208
Gay Republicans swoon over Donald Trump for hosting a gay wedding at Mar-a-Lago
(www.lgbtqnation.com)
this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2024
208 points (94.1% liked)
politics
19080 readers
3366 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If you don’t care for my personal anecdote, why did you ask again as if I could answer differently? Go ask them yourself.
Your anecdote isn't very relevant here since you aren't gay. All you're saying is that you can be liberal without being gay or having other issues directly affect you.
What they are asking is, if those issues do affect them, is that the reason they are liberal? An obvious answer is, if it matters to them more than other things then yes. I imagine personal identity and personal freedom matter very much for most people, but it may not be the highest on the list.
Unsurprisingly, things aren't black and white.
It's certainly weird to see people championing for things that will actively hurt them though. Like black people trying to join the KKK.
I'm trying to get you to see that the nature of the reasons are not what the selfishness was in reference to but rather their scope of caring. A hard right republican woman can think that she deserves to have an abortion herself but if she doesn't care if that extends to others then she is selfish. If the percentage that mellow was talking about are only liberal because the issues listed impact them then that does kinda seem selfish. It is not a commentary at all about the rightness or wrongness of those issues.
Trying to get me to see…?
Then you should she stated your case and avoided trying to be clever by asking the same question twice in some bizarre effort at a philosophical take, to what…make yourself appear smarter? To a question you’ve already answered for yourself? Ridiculous.
Or you could have answered the question I asked instead of offering an irrelevant personal anecdote.
Well, keep talking to yourself, bro. Your answers are the only ones you want to hear.
Keep dodging the point you know I've made. I'll want to hear your answer if you ever give an on topic honest one.
Ah yes, insulting me as if my answer were dishonest otherwise? Listen to yourself trying to manipulate this situation as if you were somehow in the right. I would have had a conversation with you and you bothered to reiterate your point in good faith, but here we are wasting bandwidth with you somehow having to insist on “winning”…whatever that is here. Have fun man. I’ve run out of bytes to give.
No, you wanted to be hostile from the start. And you still never actually answered the question. Dodging the point and the question is manipulation. Doing so repeatedly does seem dishonest.
No.
You didn’t like my answer and furthermore refused to engage in a discussion. That’s all there is to it. I stopped giving a flying f about what you wanted to know as soon as it was apparent you were in this discussion for yourself. You want to be right, not engage in a discussion about what is right. Fuck off at this point.
I have not refused to engage in discussion. You gave an anecdote about yourself instead of answering my question about the percentage that mellow was talking about. I acknowledged your anecdote and asked my unanswered question again. You are avoiding the question because you know answering it will show that your initial quip was off. Mellow wasn't saying that wanting those things was selfish. Don't cry about insults. Every negative turn in this conversation has been initiated by you.
You're a special kind of person, aren't you?
This far down, and you keep demanding that someone answers you about why "they" are liberals, behaving as if the universe owes you answers.
Sympathetic with your deluded but apparently honest ignorance, @RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world did their best by sharing an anecdote that demonstrates that, while possible that "they" are liberals because the issues directly impacting "them", that may not necessarily be the case.
Alas, it was then that we came to find that you just wanted to hear yourself talk while petulantly dismissing others' thoughts.
The story developed unexpectedly however, as this behaviour was accurately and immediately pointed out, and this led to a series of increasingly irate comments, likely caused by a mounting sense of frustration stemming from the inability to rebuff such accurate criticism. We're sure to see an escalation from the passive aggression initially being employed into more open and direct insults, as a welling sense of dread about being outwitted threatens to set in.
Stay tuned!
Are you special? Because you seem to have missed that the original "they" and the "they" offered in Apollo's anecdote were not the same or comparable. Apollo never engaged with sympathy. I asked a question that they didn't answer. I asked it again politely and they started getting rude. I am not demanding an answer I'm pointing out that they just never actually answered.
Ehehehehhehehhe!!! Thanks for the entertainment!
By now it's clear that it's your reading comprehension that is lacking, you aren't fully understanding the responses you're getting. Perhaps you're not a native speaker...
More of the childish insults that you were acting above and accusing me of poor reading comprehension after I pointed out your own issue with it.