the only religion that truly knows and worships God, should be able to impose its views and laws on everyone else so that God doesn't get angry and punish the USA with things such as economic problems, lost wars, and natural disasters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote from: RavenL on December 12, 2015, 11:33:07 PM
Alright this is really bothering me. Why is it alright to suddenly start treating groups of Americans as second class citizens all the sudden?
[...]
I'm sorry if I've upset anyone but I'm so upset at the way the US is going. I thought we were the land of the free. Not the land of you are alright if you fit my standards.

Hi Raven. Every identifiable group in America has been relegated to second-class status at one point or another since the founding of our republic, except the group comprised of straight, white, protestant males with Anglo-Saxon family names. If until the day you came out to yourself, you were a part of this group, you would not have noticed because you were one of them (as was I). They are the dominant culture. They are also a minority. If they voted as a block against the rest of us, they'd lose in a landslide.

So now we, society's "queers," have gotten a little uppity, claiming our birthright regardless how we package ourselves. This act of defiance against the dominant culture has gotten us attention, and not in a good way.

But history has shown that marginalized groups have made progress.* Irish, Italians, and Greeks are conditional members of the dominant culture. Lesbians and gays are generally accepted in much of polite society as long as they don't make anyone uncomfortable. Now transpeople are getting our day in the sun. I can't predict how this will turn out; I'm hoping better than what I expect.






*Apologies to the unmentioned, and still marginalized, African-Americans and Hispanics (who aren't Rubio or Cruz), topics for another day.

Quote from: stephaniec on December 07, 2015, 10:57:04 AM
Presidential hopeful Marco Rubio pledges to reverse Obama's LGBT rights order

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/12/07/presidential-hopeful-marco-rubio-pledges-to-reverse-obamas-lgbt-rights-order/

Pink News/By Nick Duffy   12/07/2015

"Republican Presidential hopeful Marco Rubio has pledged to reverse President Obama's executive order outlawing anti-LGBT discrimination.

After a federal law outlawing anti-LGBT discrimination was blocked by Republicans in Congress, last year Obama signed an Executive Order on the issue.]

The order outlawed homophobic discrimination among federal contractors, protecting LGBT workers for the first time – though it is still legal to fire someone for being gay in many states."

God I pray that person doesn't become president.

Rubio isn't as moderate as he seems.

Out of all the Republicans who have a serious chance, Trump is the most moderate on LGBT rights. I'm dead serious.

Chris Christie maybe but I think he will drop out soon and he is pretty much DOA due to his support for and lying about his support for gun control.

Good luck with turning the clock back. For marriage equality it would require a constitutional amendment. Meanwhile the people get more and more friendly to our causes. Their best hope of legalizing discrimination is with local laws and not federal ones under the guise of " religious freedom" but those efforts will meet with business objection and other obstacles, including court challenges.

He is pandering but he and his ilk will ultimately fail. As many conservative pundits have admitted the so called "culture war " is lost. This is no reason to not keep up the fight though, because our righteous efforts protect real people every day.

Sorry if this offends anyone, but have you looked at Rubio's religious background?  He converted and was baptized as a MORMON!  Only fairly recently has he converted back to being a Catholic.  I'm sorry, but I could never vote for a Mormon and will actively work against any of their candidates.  Rubio still attends Mormon services sometimes and credits them for giving him a "moral compass."  The Mormon (corporate) church hates gays and spent a huge amount defeating gay marriage in California before the Supreme court ruling.

I feel like we are watching history, watching the death throes of a political party that still lives as if it's 1950. None of the GOP candidates are acceptable to me because they each support discrimination and bigotry against us or against other minorities.

I believe that after the GOP loses this election that will be the end of bigotry as a viable party platform. The times have changed and I think that the majority supports us having rights and they won't abide bigotry anymore.

Long time, well established GOP supporters are distancing themselves from the GOP which I find telling.

Quote from: Eva Marie on December 21, 2015, 04:40:16 PM
I feel like we are watching history, watching the death throes of a political party that still lives as if it's 1950.

Oh, Eva, I hope you're right.

I keep flashing back to 1980, how everyone said here was no way that someone as crazy as Reagan would be elected, not to worry.

Reagan was a moderate compared to some of the folks who have a good chance of winning the GOP nod. Whoever they nominate has a good chance of winning. There's more than enough time for the voters to forget the primary excesses and the democratic candidates have enough flaws of their own.

This election has a chance of going horribly Bad.