Before gays it would have been day cares as a result of second wave feminism. Then interracial marriage before that. Jim Crow....the Jewish Problem...labor unions...

This post was edited by Skinned on Jul 19 2020 12:13pm

We need to have a conversation on what individuals can reasonably demand from society, and what society can reasonably demand from individuals.

The trans-right discussion at present has unfortunately devolved into black comedy.

Same rights for all humans and no unofficial tiers of citizenship is the demand and nothing less is acceptable.

I very deliberately wrote about "transgender delusions", not about transgenderism in general. When a 6'3, 235lbs mtf transgender person feels discriminated because she is not allowed to participate in female athletics where she would roflstomp the field, or when a transgender woman freaks out because a gynaecologist refuses to include her in a study on cervical cancer, that's delusional, and it is these extreme examples I was referring to.

I should have made that point more clear though.



I was never anti-gay. I flip flopped a bit on gay marriage, admittedly, and that's nothing I'm particularly proud of - but I was always in favor of gay acceptance and for protecting them from discrimination. And I was always in favor of gay adoption rights btw.

Do you accept the basic concept of distinguishing between human rights and citizen's rights?

Like... when you call for "the same rights for all humans", would you for example want foreigners to have the right to vote in your country?

Whites are a rapidly declining demographic because of political decisions made in the past and present. The difference in birthrates isnt that dramatic, the decline in the white population share is almost exclusively driven by immigration which has happened to be largely non-white in recent decades. If all immigration was stopped right now, the different age structures would mean that demographic change would continue for quite some years, but it would come to a halt at roughly 50% whites.

So no, an ever diversifying country is not inevitable fate, it's a conscious decision by the country's leadership. The Trump administration has in fact put forward several plans aimed at addressing this trend: they suggest to eliminate birthright citizenship (which translates illegal immigration into votes for Democrats with a delay of one generation) and to massively reduce chain migration, while at the same time strengthening merit-based immigration.

I agree that latinos are not a lost cause to Republicans the way blacks are, and that they should try to reach out to them without compromising on their core principles. This is possible, one does not need to adopt open borders policies to be able to appeal to them. Sure, if you position yourself against illegal immigration, you're gonna alienate some hispanics, but not all of them as long as you do it without vilifying the entire ethnicity. (This is the area where Trump failed in his messaging.)

GWB did comparatively well with hispanics in 2004, but he really went out of his way to appeal to them as much as he possibly could, and he still lost them by around 20%. Furthermore, it must be noted that if you extrapolated the race-based margins of the 2004 race on the 2016 demographics, the Republican candidate would have lost the popular vote and the electoral college.




Biden's coalition isnt strong, the anti-trump coalition is. These college-educated white suburbanites who benefit from the current status quo are the ones who are turning against Trump/the GOP the hardest. In the light of the ongoing political macro-realignment that is taking place all across the Western world, with the dominant political cleavage increasingly being along an "open-closed" scale rather than the traditional "left-right" scale (see also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open%E2%80%93closed_political_spectrum ), it seems unrealistic to me that the GOP could reverse or stop this trend. Those college-educated, cosmopolitan suburbanites are a lost cause for the GOP. It is important to shore up support among other parts of suburbia though, which is another field where the Trump GOP has failed.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Jul 19 2020 01:05pm

If you werent in favor of gay marriage you weren't in favor of gay acceptance or protecting them from discrimination. Not letting them marry is discriminating and not accepting

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jul 19 2020 01:19pm

That's a very dogmatic and uncompromising view. You're refusing to differentiate between someone who wanted to give gays 95% of their wishlist and someone who wanted to give them 0%...

Bulshit dude. If you were not in favor of gay marriage you were in favor of discrimination. Period. Full stop. That's just how the definitions of these things work. Maybe you weren't in favor of all the discrimination some people were, but you weren't against discrimination.

If this was 1960 you would be saying "I was in favor of civil rights but no in favor of them marrying white women or going to our schools".

You literally just proved my exact claim.

I'm going to unload some knowledge about you that I really hope you take seriously. You are not somebody who actively engages with and proactively considers the ramifications of your Social beliefs. You allow yourself to be moved as the public needle moves, but you don't actively consider where the needle should be. You repeat the same arguments as everybody else defending the status quo without actively considering if it should be moved. In 10 years we will be having the exact same conversation about trans rights and it will be for the same reason we are having this conversation about gay rights.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jul 19 2020 01:32pm

you (and millions of privileged lefties) repeatedly vote for candidates who have these views, and have wielded political power to codify or attempt to codify their views into law. then you yell at a German guy on the internet as if he’s the one to blame for lack of equality when it comes to the United States