JustUsBoys.com gay porn forum

logo

remove these banner ads by becoming a JUB Supporter.

Page 1 of 4 12 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 175

Thread: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

      
   
  1. #1
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,398

    Code of Conduct

    House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    As you know, House Republicans have been preventing renewal of the Violence Against Women Act, which the Senate approved last week.

    Now, the GOP leadership in the House has amended its version of VAWA to exclude protection for LGBT persons.

    In other words, it's okay to beat up on women if they're lesbians, transgendered, or bisexual. Obviously, if you fall into one of those categories, you're not really a human being.

    What is it with the GOP and its unrelenting hate? Normal people are not that vituperative. There is really something pathologically wrong with that party.



    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2742096.html

  2. #2
    On the Prowl Nemothepanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Spring Lake
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    91

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    I wonder how the token conservative-republicans here will defend this. The GOP and Republican party are not our friends, not by any measure. Although I heavily dislike bipartisanship, only the Democrats can and want to give us what we need as citizens.

  3. #3
    JockBoy87
    Guest

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Because most districts today are heavily gerrymandered, Republicans have to worry about conservative pressure from primary challenges. Even though maybe three quarters of Americans support LGBT protections, gerrymandering makes it possible for that small number of contemptuous malcontents to successfully bring popular bills like this to a grinding halt.

    That said, I believe Democrats have the upper hand on this bill, and it will be put back in by a conference committee. I dare the House to reject it.

  4. #4
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    9,390

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Nemothepanda View Post
    I wonder how the token conservative-republicans here will defend this. The GOP and Republican party are not our friends, not by any measure. Although I heavily dislike bipartisanship, only the Democrats can and want to give us what we need as citizens.
    They're always suspiciously silent on this issue of how their party votes on gay issues. Or they make it about some trumped up pretext like "we opposed that bill because it had pork in it."

  5. #5
    JubberClubber White Eagle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Corpus Christi Tx
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Widower
    Posts
    10,824

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    Because most districts today are heavily gerrymandered, Republicans have to worry about conservative pressure from primary challenges. Even though maybe three quarters of Americans support LGBT protections, gerrymandering makes it possible for that small number of contemptuous malcontents to successfully bring popular bills like this to a grinding halt.

    That said, I believe Democrats have the upper hand on this bill, and it will be put back in by a conference committee. I dare the House to reject it.
    Thanks, I figured there would be a way around it. Watch out GOP in 2014.
    BEWARE! Harassing the Indian may result in sudden and severe hair loss.

  6. #6
    Impish and Mercurial Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,631

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Nemothepanda View Post
    I wonder how the token conservative-republicans here will defend this. The GOP and Republican party are not our friends, not by any measure. Although I heavily dislike bipartisanship, only the Democrats can and want to give us what we need as citizens.
    They stay away from these topics. Too one-sided, impossible to derail into Obama bashing...
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  7. #7
    Banned chance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    21,386

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    ^ you know how they are

    As for me, I'll actually read the article before commenting

    Just to be different

  8. #8

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    The GOP war on women and gays continue.

  9. #9
    JUB Addict CoolBlue71's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    State of Michigan
    Posts
    1,899

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    In other news Log Cabin Republican or GOProud -- whichever -- aren't going to CPAC.



    Devastating.

  10. #10
    GiancarloC
    Guest

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    This is the party some of our big time right wingers on here support with their hearts. It's the GOP blind allegiance club as I call it. They can't derail the thread and turn it around on Obama.

  11. #11
    cave canem Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    2,913

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    A House GOP leadership aide pushed back on the idea that the VAWA bill doesn't protect LGBT victims.

    "The House bill protects all people from discrimination," the aide said. "The Senate bill continues to add people to an enumerated list, therefore excluding those categories not on the list and requiring constant updating. The House bill also allows states, through which VAWA grants flow, to determine the best recipients of those funds, based on the victim populations in their areas."
    The defense conservatives put forward is there is no need for a special focus on these groups in this bill. The paragraph containing the language says that LGBT are an under-served group being denied access to services therefore needing special funding and assistance. I am guessing the GOP is challenging this saying that they have the same access as everyone else. I can sort of see their point, though I'm not sure I agree with it; how are LGBT individuals being denied access would be the question? If you show up at a battered woman shelter you would be turned away because you are a lesbian? Would a person who would otherwise be eligible for the grants mentioned be denied just because of their sexual orientation? If this is the case then I see the need for this language. The GOP is likely resisting this on the knee jerk opposition to what they see as trying to push LGBT 'special' rights where it is not needed, part of an overall struggle to prevent LGBT individuals being granted the same 'special protection' status that race and gender have in civil law.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  12. #12
    GiancarloC
    Guest

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    The House bill simply doesn't cut it... the GOP doesn't have any case and are continuing their war against LGBT people in this country.

  13. #13
    What's next? chrisrobin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    7,826

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by CoolBlue71 View Post
    In other news Log Cabin Republican or GOProud -- whichever -- aren't going to CPAC.



    Devastating.
    I'm not making this up...honestly. Two of the speakers at CPAC are the former governor of Alaska and loser of the vice-presidency in 2008, "game-changer" Sarah Palin. Also, the former governor of Massachusetts, Willard Romney, loser of the 2012 presidential election will also be at CPAC. Looks like the GOP is serious about forging ahead - I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't hear the title "The New Republicons" much as we heard "The New Nixon". Today's Republicons are depending on "voters' amnesia" in 2014 and 2016.


  14. #14

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    If their version does pass, our side could probably force their inclusion in in conferance committee.

  15. #15
    JUB Addict
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,758

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    If you're gay and a republican in this day and age you are a moron---you can be an Independent, a Libertarian or a conservative democrat --fine--but to be associated with the party of stupid---is just plain dumb.

  16. #16
    of the 99%
    Just_Believe18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    9,155

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    The defense conservatives put forward is there is no need for a special focus on these groups in this bill. The paragraph containing the language says that LGBT are an under-served group being denied access to services therefore needing special funding and assistance. I am guessing the GOP is challenging this saying that they have the same access as everyone else. I can sort of see their point, though I'm not sure I agree with it; how are LGBT individuals being denied access would be the question? If you show up at a battered woman shelter you would be turned away because you are a lesbian? Would a person who would otherwise be eligible for the grants mentioned be denied just because of their sexual orientation? If this is the case then I see the need for this language. The GOP is likely resisting this on the knee jerk opposition to what they see as trying to push LGBT 'special' rights where it is not needed, part of an overall struggle to prevent LGBT individuals being granted the same 'special protection' status that race and gender have in civil law.
    Nope. I can't see the GOP's point. I am positively sure I vehemently disagree with it. LGBT individuals are persecuted throughout this country. You need only look at the 30 states that have enshrined marriage discrimination into this country to know there are communities that harass, discriminate, and abuse both mentally and physically LGBT people. I only wish as a fellow homosexual, you would agree as well, rather than giving a political party of hate the benefit of a doubt.
    Last edited by Just_Believe18; February 22nd, 2013 at 09:14 PM.
    #439th oldest member on JUB.

  17. #17
    JockBoy87
    Guest

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    If you show up at a battered woman shelter you would be turned away because you are a lesbian?
    Always a possibility, especially in less cultured parts of the country.

    Would a person who would otherwise be eligible for the grants mentioned be denied just because of their sexual orientation?
    There is an executive order prohibiting the federal government from discrimination based on sexual orientation, however this bill would affirm that by statute.


    And by the way, the significance of this bill is being overlooked as we have this discussion.

    The legislation is the first federal LGBT inclusive anti-discrimination law of any kind passed by the Senate in American history, albeit limited in scope.

  18. #18
    IllumiNaughty Overlord. bankside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Married (to a man)
    Posts
    15,406
    Blog Entries
    2

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    I disagree with the premise of the act and its title.

    Violence against men should be equally abhorrent to us. Even if violence against men were ten times less frequent than violence against women, that one man still deserves our support and recognition. But it seems that in domestic violence situations, the numbers may actually be far more equitable.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesti...ce_against_men
    Americans need to keep their guns so they can protect themselves from gun violence just like Nancy Lanza did. And like Chris Kyle did. And like Gabby Giffords did. And like Tom Clements did. And like Michael Piemonte.

  19. #19
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,398

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    The defense conservatives put forward is there is no need for a special focus on these groups in this bill. The paragraph containing the language says that LGBT are an under-served group being denied access to services therefore needing special funding and assistance. I am guessing the GOP is challenging this saying that they have the same access as everyone else. I can sort of see their point, though I'm not sure I agree with it; how are LGBT individuals being denied access would be the question? If you show up at a battered woman shelter you would be turned away because you are a lesbian? Would a person who would otherwise be eligible for the grants mentioned be denied just because of their sexual orientation? If this is the case then I see the need for this language.
    Of course LGBTs need additional protection from violence, but its removal by Republicans from the VAWA isn't really the point of my rant. The point is that the GOP uses every opportunity, every piece of legislation - however tangentially related - to bash us. They do this not because of some sort of provocation on our part, nor because it is helpful in some way to certain Americans. It is blind hatred which hurts everyone. We have never done anything to harm these people. But they live to do as much harm to us as they can manage. It is fanatical bigotry, and I don't really understand where it comes from.


    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    The GOP is likely resisting this on the knee jerk opposition to what they see as trying to push LGBT 'special' rights where it is not needed, part of an overall struggle to prevent LGBT individuals being granted the same 'special protection' status that race and gender have in civil law.
    No, they are knee jerk resisting LGBT protections because of their stupid, blind, raging, nonsensical hatred of gays. The GOP is not doing this out of some misguided attempt to legislate in a hyper-responsible fashion. They are doing it to proudly assert their hyper-bigotry.


    Quote Originally Posted by CoolBlue71 View Post
    In other news Log Cabin Republican or GOProud -- whichever -- aren't going to CPAC.
    Did I say "however tangentially related" above? Let me correct that. The GOP uses every opportunity - however unrelated - to bash us. CPAC has become a showplace for Republicans to proudly and publicly enforce bigotry against gays. There really is something disturbingly pathological about that.


    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    The legislation is the first federal LGBT inclusive anti-discrimination law of any kind passed by the Senate in American history, albeit limited in scope.
    I suspect that's one reason Republicans want to kill that aspect of the bill so badly.

  20. #20
    cave canem Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    2,913

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Just_Believe18 View Post
    Nope. I can't see the GOP's point. I am positively sure I vehemently disagree with it. LGBT individuals are persecuted throughout this country. You need only look at the 30 states that have enshrined marriage discrimination into this country to know there are communities that harass, discriminate, and abuse both mentally and physically LGBT people. I only wish as a fellow homosexual, you would agree as well, rather than giving a political party of hate the benefit of a doubt.
    I'm not giving them the benefit of the doubt, I don't really agree with their position but I understand how they 'publicly' defend their position and that was the question asked. I'm also sure many here will point out what they think is their actual motivations and in quite a few cases they would be right. I'd need to know more about what types of domestic violence this bill is actually supposed to protect to get into whether LGBT specific protections need to be in it or not. But there is more than enough evidence of violence against LGBT individuals to warrant addressing if they protected by the current laws or not.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  21. #21
    cave canem Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    2,913

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    Always a possibility, especially in less cultured parts of the country.



    There is an executive order prohibiting the federal government from discrimination based on sexual orientation, however this bill would affirm that by statute.


    And by the way, the significance of this bill is being overlooked as we have this discussion.

    The legislation is the first federal LGBT inclusive anti-discrimination law of any kind passed by the Senate in American history, albeit limited in scope.
    And that is probably why its being opposed, the Republican position is that LGBT individuals are protected by current laws against violent and assault that protect everyone and don't need special protections. They think that the effort to provide them is really a effort to gain legal acceptance of homosexuality. They are wrong in that point, as there is plenty of history to show that current laws are not enough and opposing it in this type of legislation is a very wrong move politically IMHO but they don't ask me.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  22. #22
    cave canem Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    2,913

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Of course LGBTs need additional protection from violence, but its removal by Republicans from the VAWA isn't really the point of my rant. The point is that the GOP uses every opportunity, every piece of legislation - however tangentially related - to bash us. They do this not because of some sort of provocation on our part, nor because it is helpful in some way to certain Americans. It is blind hatred which hurts everyone. We have never done anything to harm these people. But they live to do as much harm to us as they can manage. It is fanatical bigotry, and I don't really understand where it comes from.




    No, they are knee jerk resisting LGBT protections because of their stupid, blind, raging, nonsensical hatred of gays. The GOP is not doing this out of some misguided attempt to legislate in a hyper-responsible fashion. They are doing it to proudly assert their hyper-bigotry.
    Oh I agree its bigotry and in a good number of cases driven by hate though the individuals may not always realize it themselves. They have a golden age view of American society and they tend to think that anything that moves us away from that mythical social structure will destroy the country. They thus construct the fallacy in their own minds that gays asking for equality is a challenge to that myth and therefore to them we ARE threatening them because we are trying to destroy our culture with our wanton ways. Its all nonsense of course but it makes for good political theater and plays to the fears of many people that the country and society is in decline and looking for some reason for it. The motivating force is hate and fear of those who are different of course, something that can demonstrated just by pointing to the similarities in the argument used by white supremacists and anti-Semitics to fight racial civil rights.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  23. #23
    Banned chance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    21,386

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    I support the concept of stopping/preventing/reducing violence against anyone - in this case women

    why do gay/lesbian women need special notation here ?

    what am i missing ?

    women need protection - i get it

    why do diff. types of women need diff. types of protection ?

    please do not respond as if this is anything but a reasonable question or POV

  24. #24
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,398

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by chance1 View Post
    I support the concept of stopping/preventing/reducing violence against anyone - in this case women

    why do gay/lesbian women need special notation here ?

    what am i missing ?

    women need protection - i get it

    why do diff. types of women need diff. types of protection ?

    please do not respond as if this is anything but a reasonable question or POV
    See Post #19

  25. #25
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,398

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    Oh I agree its bigotry and in a good number of cases driven by hate though the individuals may not always realize it themselves. They have a golden age view of American society and they tend to think that anything that moves us away from that mythical social structure will destroy the country. They thus construct the fallacy in their own minds that gays asking for equality is a challenge to that myth and therefore to them we ARE threatening them because we are trying to destroy our culture with our wanton ways. Its all nonsense of course but it makes for good political theater and plays to the fears of many people that the country and society is in decline and looking for some reason for it. The motivating force is hate and fear of those who are different of course, something that can demonstrated just by pointing to the similarities in the argument used by white supremacists and anti-Semitics to fight racial civil rights.
    I agree entirely.

    So, why do you support these bigots?

  26. #26
    Banned chance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    21,386

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    See Post #19
    sorry T-Rexx

    I don't see an answer

    not one that addresses my simple question

  27. #27
    JockBoy87
    Guest

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    I suspect that's one reason Republicans want to kill that aspect of the bill so badly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    And that is probably why its being opposed...
    And yet it passed the Senate 78-22. There were some seriously conservative Senators who voted for it, including Republicans from the Deep South.

  28. #28
    JockBoy87
    Guest

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by chance1 View Post

    why do gay/lesbian women need special notation here ?

    why do diff. types of women need diff. types of protection ?


    "‘‘(39) UNDERSERVED POPULATIONS.—The 2 term ‘underserved populations’ means populations who face barriers in accessing and using victim services, and includes populations underserved because of geographic location, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, underserved racial and ethnic populations, populations underserved because of special needs (such as language barriers, disabilities, alienage status, or age), and any other population determined to be underserved by the Attorney General or by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, as appropriate."

    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-1...S-113s47es.pdf




    Quote Originally Posted by Bilerico
    Finally, Wang blurted out that she was a lesbian. The staffer immediately put her on hold. After a long wait, Wang got the word she feared: There were no beds available.

    http://www.bilerico.com/2007/05/lesbian_denied.php

    Now do you get it?

    A gay man as seasoned as you Chance should not have to be told/informed/educated that discrimination against LGBT's is a real and specific phenomenon in society that needs to be addressed by legislation.

  29. #29
    cave canem Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    2,913

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by chance1 View Post
    I support the concept of stopping/preventing/reducing violence against anyone - in this case women

    why do gay/lesbian women need special notation here ?

    what am i missing ?

    women need protection - i get it

    why do diff. types of women need diff. types of protection ?

    please do not respond as if this is anything but a reasonable question or POV
    That is the question isn't it?
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  30. #30
    cave canem Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    2,913

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    I agree entirely.

    So, why do you support these bigots?
    I don't. The question was being asked how Republicans and/or Conservatives defend their position, I'm just providing that answer, I also point out that I don't agree with it. There is I think a valid question of whether this particular bill warrants having language that focuses on LGBT individuals, but that is due to some confusion as to what the bill is about not that LGBT individuals may not need protections.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  31. #31
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    9,390

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Just_Believe18 View Post
    Nope. I can't see the GOP's point. I am positively sure I vehemently disagree with it. LGBT individuals are persecuted throughout this country. You need only look at the 30 states that have enshrined marriage discrimination into this country to know there are communities that harass, discriminate, and abuse both mentally and physically LGBT people. I only wish as a fellow homosexual, you would agree as well, rather than giving a political party of hate the benefit of a doubt.
    "Equal protections already covers everyone" is the standard status quo argument heavily used by conservatives to claim that any program aiming to reduce the disproportionate level of discrimination, disadvantage, workplace harassment, hiring, bullying or beating of certain groups (which somehow magically Equal Protections fails to flow out into the minds of bigots and make them equal opportunity persecutors) is giving "special rights" that are unnecessary and should be opposed. Laws/programs/policies that help reduce the degree to which certain minority groups have a bullseye on them simply because of what they are are a necessary component of protecting everyone equally, imho.

    Quote Originally Posted by bankside View Post
    I disagree with the premise of the act and its title.

    Violence against men should be equally abhorrent to us. Even if violence against men were ten times less frequent than violence against women, that one man still deserves our support and recognition. But it seems that in domestic violence situations, the numbers may actually be far more equitable.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesti...ce_against_men
    Bankside, you sound like those shrill people who oppose things like breast cancer fundraisers or charities because "they disregard men with prostate cancer."

  32. #32
    cave canem Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    2,913

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    And yet it passed the Senate 78-22. There were some seriously conservative Senators who voted for it, including Republicans from the Deep South.
    The Republicans are in the throws of a re-evaluation period which they should have done back in 2008 but didn't in the hopes of a Tea Party revolution and the economy bringing them back to the White House. The election shattered that dream. The party is far from united right now and social issues particularly gay rights is one of the fracture points. Quite a few want to steer away from subject all together and those that are still fighting the fight are more willing to focus on abortion where the odds are better. The ones who can read the writing on the wall know that the gay rights issue is lost at least for now.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  33. #33
    JUB Addict CoolBlue71's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    State of Michigan
    Posts
    1,899

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by nycguydowntown View Post
    If you're gay and a republican in this day and age you are a moron---you can be an Independent, a Libertarian or a conservative democrat --fine--but to be associated with the party of stupid---is just plain dumb.
    What is insulting is when a person who is gay and votes Republican comes across that he is being reasonable—perhaps due to self-interest of his personal economic situation—and then thinks he is in a position to tell those who are gay and vote Democratic that they are the ones who are misguided.

  34. #34
    IllumiNaughty Overlord. bankside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Married (to a man)
    Posts
    15,406
    Blog Entries
    2

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by xbuzzerx View Post
    "Equal protections already covers everyone" is the standard status quo argument heavily used by conservatives to claim that any program aiming to reduce the disproportionate level of discrimination, disadvantage, workplace harassment, hiring, bullying or beating of certain groups (which somehow magically Equal Protections fails to flow out into the minds of bigots and make them equal opportunity persecutors) is giving "special rights" that are unnecessary and should be opposed. Laws/programs/policies that help reduce the degree to which certain minority groups have a bullseye on them simply because of what they are are a necessary component of protecting everyone equally, imho.



    Bankside, you sound like those shrill people who oppose things like breast cancer fundraisers or charities because "they disregard men with prostate cancer."
    When men live as long as women, I'll give money to breast cancer research. Until then we should have the right priorities.
    Americans need to keep their guns so they can protect themselves from gun violence just like Nancy Lanza did. And like Chris Kyle did. And like Gabby Giffords did. And like Tom Clements did. And like Michael Piemonte.

  35. #35
    cave canem Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    2,913

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by CoolBlue71 View Post
    What is insulting is when a person who is gay and votes Republican comes across that he is being reasonable—perhaps due to self-interest of his personal economic situation—and then thinks he is in a position to tell those who are gay and vote Democratic that they are the ones who are misguided.
    Some people feel the Democratic party does not represent their best interests overall either. As long as we are locked in a two party system where the game is rigged keep both parties in power, this will be the way of things.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  36. #36
    JockBoy87
    Guest

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    The Republicans are in the throws of a re-evaluation period which they should have done back in 2008 but didn't in the hopes of a Tea Party revolution and the economy bringing them back to the White House. The election shattered that dream. The party is far from united right now and social issues particularly gay rights is one of the fracture points. Quite a few want to steer away from subject all together and those that are still fighting the fight are more willing to focus on abortion where the odds are better. The ones who can read the writing on the wall know that the gay rights issue is lost at least for now.
    A lot if things went wrong for the GOP in that election, much of it historical. The reelection of Bush in 2004 did not signal the dawn if a new conservative age for America. Bush and the then GOP congress misjudged that and took advantage of public trust. The radical conservative revolution was not across the country; it was in the Republican Party, and it has destroyed their chances for a monopoly on the federal government unless they shake it. Worse still, the election of Obama generated reactionaries making the GOP more extreme. The counter revolution represented by senators such as Murkowski have now tried to steer the party towards common sense, but divisions remain. I think that is evident in the VAWA vote.

    Unfortunately, the Republican House districts are heavily gerrymandered and such districts have stuck the GOP in a rut so conservative, that representatives in those districts live in constant fear of primary challenges if they are not right wing enough. The public sees that and voted for a Democratic senate and White House. I surmise that the GOP in the House will remain much more conservative than their counterparts in the senate for a long time to come.

  37. #37
    Impish and Mercurial Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,631

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    Some people feel the Democratic party does not represent their best interests overall either. As long as we are locked in a two party system where the game is rigged keep both parties in power, this will be the way of things.
    There is a difference between a party that doesn't represent your best interests overall, and one that directly tries to do you harm. The first is to be suspected and constantly re-evaluated. The second is to be fought against with extreme prejudice.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  38. #38
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    9,390

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by bankside View Post
    When men live as long as women, I'll give money to breast cancer research. Until then we should have the right priorities.
    We do have priorities. Prostate cancer shows up incredibly late in life for men and is extremely treatable. Breast cancer strikes down a lot of women in the age of being mothers. There are biological reasons men don't live as long as women and almost none of it has anything to do with "we prioritize treating women's illnesses more."

  39. #39
    cave canem Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    2,913

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Rolyo85 View Post
    There is a difference between a party that doesn't represent your best interests overall, and one that directly tries to do you harm. The first is to be suspected and constantly re-evaluated. The second is to be fought against with extreme prejudice.
    Which is why I"m currently supporting neither
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  40. #40
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    9,390

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    Which is why I"m currently supporting neither
    That doesn't make any sense.

  41. #41
    Impish and Mercurial Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,631

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    Which is why I"m currently supporting neither
    What part of "is to be fought against with extreme prejudice" was unclear? Your response does not follow from my statement.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  42. #42
    cave canem Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    2,913

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by xbuzzerx View Post
    That doesn't make any sense.
    I am neither a Republican or a Democrat, neither party currently has my support.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  43. #43

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by bankside View Post
    When men live as long as women, I'll give money to breast cancer research. ...
    We have a weird situation in my country where donations to breast cancer research has become VERY popular and successful. Researchers for the other cancers are struggling really hard to be as successful.

  44. #44
    cave canem Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    2,913

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Rolyo85 View Post
    What part of "is to be fought against with extreme prejudice" was unclear? Your response does not follow from my statement.
    That aspect is the major reason why the Republicans are getting no support from me at present.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  45. #45
    Impish and Mercurial Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,631

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    But they kind of are, indirectly, if you are not supporting Democrats. Who, by the way, may not have done everything for you that you need, but they have been fighting for your rights in the particular field where the Republicans are trying to harm you.

    In a two-party system, I think the only ones who are entitled to standing on the sidelines, are those with no dog in the fight. Us gay folks - all of us - DO have one.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  46. #46
    cave canem Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    2,913

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Rolyo85 View Post
    But they kind of are, indirectly, if you are not supporting Democrats. Who, by the way, may not have done everything for you that you need, but they have been fighting for your rights in the particular field where the Republicans are trying to harm you.

    In a two-party system, I think the only ones who are entitled to standing on the sidelines, are those with no dog in the fight. Us gay folks - all of us - DO have one.
    I do not embrace the 'us vs them' philosophy of American politics. It may look like a war at time but it is not war but the means we have of political debate, factious as it is. I do not consider myself to be standing on the sidelines either, I dole my support where I will to push the debate in the direct I want it to go. If you are caught up in the us vs them, evil vs good mindset don't bother trying to understand me, just file it under those crazy Libertarians and move on.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  47. #47
    Banned chance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    21,386

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by CoolBlue71 View Post
    What is insulting is when a person who is gay and votes Republican comes across that he is being reasonable—perhaps due to self-interest of his personal economic situation—and then thinks he is in a position to tell those who are gay and vote Democratic that they are the ones who are misguided.
    what's REALLY insulting is that the premise u just suggested actually doesn't take place here

    the reverse does

    bizarro world of CE+P

  48. #48
    Impish and Mercurial Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,631

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    I do not embrace the 'us vs them' philosophy of American politics. It may look like a war at time but it is not war but the means we have of political debate, factious as it is. I do not consider myself to be standing on the sidelines either, I dole my support where I will to push the debate in the direct I want it to go. If you are caught up in the us vs them, evil vs good mindset don't bother trying to understand me, just file it under those crazy Libertarians and move on.
    Nope, I am not. Or rather, I don't see it as good vs evil, but rather grey vs evil. And not even the fairy tale "evil" but the soulless, self-serving, backward mindset steeped in the misconception of its own superiority and baring its teeth against any perceive attack on said superiority. When there is deliberate harm involved, anything that doesn't directly fight that deliberate harm is failing to address it. That's not an "us vs. them" thing, it's a fact of life, which is why I said people with dogs in the fight can't afford to be philosophical about it. You're furthering nothing when holding your vote from either major party. You're just making the gap between them - whichever direction it may go in - smaller.

    Frankly, I feel nothing but mild disgust at "those crazy libertarians" and the total lack of moral compass that ideology peddles, but that's a conversation for another topic.


    Chance, Bizzaro World would be what CoolBlue71 is suggesting. What IS happening at CE&P is a normal healthy behavior. [Text: Removed]
    Last edited by opinterph; February 24th, 2013 at 05:17 PM. Reason: removed demeaning personal characterization; excessive baiting
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  49. #49
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    9,390

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    I am neither a Republican or a Democrat, neither party currently has my support.
    Stardreamer, if your position is "the dems don't support the issue perfectly, and the Reps are an active enemy of gay rights, so I support neither of them" then you are letting perfect be the enemy of good.

  50. #50
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    9,390

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by chance1 View Post
    [Quoted Post: Removed]
    The entire concept that being an advocate of your own equal rights in society is part of some "ideological litmus test" doesn't say anything about liberal litmus narrowness. It says something about how slantedly ideological Republicans are that they'd call someone a partisan for defending themselves.
    Last edited by opinterph; February 23rd, 2013 at 03:04 PM. Reason: removed verbiage quoted from another poster

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | About JustUsBoys.com | Site Map | RSS | Webmasters | Advertise | Link to JUB | Report A Bug on this Page

Visit our sister sites: Broke Straight Boys | CollegeDudes.com | CollegeBoyPhysicals.com | RocketTube
All models appearing on JustUsBoys.com were over 18 at the time of photography. The records for sexually explicit images required by U.S. 2257 are kept by the
individual producers of the images. The location of the records is available by clicking the Custodian of Records link at the bottom of each gallery page.
© 2012 JustUsBoys.com. The JustUsBoys.com name and logo are registered trademarks. Labeled with ICRA and RTA. Member of ASACP and The Free Speech Coalition.