Health Care to fail

[jdoe4822]

Gay marriage is one of the multitude of gay rights that we are working to fight for.

Like ENDA.

Or the DADT.

Allow me to restate. Gay rights are not the only issues out there that matter and to me, things like abortion, the myth of man made climate change, the 2nd amend, respect for individual rights and entrepeneurship, free markets, and national defense are far more important and my views are far more consistent with the Republican party on those

 

[DiamondSkin]

Allow me to restate. Gay rights are not the only issues out there that matter and to me, things like abortion, the myth of man made climate change, the 2nd amend, respect for individual rights and entrepeneurship, free markets, and national defense are far more important and my views are far more consistent with the Republican party on those

Again, nothing is more 'important' than gay rights to a gay person. One should not be compromised for another.

It's sad phenomenon that many gay Republicans seem to actively portray where it's okay to throw gay rights under the bus as long as you get that bigger tax refund.

You can have BOTH.....

The fact that you think that you think that the debate on climate change is more important than your lack of rights that make you and every gay person a second-class citizen is both sad and pathetic.

Gay rights, regardless of the political climate, is always important.

Did you think blacks said themselves, "Well, I think the abortion and national defense are MORE important than desegregation and our right to marry outside our race." ?

No, of course not.

 

[jdoe4822]

GOProud....?

Oh, please.

If you're going to use a gay Republican website at least cite the Log Cabin Republicans who actually fight for gay rights.

GOProud has actively supported candidates and organizations with GLARING anti-gay agendas.

They're puppets, nothing more.

I cite GOProud versus LCR for those very reasons, that LCR focuses too much on gay rights whereas GOProud focuses more on providing a place for gays who support a broader conservative/libertarian agenda. I ultimately don't care that much what a candidate personally believes as long as he supports the issues I believe in. I care about results/issues first and foremost.

 

[andysayshi]

And you think the legislation currently being finalized would fix ANY of that?

I actually commented that it wouldn't fix much at all. (The Bill does address at least one of my points - insurance for those with pre-exisiting conditions.)

My point is that, rather than offering solutions to the US health system debacle, conservatives seem to view no change as the preferred option. I was simply pointing out the results that no change provides.

 

[JB3]

Again, nothing is more 'important' than gay rights to a gay person. One should not be compromised for another.

It's sad phenomenon that many gay Republicans seem to actively portray where it's okay to throw gay rights under the bus as long as you get that bigger tax refund.

You can have BOTH.....

The fact that you think that you think that the debate on climate change is more important than your lack of rights that make you and every gay person a second-class citizen is both sad and pathetic.

Gay rights, regardless of the political climate, is always important.

Did you think blacks said themselves, "Well, I think the abortion and national defense are MORE important than desegregation and our right to marry outside our race." ?

No, of course not.

What a lot of liberals have trouble comprehending is that people that care about many things DO prioritize them, depending on the situation. If I have a candidate that supports 99% of what I want, but is on the fence about gay marriage (that is, NOT casting a vote for either side, and saying that they will not do so), I would vote for them over a tax-raiser that supports gay rights 100%. I would never vote for someone that is vocally against gay rights though.

 

[DiamondSkin]

Well said!!!!!!! I have to agree!!!

Ugh, this is why gay rights is so difficult to fight for.

Our own people aren't passionate about fighting for it and they think it's something that's not important to fight for.

As a gay person, NOTHING is more important than gay rights.

You can be anti-abortion, you can be pro-national defense, but when you say these issues are more 'important' you automatically say:

"I have no self-respect as a gay man. I think my rights aren't important and I'm okay with being a second-class citizen".

It's not Jingo. You don't have to stack gay rights under your other political values like it's a block or something....

 

[JB3]

I actually commented that it wouldn't fix much at all. (The Bill does address at least one of my points - insurance for those with pre-exisiting conditions.)

My point is that, rather than offering solutions to the US health system debacle, conservatives seem to view no change as the preferred option. I was simply pointing out the results that no change provides.

Compared to what is being offered, no change is preferable. Most conservatives actually want to fix the problems before adding anything else onto the system. A good starting point would have been addressing costs and the issues you mentioned above BEFORE attempting to fix the coverage issue.

 

[DiamondSkin]

What a lot of liberals have trouble comprehending is that people that care about many things DO prioritize them, depending on the situation. If I have a candidate that supports 99% of what I want, but is on the fence about gay marriage (that is, NOT casting a vote for either side, and saying that they will not do so), I would vote for them over a tax-raiser that supports gay rights 100%. I would never vote for someone that is vocally against gay rights though.

That's something I don't have a particular problem with.

It irritates me when a gay person says "there's more important things than gay rights".

That's not how we won gay rights in the past.

That's not how women won gender rights in the past.

That's not how African-Americans won race rights in the past.

They didn't 'prioritize' their rights as an equal citizen in lieu of another issue.

Unfortunately, many gay people on this forum don't have the same mentality you do.

They're more than willing to vote for anti-gay politician if they're on the money with their other 'more important issues".

If abortion and national defense is more important than gay rights to that poster, than surely he wouldn't have a problem with voting for an anti-gay politician who is against abortion and for national defense because the logic of prioritizing issues demands it....

 

[JB3]

You didn't "school" me on anything because I never said that

You are a master at attacking a straw man.

As a matter of fact, you have on several occasions claimed that all republicans hate gays. You did so in the trainwreck thread several times.

 

[DiamondSkin]

Compared to what is being offered, no change is preferable. Most conservatives actually want to fix the problems before adding anything else onto the system. A good starting point would have been addressing costs and the issues you mentioned above BEFORE attempting to fix the coverage issue.

What WOULD be nice if the conservatives would offer THEIR solution to the healthcare reform problem.

It always seems like they're the "Party of NO" and they've only been on the defensive to block any and all efforts by the Democrats to reform healthcare.

For the life of me, I STILL don't know what the Republicans' alternative is.

It would be FAR more constructive for Republicans to give alternatives and solutions to the healthcare reform problem than saying no all the time.

These petty battles between the Democrats and Republicans is just a gridlock with no solutions in sight...

 

[jdoe4822]

Again, nothing is more 'important' than gay rights to a gay person. One should not be compromised for another.

It's sad phenomenon that many gay Republicans seem to actively portray where it's okay to throw gay rights under the bus as long as you get that bigger tax refund.

You can have BOTH.....

The fact that you think that you think that the debate on climate change is more important than your lack of rights that make you and every gay person a second-class citizen is both sad and pathetic.

Gay rights, regardless of the political climate, is always important.

Did you think blacks said themselves, "Well, I think the abortion and national defense are MORE important than desegregation and our right to marry outside our race." ?

No, of course not.

and here we will have to agree to disagree. I have antidiscrimination protection already here in Orlando, as do most major municipalities and states. Florida has hate crime legislation on the books (which at any rate I oppose). And yeah when you view abortion as the annual slaughter of millions of innocent kids, when you see the futile attempts to stop nature from doing what is been doing since the dawn of the earth has the potential to wreck global productivity, when you view private gun ownership as fundamentally necessary to your own self protection and independence, and when you see the whack jobs in the Middle East who prefer to see you whipped beaten and strung up to die as being a bigger threat to your gay rights than a blowhard like James Dobson, then yeah I am comfortable saying that gay rights are of secondary concern to me.

 

[JB3]

What WOULD be nice if the conservatives would offer THEIR solution to the healthcare reform problem.

It always seems like they're the "Party of NO" and they've only been on the defensive to block any and all efforts by the Democrats to reform healthcare.

For the life of me, I STILL don't know what the Republicans' alternative is.

It would be FAR more constructive for Republicans to give alternatives and solutions to the healthcare reform problem than saying no all the time.

These petty battles between the Democrats and Republicans is just a gridlock with no solutions in sight...

They offered one (don't have the time to find it at the moment) which was analyzed by the CBO and determined to lower costs significantly.

 

[01solara]

What WOULD be nice if the conservatives would offer THEIR solution to the healthcare reform problem.

It always seems like they're the "Party of NO" and they've only been on the defensive to block any and all efforts by the Democrats to reform healthcare.

For the life of me, I STILL don't know what the Republicans' alternative is.

It would be FAR more constructive for Republicans to give alternatives and solutions to the healthcare reform problem than saying no all the time.

These petty battles between the Democrats and Republicans is just a gridlock with no solutions in sight...

They offered several ideas and amendments but were shut out of the process and the meetings. Sometimes the grown ups that know you can't get something for nothing and that someone has to pay the bill have to say no. Adding tens of thousands to the healthcare rolls that can't pay the bill requirres that someone pay for them. The someone the dems have in mind is the middle class taxpayers. The poor don't pay federal taxes so why should they not ask for more freebies.

 

[DiamondSkin]

I cite GOProud versus LCR for those very reasons, that LCR focuses too much on gay rights whereas GOProud focuses more on providing a place for gays who support a broader conservative/libertarian agenda. I ultimately don't care that much what a candidate personally believes as long as he supports the issues I believe in. I care about results/issues first and foremost.

GOProud has openly supported the following anti-gay organizations:

Focus on Family

National Organization of Marriage

Exodus

This is inexcusable. Gays pandering and supporting and FUNDING organizations that openly attack gay rights and gay citizens is MIND-BOGGLING.

Their only purpose is to fool people like you into thinking that Focus on Family and the NOM aren't really anti-gay at all.

Hell, at the CPAC, they sat stone SILENT while Maggie Gallagher went on a homophobic rant saying that gays "will ruin American families"

The Log Cabin Republicans admonished her.

The GOProud? They attacked the gays who admonished NOM!

Ugh!

 

[DiamondSkin]

They offered one (don't have the time to find it at the moment) which was analyzed by the CBO and determined to lower costs significantly.

Yes, and what is it exactly?

Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[jdoe4822]

GOProud has openly supported the following anti-gay organizations:

Focus on Family

National Organization of Marriage

Exodus

This is inexcusable. Gays pandering and supporting and FUNDING organizations that openly attack gay rights and gay citizens is MIND-BOGGLING.

Their only purpose is to fool people like you into thinking that Focus on Family and the NOM aren't really anti-gay at all.

Hell, at the CPAC, they sat stone SILENT while Maggie Gallagher went on a homophobic rant saying that gays "will ruin American families"

The Log Cabin Republicans admonished her.

The GOProud? They attacked the gays who admonished NOM!

Ugh!

citations/links please?

 

[DiamondSkin]

and here we will have to agree to disagree. I have antidiscrimination protection already here in Orlando, as do most major municipalities and states. Florida has hate crime legislation on the books (which at any rate I oppose). And yeah when you view abortion as the annual slaughter of millions of innocent kids, when you see the futile attempts to stop nature from doing what is been doing since the dawn of the earth has the potential to wreck global productivity, when you view private gun ownership as fundamentally necessary to your own self protection and independence, and when you see the whack jobs in the Middle East who prefer to see you whipped beaten and strung up to die as being a bigger threat to your gay rights than a blowhard like James Dobson, then yeah I am comfortable saying that gay rights are of secondary concern to me.

Here's a scenario for you:

There's a new Florida governor who is rabidly anti-gay...but he's against the 'myth of climate change' and he's pro-gun rights, and pro-national defense and for lower taxes.

If elected, he will institute an amendment that will ban gay marriage, gay adoption, hate crimes legislation and allow discrimination against gays in the workplace.

Since gay rights are "secondary" to you, surely you wouldn't have any problem voting for this candidate since many of his issues are more important to you, no?

 

[DiamondSkin]

citations/links please?

Google the GOProud and the CPAC 2010 caucus.

They co-sponsored the event.

Hell, the American Family Association told them to their damn faces that they didn't belong there.

And the GOProud didn't even bother to retort such bigotry.

All the funding that the GOProud organized went to numerous anti-gay organizations like Focus on Family.

Why did they do that?

Their inane logic was that if gays gave them money than the Focus on Family will start to like gays!

Idiots. Idiotic puppets....

 

[DiamondSkin]

DiamondSkin - please re-read what i said - so it's not taken out of context - IT STATES THAT GAY RIGHTS ARE NOT THE ONLY ISSUES THAT MATTER - OK MAYBE NOT FAR MORE IMPORTANT(overlooked that part) BUT THE REST ARE AS IMPORTANT!!! TO ME!!

It's okay to hold other issues dear to your heart....but don't say that there are other issues more important than gay rights.

That says to me, "I don't think my rights are important" or "I don't respect myself as a gay person to think my rights are always important."

 

[jdoe4822]

Here's a scenario for you:

There's a new Florida governor who is rabidly anti-gay...but he's against the 'myth of climate change' and he's pro-gun rights, and pro-national defense and for lower taxes.

If elected, he will institute an amendment that will ban gay marriage, gay adoption, hate crimes legislation and allow discrimination against gays in the workplace.

Since gay rights are "secondary" to you, surely you wouldn't have any problem voting for this candidate since many of his issues are more important to you, no?

The simple answer is yes I'd vote for him, but I'll clarify a couple issues you raised:

of those 4 "anti gay" initiatives you've listed, the first two are already on the books here in FL, I'd agree with the third, and anti-discrimination laws are generally on the books at the local level so on a practical level its irrelevant, and my answer is only applicable on a hypothetical generic state governor level

secondly, foreign policy views are not an issue when governor so my vote at the state level would not be decided on those issues.

As far as taxes go, while I am for lower taxes in general, I'm also a deficit hawk. To me George W Bush was a failure as a Republican president because if there should be any defining trademark of a Republican president, that is that the government and its spending must shrink, not grow. There are appropriate times to cut taxes but you can't constantly cut them till they're eliminated. If you do, you will eventually have to find alternative sources of revenue. Personally I am in favor of abolishing the income tax and replacing it with the Fair Tax.