Trump to become first president to speak at anti-LGBT hate group's summit

[BmorePat87]

http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-speak-anti-lgbt-hate-groups-annual-event-first-president-683927

Trump has previously spoken at the summit hosted by the Family Research Council, an anti LGBT hate group that seeks to put discriminatory policies into law and puts out publications calling the promotion of LGBT rights the downfall of the US.

The group uses coded language, like calling for these discriminatory policies "protecting the 1st amendment".

The following is their official statement on homosexuality:

Quote:Family Research Council believes that homosexual conduct is harmful to the persons who engage in it and to society at large, and can never be affirmed. It is by definition unnatural, and as such is associated with negative physical and psychological health effects. While the origins of same-sex attractions may be complex, there is no convincing evidence that a homosexual identity is ever something genetic or inborn. We oppose the vigorous efforts of homosexual activists to demand that homosexuality be accepted as equivalent to heterosexuality in law, in the media, and in schools. Attempts to join two men or two women in "marriage" constitute a radical redefinition and falsification of the institution, and FRC supports state and federal constitutional amendments to prevent such redefinition by courts or legislatures. Sympathy must be extended to those who struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions, and every effort should be made to assist such persons to overcome those attractions, as many already have.

[GMDino]

(10-13-2017, 10:55 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-speak-anti-lgbt-hate-groups-annual-event-first-president-683927

Trump has previously spoken at the summit hosted by the Family Research Council, an anti LGBT hate group that seeks to put discriminatory policies into law and puts out publications calling the promotion of LGBT rights the downfall of the US.

The group uses coded language,  like calling for these discriminatory policies "protecting the 1st amendment".

The following is their official statement on homosexuality:

Yes, but what is in his heart? 

[BmorePat87]

on an amusing note, they open their summit every year by playing Fanfare for the Common Man, composed by a gay agnostic.

[Belsnickel]

"The LGBT community has nothing to fear from Trump."

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-13-2017, 10:55 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-speak-anti-lgbt-hate-groups-annual-event-first-president-683927

Trump has previously spoken at the summit hosted by the Family Research Council, an anti LGBT hate group that seeks to put discriminatory policies into law and puts out publications calling the promotion of LGBT rights the downfall of the US.

The group uses coded language,  like calling for these discriminatory policies "protecting the 1st amendment".

The following is their official statement on homosexuality:

The group is clearly motivated by religion.  Seeing as how islam holds the exact same ideals when it comes to homosexuals (often going to far more extremes in dealing with them) then the left should have no issue with them.  Everyone who has been hear or on the old board knows I've been championing marriage equality and equal rights for homosexuals for years, but I have to question why this is a "hate group"?  Is it because the SPLC says so?  If that's the reason then it's a poor one as the SPLC has fallen very far from it's original position and now indulges in pure partisan hackery.  They are no longer a reliable source in any way.

[GMDino]

(10-13-2017, 11:29 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The group is clearly motivated by religion.  Seeing as how islam holds the exact same ideals when it comes to homosexuals (often going to far more extremes in dealing with them) then the left should have no issue with them.  Everyone who has been hear or on the old board knows I've been championing marriage equality and equal rights for homosexuals for years, but I have to question why this is a "hate group"?  Is it because the SPLC says so?  If that's the reason then it's a poor one as the SPLC has fallen very far from it's original position and now indulges in pure partisan hackery.  They are no longer a reliable source in any way.

Question:  Is saying that all Mulsims aren't terrorists the same as saying there is nothing wrong with the Muslim religion?

'Cause I'd have a problem with any religion that holds those "ideals"...but that doesn't mean I won't stop the "all muslims are terrorists" meme.

Maybe Trump could have just planned to speak to the group at all like every other President did?  

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-13-2017, 11:38 AM)GMDino Wrote: Question:  Is saying that all Mulsims aren't terrorists the same as saying there is nothing wrong with the Muslim religion?

You're rebutting a question that wasn't asked.  I'll still answer, no.

Quote:'Cause I'd have a problem with any religion that holds those "ideals"...but that doesn't mean I won't stop the "all muslims are terrorists" meme.

Not a single person mentioned terrorism in this thread until you did.  Maybe when you saw islam you immediately thought of terrorism?  I can't be held responsible for your bigotry.

Quote:Maybe Trump could have just planned to speak to the group at all like every other President did?  

I'm sure you meant "not speak to the group", but sure, he could have.  The question I asked is what makes them a "hate group".  I think I have well established my intense dislike of making weighty accusations with minimal to no proof.  If, as I'm suspecting, religion motivates the ideology that caused the SPLC to label them a hate group then the SPLC has a lot of work to do labeling religious organizations hate groups.  

[Aquapod770]

(10-13-2017, 11:42 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You're rebutting a question that wasn't asked.  I'll still answer, no.



Not a single person mentioned terrorism in this thread until you did.  Maybe when you saw islam you immediately thought of terrorism?  I can't be held responsible for your bigotry.


I'm sure you meant "not speak to the group", but sure, he could have.  The question I asked is what makes them a "hate group".  I think I have well established my intense dislike of making weighty accusations with minimal to no proof.  If, as I'm suspecting, religion motivates the ideology that caused the SPLC to label them a hate group then the SPLC has a lot of work to do labeling religious organizations hate groups.  

The SPLC is about as credible as The Onion. 

[GMDino]

(10-13-2017, 11:42 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You're rebutting a question that wasn't asked.

 

I wasn't "rebutting" anything.  I was seeking clarification as to why it mattered that islam shares views on homosexuals with the group Trump is speaking too. And why that would mean "the left" would be okay with it.

(10-13-2017, 11:42 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'll still answer, no.

Then, again, why bring up Islam at all?

(10-13-2017, 11:42 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Not a single person mentioned terrorism in this thread until you did.  Maybe when you saw islam you immediately thought of terrorism?  I can't be held responsible for your bigotry.

Correct I was trying to make some connection as to why Islam was mentioned in the thread at all since no one else was talking about it and he is not speaking to members of Islam.

(10-13-2017, 11:42 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'm sure you meant "not speak to the group",

I did.  Thanks.

(10-13-2017, 11:42 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: but sure, he could have.  The question I asked is what makes them a "hate group".  I think I have well established my intense dislike of making weighty accusations with minimal to no proof.  If, as I'm suspecting, religion motivates the ideology that caused the SPLC to label them a hate group then the SPLC has a lot of work to do labeling religious organizations hate groups.  

Could be because of their strict stance against fellow citizens that happen to be homosexuals.  Religiously based or not.  I mean they aren't a church, are they?  You can't label the entire Catholic church (for example) as a hate group because they say homosexuality is a sin.  But they can say a single group like this one is.

Even if we want to say the SPLC has no right to label any group their actions make it precarious for the President to go and speak in front of.  I mean unless he plans to go and tell them they are wrong and homosexuals are good, normal people.

I doubt he'll do that.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-13-2017, 11:52 AM)GMDino Wrote:  

I wasn't "rebutting" anything.  I was seeking clarification as to why it mattered that islam shares views on homosexuals with the group Trump is speaking too. And why that would mean "the left" would be okay with it.


Then, again, why bring up Islam at all?

If you can't figure that out then I have to think you're playing stupid.

Quote:Correct I was trying to make some connection as to why Islam was mentioned in the thread at all since no one else was talking about it and he is not speaking to members of Islam.

Why did I bring up a religion known for intolerance towards homosexuals in a thread about a religiously motivated group being labeled a "hate group" for their views on homosexuals?  let me ponder that one for a moment.

Quote:I did.  Thanks.

Anytime.

Quote:Could be because of their strict stance against fellow citizens that happen to be homosexuals.  Religiously based or not.  I mean they aren't a church, are they?  You can't label the entire Catholic church (for example) as a hate group because they say homosexuality is a sin.  But they can say a single group like this one is.

Why can't you label the catholic church a hate group for preaching the exact same ideology?

Quote:Even if we want to say the SPLC has no right to label any group their actions make it precarious for the President to go and speak in front of.  I mean unless he plans to go and tell them they are wrong and homosexuals are good, normal people.

I doubt he'll do that.

Just spitballing here, but he may support some of their platform and not the part about homosexuals?  Is the POTUS restricted to speaking only to groups they agree with 100%?  I do recall an defense being made about Obama attending Wright's church that went along the lines of they didn't buy in to all of reverand Wright's views.

[hollodero]

(10-13-2017, 11:29 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The group is clearly motivated by religion.  Seeing as how islam holds the exact same ideals when it comes to homosexuals (often going to far more extremes in dealing with them) then the left should have no issue with them.

I don't understand that one...?

[GMDino]

(10-13-2017, 12:08 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: If you can't figure that out then I have to think you're playing stupid.

I asked rather than assumed.

(10-13-2017, 12:08 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Why did I bring up a religion known for intolerance towards homosexuals in a thread about a religiously motivated group being labeled a "hate group" for their views on homosexuals?  let me ponder that one for a moment.

That's what I assumed...so I asked first. It was meant to be a "what about" argument to distract from the original group.

(10-13-2017, 12:08 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Anytime.

Oh, I know!

(10-13-2017, 12:08 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Why can't you label the catholic church a hate group for preaching the exact same ideology?

Are you saying they should?

(10-13-2017, 12:08 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Just spitballing here, but he may support some of their platform and not the part about homosexuals?  Is the POTUS restricted to speaking only to groups they agree with 100%?  I do recall an defense being made about Obama attending Wright's church that went along the lines of they didn't buy in to all of reverand Wright's views.

Eh, they say they are pro-life and pro-marriage. Trump is neither of those things either.

Seems like an odd connection unless he agrees with "something" they stand for. I wonder what that could be?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-13-2017, 12:17 PM)hollodero Wrote: I don't understand that one...?

The left and islam is a bit of an odd alliance.  As opposition to islam's extreme tenants typically comes from the right, the left tends to defend them as victims of oppression.  This is ironic considering that islam, as practiced in most places, especially muslim majority countries, is about as conservative an ideology as currently exists on this planet.  Women and homosexuals are routinely treated in ways that couldn't even be considered in western countries.  The howls of outrage over, not insignificant but comparatively minor, things such as Title 9 or marriage equality dwarf those directed at the behavior condoned and justified in most of the world in the name of islam.

(10-13-2017, 12:18 PM)GMDino Wrote: Are you saying they should?

If they consistently use the same criteria to label an organization a hate group then absolutely.  I wonder why they don't do that?

Quote:Eh, they say they are pro-life and pro-marriage.  Trump is neither of those things either.

I agree with you, but much of his voting base is.

Quote:Seems like an odd connection unless he agrees with "something" they stand for.  I wonder what that could be?

The fact that they vote for him.

[BmorePat87]

(10-13-2017, 11:29 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The group is clearly motivated by religion.  Seeing as how islam holds the exact same ideals when it comes to homosexuals (often going to far more extremes in dealing with them) then the left should have no issue with them.  Everyone who has been hear or on the old board knows I've been championing marriage equality and equal rights for homosexuals for years, but I have to question why this is a "hate group"?  Is it because the SPLC says so?  If that's the reason then it's a poor one as the SPLC has fallen very far from it's original position and now indulges in pure partisan hackery.  They are no longer a reliable source in any way.

I couldn't care less what SPLC labels them, nor do I care about how other religions view gay people. I don't even know where the Muslim comment came from.

A group that lobbies government officials to legalize discrimination against a class of people and calls them detrimental to society on the basis of their gender, orientation, race, or any similar factor is a hate group. Discrimination is hostility towards a group.

To clarify, the label I apply to them has to do with their actions and statements, not the labels used by any other group. I don't think any logical poster here would argue with labeling the Family Research Council a "hate group" if we took everything they wrote and lobbied for and replaced sexual orientation with skin color, age, or disability. Giving someone a pass because they justify discrimination with religion doesn't make it any less immoral.

[BengalHawk62]

"Give him a chance!" 


"He's new to this."

[hollodero]

(10-13-2017, 12:44 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The left and islam is a bit of an odd alliance.  As opposition to islam's extreme tenants typically comes from the right, the left tends to defend them as victims of oppression.  This is ironic

It#s also not entirely accurate, isn't it? I do not see said "alliance". That opposition to medieval beliefs in Islam isn't strong enough on the left side is something I do not like either... but you can't really forge an alliance out of that. An anti-gay stance is not accepted in wide parts of the left, no matter if these stances are expressed by muslims, christians or whom ever. Now granted I don't know the US as good, but it would really surprise me if the US left really said muslim homophobia is just fine and we are in alliance with them against Christmas and stuff :)

(10-13-2017, 12:44 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: considering that islam, as practiced in most places, especially muslim majority countries, is about as conservative an ideology as currently exists on this planet.  Women and homosexuals are routinely treated in ways that couldn't even be considered in western countries.  The howls of outrage over, not insignificant but comparatively minor, things such as Title 9 or marriage equality dwarf those directed at the behavior condoned and justified in most of the world in the name of islam.

The priorities might be wrong, and the left might have some fear of appearing oppressive to other cultures, hence holding their tongue too much. As i said. That's all I am giving you on that one though. The left is not a fan of Saudi-Arabia or places like the ones you described.
Your assessment is not entirely fair, and the irony you see seems a bit constructed. Oh yeah. Take that. :)

[StLucieBengal]

A hate group?

This is a Christian advocacy group. They are no more of a hate group than any other religious based advocacy group. Unless the OP is trying to call all religious based groups hate Groups. Which does nothing except lessen the label of hate group.

[BmorePat87]

(10-13-2017, 01:17 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: A hate group?  

This is a Christian advocacy group.  They are no more of a hate group than any other religious based advocacy group.    Unless the OP is trying to call all religious based groups hate Groups.    Which does nothing except lessen the label of hate group.

how does advocating for the removal of civil rights from a class of people based on their sexual orientation have anything to do with advocating for Christians? 

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(10-13-2017, 12:49 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I couldn't care less what SPLC labels them, nor do I care about how other religions view gay people. I don't even know where the Muslim comment came from.

A group that lobbies government officials to legalize discrimination against a class of people and calls them detrimental to society on the basis of their gender, orientation, race, or any similar factor is a hate group. Discrimination is hostility towards a group.

To clarify, the label I apply to them has to do with their actions and statements, not the labels used by any other group. I don't think any logical poster here would argue with labeling the Family Research Council a "hate group" if we took everything they wrote and lobbied for and replaced sexual orientation with skin color, age, or disability. Giving someone a pass because they justify discrimination with religion doesn't make it any less immoral.

You walk in on a guy having sex with a cow. Is that disgusting, or if you say it's disgusting is it discrimination?
Or on a less hyperbolic/more realistic example, why is nobody trying to defend the rights of polygamists if discrimination is bad?

The bestiality bit was mostly a ridiculous example of the arbitrarily decided moving line on what you're required to be comfortable with if you don't want to be "discriminating" and the equally moving line on what is okay to be uncomfortable with/disapprove of.

A Korean man awhile back decided he wanted to marry his giant pillow that had an anime girl on it.

Should we support that, or is that not okay? Is that better or worse than wanting to lop off your genitalia?



Keep in mind, I have absolutely no care if people want to marry the same sex, marry multiple people, have a sex change, whatever. So long as it doesn't affect me and they don't constantly shove it in my face, more power to them if it makes them happy. I may think some of it is weird, or even really F'ing weird, but hey, their choice. I just find the always changing arbitrary moral line that determines "you must support this or you're a discriminatory hate group".

(10-13-2017, 01:04 PM)hollodero Wrote: The priorities might be wrong, and the left might have some fear of appearing oppressive to other cultures, hence holding their tongue too much. As i said. That's all I am giving you on that one though. The left is not a fan of Saudi-Arabia or places like the ones you described.
Your assessment is not entirely fair, and the irony you see seems a bit constructed. Oh yeah. Take that. :)

Yet the left's last Presidential candidate was a huge fan of them, took tons of their donations, too.

There's some hypocrisy going on there, Hollo.

[hollodero]

(10-13-2017, 01:34 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Yet the left's last Presidential candidate was a huge fan of them, took tons of their donations, too.

There's some hypocrisy going on there, Hollo.

Yeah and the current one performed some bizarre ritual with an orb there. When it comes to cuddling to rich sheikhs, both your parties are quite game and don't give anything away, isn't that true.