General US Politics

[Crysta]

Nah you're alright as far as I can tell, Rez.

Also: California is not the blue liberal paradise outsiders seem to think it is. Until this election Orange County was a conservative haven and there's plenty of conservative-leaning coastal communities. Newport is one of them. I don't think this is not something that is radically different in other states with large populations but maybe I'm wrong.

So no, you shouldn't be wishing they secede and I'm not expecting it to happen.

Edited November 13, 2016 by Crysta

[Acacia Sgt]

That seccesion thing isn't likely to be more than simply a form of protest, in the end, I think.

Speaking of experience, considering my own state here in Mexico has pulled similar stunts over stuff that wasn't liked over here. Latest I'm aware of was back in 2013 when the tax in the border states was raised to match the rest of the country. Talks of secceding sprung up, but it never went anywhere.

[Rezzy]

That seccesion thing isn't likely to be more than simply a form of protest, in the end, I think.

Speaking of experience, considering my own state here in Mexico has pulled similar stunts over stuff that wasn't liked over here. Latest I'm aware of was back in 2013 when the tax in the border states was raised to match the rest of the country. Talks of secceding sprung up, but it never went anywhere.

The California secession talks are pretty new. A while back Texas was grumbling about secession as well as a few others from the deep south, but it never goes anywhere.

[The Geek]

Actually as someone who lives in the Pacific Northwest I've heard talks about the entire West Coast seceding and becoming an independent nation called "Cascadia" for years. Like with the supposed California secession it was mostly nonsense spouted by some eccentric Silicon Valley bigwigs.

[Res]

Nah you're alright as far as I can tell, Rez.

Also: California is not the blue liberal paradise outsiders seem to think it is. Until this election Orange County was a conservative haven and there's plenty of conservative-leaning coastal communities. Newport is one of them. I don't think this is not something that is radically different in other states with large populations but maybe I'm wrong.

So no, you shouldn't be wishing they secede and I'm not expecting it to happen.

Yes yes. And it's worth noting that although the state has a diverse population, it's also pretty segregated. A few of my non-white friends say they've experienced more racism in the Bay Area than elsewhere.

[CyborgZeta]

It wouldn't benefit anyone. The rest of America wouldn't be able to survive without the almost massive amount of food and capital produced by California and California, without the resources (especially water) provided from other states to maintain its large population and generate its food and wealth, would collapse under its own weight and become a dried out husk of a state.

No offense, but I'm pretty skeptical of that. California is not the only state that produces food, and there's already growing capital elsewhere in the country.

If states were to start leaving, I'd be more concerned with losing Texas.

Edited November 13, 2016 by CyborgZeta

[Res]

Actually as someone who lives in the Pacific Northwest I've heard talks about the entire West Coast seceding and becoming an independent nation called "Cascadia" for years. Like with the supposed California secession it was mostly nonsense spouted by some eccentric Silicon Valley bigwigs.

There've been various secession suggestions and movements on the west coast since the 19th century, apparently!

Of course, it's worth noting that the movements stem from white colonialism in the first place.

[Moira]

Why are so many people giving Trump the slide with lgbt issues when there are plenty of examples of why he is pretty against lgbt rights on a lot of issues

[Crysta]

Why are so many people giving Trump the slide with lgbt issues when there are plenty of examples of why he is pretty against lgbt rights on a lot of issues

lowered standards = grading on a curve

though it'd help if you actually sourced these

[Moira]

I made a post with a couple examples a couple pages back but it probably got lost in the flood of posts

[Life]

Why are so many people giving Trump the slide with lgbt issues when there are plenty of examples of why he is pretty against lgbt rights on a lot of issues

Mmm.. disagree on Trump being against LGBT rights. I'll give you Pence but the liberal battle has been won (and I'm happy about it).

Concentrate on the crowd's response to Trump saying that. They are CHEERING. They WANT the LGBT community to treated like the rest of them.

[Rezzy]

I think a big part of it is the baggage that comes with Republicans. Part of it is many people value religious freedom over the right to luxuries. Like many people think a person's religious freedom overrides a person's right to have a cake baked for their gay wedding. As probably obvious from my earlier posts. I want Gay Marriage to be the law of the land, but I also respect a baker's right to their religious beliefs and don't think they should be forced to bake a wedding cake for a gay wedding if they don't want to. Likewise, people should be able to get their wedding done before a judge, but shouldn't be able to force a Catholic priest to perform the ceremony.

A bit of levity from the Onion that seems appropriate. http://www.theonion.com/article/conservative-acquaintance-annoyingly-not-racist-35236

[Ema Skye]

@Blah, Maslow's hierachy is stupid and meaningless. Most people would rather be dead if they were truly in a low, low place. Emotional health is more important than physical health typically. It's why suicide is such a rampant issue. The hierachy shows no sympathy for anyone with mental issues. I mean, they're healthy, right?

As someone with /many/ mental issues, I can see what you're saying, but I think you're so far stuck in your little box of "Rainbow Lives Matter" that you're defying reality to win arguments.

But no, emotional health is not more important to physical health. I need air, water and food to survive. I'd like a brain that isn't rifled with anxiety, but it's not life or death. I'd give anything to not battle depression, but I can (and have) been living with it. If I had to choose between water and no depression, I think the choice is obvious for me, and I know many other people in my situation would think the same.

Second layer is physical safety, which basically means that you have a safe place to live. This is, usually unarguably, more important to one's mental health. I can be a sound of mind human, but if I'm wandering without a house in some dangerous community, I'm still screwed regardless of how my mind is shaped. Mental health can fit in here if you're in a physically abusive situation though.

However, I think the mental health you're largely referring to is in the third layer about love and relationships. It's still important, but my relationships with people around me aren't killing me like a lack of food or physical safety are (or at least, the people around me aren't killing me as fast as a lack of food/safety would).

The western world, for the most part, has everyone (or at least tries to) put everyone up on Maslow's third layer; love and relationships. I feel like this is why virtually all sexuality and gender minorities are so much more prevalent in the developed west than in the developing world, because they're still trying to get to this layer of Maslow for survival that they don't have time to ponder about their mental health.

Edited November 13, 2016 by Ema Skye

[Life]

I think a big part of it is the baggage that comes with Republicans. Part of it is many people value religious freedom over the right to luxuries. Like many people think a person's religious freedom overrides a person's right to have a cake baked for their gay wedding. As probably obvious from my earlier posts. I want Gay Marriage to be the law of the land, but I also respect a baker's right to their religious beliefs and don't think they should be forced to bake a wedding cake for a gay wedding if they don't want to. Likewise, people should be able to get their wedding done before a judge, but shouldn't be able to force a Catholic priest to perform the ceremony.

A bit of levity from the Onion that seems appropriate. http://www.theonion.com/article/conservative-acquaintance-annoyingly-not-racist-35236

I'm with you on this one 99%. I just don't think that it should be a federal issue. I think that every state should make that decision and that it would be morally wrong for it not to be legal. Hence the 99%.

[Moira]

To be fair, that sets the bar pretty low, as republicans have a history of not supporting LGBT rights.

I think the most concerning thing from an LGBT standpoint is going to be the supreme court choice. Trump stated that he would strongly consider appointing justices to overrule the decision on same-sex marriage (source). From what I know, the supreme court dislikes going against precedence in general, and it would be extremely hard to overturn, but the issue becomes much more concerning when there are plenty of issues that could face the supreme court concerning LGBT rights. For instance, one issue that just came up: (link) Trans issues were at the forefront of the news not that long ago, and I can easily see them coming back. Trump has even supported HB2, which is extremely discriminatory (source). Trump has also supported FADA, which seeks to protect opponents of same sex marriage based on religious beliefs from repercussions from the government(source and wiki on FADA).

On a personal level, I really am concerned about the supreme court, and how that's going to affect the LGBT community. Also, with much every part of the government being majority republican, its not a stretch to imagine that progress on our issues will slow down considerably, or even get backtracked in some ways.

Sorry I didn't realize my post was literally 24 ages ago so I brought it back so nobody has to dig.

I'll start at life's post w/ the video. I agree with you that the tide has definitely shifted in America. In the video, Trump talks about how he will protect LGBT people from "the hateful foreign ideology", (I'm guessing in response to the Pulse nightclub shooting), which is admirable. Hopefully any presidential candidate would have said they would protect LGBT people from being the targets of terrorism, but this does not make Trump pro LGBT, especially when placed next to the other positions he has. I also believe that while a lot of progress has been made for acceptance of same gender attraction orientations, the public's opinion on trans individuals is much less accepting. While there has been much progress with examples like Laverne Cox, trans individuals still face an extreme amount of discrimination. This can be seen by lack of protections for employment, or North Carolina's bathroom laws. It is especially hard for people who do not have to financial ability or desire to "pass". Trump, while not giving many statements on these issues, still demonstrates unfavorable opinions towards them, and it is not unreasonable for LGBT people to worry about the direction of progress will go in a republican dominated government.

This also ties in to Rezzy's post. A lot of it is baggage from the republican party, but that is still pretty relevant with the control the republican party currently has. Also slightly off topic, I totally get where you're coming from about religious freedom, but I believe that any business operating in a country should serve anyone living in that country, especially when they're operating on a street that my taxes go toward, under protections from services like police and fire departments that are also paid by my taxes. As far as forcing a priest to do it, that wouldn't fall under the same category for me since that is strictly religious ground. (I'm open hearing more about this, Idk if this is the right thread though)

Also, it kinda cracks me up that the picture of Trump in the thumbnail is him holding the LGBT flag upside down. This may not be a fair comparison, but if someone was like "I love Americans" and held an American flag upside down, I don't think many Americans would be particularly impressed. Also we can all mutually agree that Pence sucks and I'm still really disgruntled by that VP choice.

edit: Also my friend just sent me this link so it's not just Pence he's choosing.

Edited November 13, 2016 by Moira

[eclipse]

I have a question. Should discussion on the US President Elect's future plans be discussed elsewhere?

Because while you could argue that discussing these is relevant, this thread is mostly about the reaction to the election itself. So just wanting to clarify.

I'm fine with that being discussed in here. We've been talking about the candidates the entire time.

I am guilty of using the BBC as my main news source for US events, despite the possibility of similar bias existing from them. I was just tired of seeing American news outlets give two completely opposite sides of the same story.

I don't blame you at all. However, if you have the time, it helps to listen to what our news outlets are saying, and cross-reference them. The truth will probably be somewhere in the middle.

That fucking snake. I bet she only changed her opinion to further her political career.

But, if I look back at myself, am I really any better? I started out against gay rights because I grew up in a religious family. My reason for changing my mind on the matter was ultimately a selfish one, looking back. There was a close friend of mine during high school who was gay, and my parents told me that I couldn't hang out with him anymore for no reason other than his sexual orientation. I got mad in response, because I believed that he wasn't hurting anyone by being who he was and started to move away from the church for that sole reason.

I think The Onion wrote a hilarious piece on Hillary about how her views will change to be your views or something like that. I'm not surprised in the least.

Nothing wrong with changing, in the way you've described. Be worried if you DON'T change. . .or change for the worse!

This also ties in to Rezzy's post. A lot of it is baggage from the republican party, but that is still pretty relevant with the control the republican party currently has. Also slightly off topic, I totally get where you're coming from about religious freedom, but I believe that any business operating in a country should serve anyone living in that country, especially when they're operating on a street that my taxes go toward, under protections from services like police and fire departments that are also paid by my taxes. As far as forcing a priest to do it, that wouldn't fall under the same category for me since that is strictly religious ground. (I'm open hearing more about this, Idk if this is the right thread though)

24 ages ago is a very accurate description of it, even if it's a typo

This is probably the best argument I've heard for businesses not being able to pick and choose their customers. Also, if you want to talk about where the line is drawn regarding this, feel free to make another topic.

---

I do appreciate the policy/other candidate discussion, so feel free to keep that up.

[Res]

I think a big part of it is the baggage that comes with Republicans. Part of it is many people value religious freedom over the right to luxuries. Like many people think a person's religious freedom overrides a person's right to have a cake baked for their gay wedding.

And yet many would also love to see an increase in religion in public schools!

The close tie of religion to politics in the U.S. is interesting to me, coming from a country with an official religion, yet where the two rarely seem to intertwine.

[SalShich10N]

And yet many would also love to see an increase in religion in public schools!

The close tie of religion to politics in the U.S. is interesting to me, coming from a country with an official religion, yet where the two rarely seem to intertwine.

As someone from Mexico, country which has quite the background with religion and state mixing together is that it is the last thing that should happen ever. Because then every governmental action, good or bad, will have a moral justification. What can be taught and not taught, what can be said and not said, what can be worn and when. A religion-driven state will only control its people in as an insidious way to control them, not in the path of religion textbook, but to the benefit of the people with political power. It half-happened to the US before with the when capitalism was instituted, it was said that it followed god's path when it actually was all the contrary.

I don't think the US will be able to mix religion with its state, it has too many people with different points of views and a good number of anti-theistic people with power. For a mixture to happen priests or bishops would need to start getting public charges.

[UNLEASH IT]

Not necessarily directed at me, but I hold no ill feelings towards anybody here, and if I come across that way, it's not intentional.

This is hypocritical of me, since I've been talking about empathy and understanding for the past few days, but I can't say that I feel the same. It hasn't reached the point where I would wish ill on someone, but I do feel anger towards some people on this site (and IRL). What is still a bit confusing to me though, is that I'm more angry at the liberals/progressives who share my views, than the conservatives who disagree with them.

[Anacybele]

I think a big part of it is the baggage that comes with Republicans. Part of it is many people value religious freedom over the right to luxuries. Like many people think a person's religious freedom overrides a person's right to have a cake baked for their gay wedding. As probably obvious from my earlier posts. I want Gay Marriage to be the law of the land, but I also respect a baker's right to their religious beliefs and don't think they should be forced to bake a wedding cake for a gay wedding if they don't want to. Likewise, people should be able to get their wedding done before a judge, but shouldn't be able to force a Catholic priest to perform the ceremony.

A bit of levity from the Onion that seems appropriate. http://www.theonion.com/article/conservative-acquaintance-annoyingly-not-racist-35236

Rezzy, you know the Onion isn't real, right? It's literally one big joke.

Anyway, I get where you're coming from here, and I do rather agree, the baker shouldn't be FORCED to make that cake. However, I also think that it would be more right for him or her to do it anyway, because it's his/her job. I would feel pretty bad refusing to do my job just because of one of my beliefs and leaving a customer unhappy because of it. Basically, I'd rather keep my customers happy than let beliefs get in the way. I'm not saying you're wrong here, I'm just giving my side of the scenario and what I would prefer to do in such a case.

Now, this isn't to say I wouldn't make exceptions to this. I would never, say, do an art commission that asks me to, say, make an art of gay people being hanged, or any other such serious form of hate art. That's just going too far. It'd probably hurt my business because it'd make me look like a shithead hater.

Edited November 13, 2016 by Anacybele

[Res]

This is hypocritical of me, since I've been talking about empathy and understanding for the past few days, but I can't say that I feel the same. It hasn't reached the point where I would wish ill on someone, but I do feel anger towards some people on this site (and IRL).

If any of that anger is aimed at me you're welcome to PM me to talk it out more!

[Phoenix Wright]

Rezzy, you know the Onion isn't real, right? It's literally one big joke.

Anyway, I get where you're coming from here, and I do rather agree, the baker shouldn't be FORCED to make that cake. However, I also think that it would be more right for him or her to do it anyway, because it's his/her job. I would feel pretty bad refusing to do my job just because of one of my beliefs and leaving a customer unhappy because of it. Basically, I'd rather keep my customers happy than let beliefs get in the way. I'm not saying you're wrong here, I'm just giving my side of the scenario and what I would prefer to do in such a case.

Now, this isn't to say I wouldn't make exceptions to this. I would never, say, do an art commission that asks me to, say, make an art of gay people being hanged, or any other such serious form of hate art. That's just going too far. It'd probably hurt my business because it'd make me look like a shithead hater.

rezzy said it was a joke, "...a bit of levity." rezzy knows the onion is satirical.

[Rezzy]

Rezzy, you know the Onion isn't real, right? It's literally one big joke.

Anyway, I get where you're coming from here, and I do rather agree, the baker shouldn't be FORCED to make that cake. However, I also think that it would be more right for him or her to do it anyway, because it's his/her job. I would feel pretty bad refusing to do my job just because of one of my beliefs and leaving a customer unhappy because of it. Basically, I'd rather keep my customers happy than let beliefs get in the way. I'm not saying you're wrong here, I'm just giving my side of the scenario and what I would prefer to do in such a case.

Now, this isn't to say I wouldn't make exceptions to this. I would never, say, do an art commission that asks me to, say, make an art of gay people being hanged, or any other such serious form of hate art. That's just going too far. It'd probably hurt my business because it'd make me look like a shithead hater.

Yep, I know the Onion is satire. I've been reading it for years. Levity means "humor or frivolity, especially the treatment of a serious matter with humor or in a manner lacking due respect." I just remembered that article I had read previously about a woman who was frustrated because her Republican friend wasn't racist, but just thought differently that she did on issues.

Here's a copy-paste, for those who didn't check the link.

"Conservative Acquaintance Annoyingly Not Racist NEWS IN BRIEF February 11, 2014

Vol 50 Issue 06 Local

BROOKLYN, NY—Acknowledging that the man’s right-wing views are more nuanced than one might expect, 36-year-old liberal Diana Hardwick confided to reporters Tuesday that her conservative acquaintance Brady Daniels is, quite frustratingly, not racist. “We got to talking about immigration, and I really wanted him to undermine his argument for stricter border controls by saying something disparaging of Latinos, but apparently his opinions are based entirely on national security issues instead of race—which is super irritating,” Hardwick said of Daniels, who reportedly describes himself as a “strong conservative” on fiscal issues but, annoyingly, exhibits no racial biases. “It would be so much easier if I could just write him off as a bigot, but as far as I can tell he harbors no resentment or disdain toward people of color. For God’s sake, we argued every issue from states’ rights to income disparity but nope, he didn’t say anything even tacitly racist. Not once.” Hardwick later concluded that her acquaintance’s opposition to most of President Obama’s policies meant he was probably “close enough” to count as a racist."

The part in bold was what made me laugh.

This is hypocritical of me, since I've been talking about empathy and understanding for the past few days, but I can't say that I feel the same. It hasn't reached the point where I would wish ill on someone, but I do feel anger towards some people on this site (and IRL). What is still a bit confusing to me though, is that I'm more angry at the liberals/progressives who share my views, than the conservatives who disagree with them.

If I only kept the friends who voted the same way I did, I'd have like 5-6 friends right now.

[Radiant head]

Nah you're alright as far as I can tell, Rez.

Also: California is not the blue liberal paradise outsiders seem to think it is. Until this election Orange County was a conservative haven and there's plenty of conservative-leaning coastal communities. Newport is one of them. I don't think this is not something that is radically different in other states with large populations but maybe I'm wrong.

So no, you shouldn't be wishing they secede and I'm not expecting it to happen.

Even if it was a liberal paradise, I would say Silicon Valley and Hollywood liberals are a huge part of the problem

[Ansem]

though i do lean liberal im gonna have to side with the conservatives on one matter, the protesting is silly. it was a democratic election and even with most of the media outlets supporting her, hillary still managed to lose.

also democrats really suck for putting the lowest energy candidate up against another candidate and im glad they lost everything. what a shitty party, as soon as i get back home i'm gonna go back to independent.

Edited November 13, 2016 by Mimikyu