Trump To Speak Monday Det Economic Club Monday

[erikd]

I don't support gay marriage, although I've attended one for close family friends, but I'm in favor of every one of the actual rights of marriage, except the ability to call it marriage.

How does that work? Marriage is the legal term that defines all of those rights. The government record that gives those rights is called a "marriage license." How do we give gay people the same rights, if we deny them the same legal documentation and status as other people? There is no other legal documentation or status that grants the same rights as marriage.

[canuck]

How does that work? Marriage is the legal term that defines all of those rights. The government record that gives those rights is called a "marriage license." How do we give gay people the same rights, if we deny them the same legal documentation and status as other people? There is no other legal documentation or status that grants the same rights as marriage.

Exactly. Why claim that the particulars are ripe but that the notion of marriage is unacceptable? What does it take away from you if you say you are OKAY with it, but it shouldn't be ratified? Let it go. Give.
An inner peace will follow.

Why force anyone to hide their true self, and indeed their potential humanity? That attitude is tantamount to hiding a woman under a veil, reducing à handicapped person to indigence, darker complexioned folk to certain quarters, and the list goes on... What is the bother?

[emu steve]

Support of gay rights does not mean agreeing with you or other advocates one each issue.

I don't support gay marriage, although I've attended one for close family friends, but I'm in favor of every one of the actual rights of marriage, except the ability to call it marriage. ...

Civil unions?

[Honky Tonk]

Civil unions?

A very civil post, Steve.

[Wesley Mouch]

Civil unions?

Yes, Civil Unions. As a Libertarian, I believe in freedom. So if benefits are being extended to any two people who make commitments to each other, then I don't see any rational reason to limit it to those who are married [[in the traditional sense).

I don't approve of the gay rights movement's appropriation of the term marriage, which has a pre-existing meaning to religious people. And I don't approve of the state treating marriages different than other forms of committment since the state has no business supporting religion.

There's room, IMO, for tax credits for those who create and support families, no matter the composition [[gender, age, faith, disability, military status, skin color, hair style, nor speech impediments)

[dtowncitylover]

Yes, Civil Unions. As a Libertarian, I believe in freedom. So if benefits are being extended to any two people who make commitments to each other, then I don't see any rational reason to limit it to those who are married [[in the traditional sense).

I don't approve of the gay rights movement's appropriation of the term marriage, which has a pre-existing meaning to religious people. And I don't approve of the state treating marriages different than other forms of committment since the state has no business supporting religion.

There's room, IMO, for tax credits for those who create and support families, no matter the composition [[gender, age, faith, disability, military status, skin color, hair style, nor speech impediments)

I don't approve of the religious appropriation of the term marriage. Despite "tradition" there's no real religious connotation to it. A hypothetical straight, atheist couple who are unfortunately infertile are married and therefore have a marriage. Or do you want them to have a civil union?

It's not gay marriage, it's equal marriage. I want to be married. I want to have a wedding. I don't want to be civilly union-ed.

[canuck]

Yes, Civil Unions. As a Libertarian, I believe in freedom. So if benefits are being extended to any two people who make commitments to each other, then I don't see any rational reason to limit it to those who are married [[in the traditional sense).

I don't approve of the gay rights movement's appropriation of the term marriage, which has a pre-existing meaning to religious people. And I don't approve of the state treating marriages different than other forms of committment since the state has no business supporting religion.

There's room, IMO, for tax credits for those who create and support families, no matter the composition [[gender, age, faith, disability, military status, skin color, hair style, nor speech impediments)

I see. I know what you are doing there, Wesley. You know that nothing could possible disqualify Trump for marriage before God or State excepting hair style. And of course you cleverly stashed it in your post.

[GMan]

I see. I know what you are doing there, Wesley. You know that nothing could possible disqualify Trump for marriage before God or State excepting hair style. And of course you cleverly stashed it in your post.

FWIW this thread is way off topic.

[Zacha341]

Add the kitchen sink while you're at in terms of where this thread has gone. When will either of them be back to Michigan to grace us with more fun, facts and frivolity!

I love politics. Lets talk about religion and everyone's pre-tax earnings well we're at it...

[Zacha341]

Yeah, I am NOT going there re. some of the directions. Hah!

FWIW this thread is way off topic.

[ABetterDetroit]

Yes, Civil Unions. As a Libertarian, I believe in freedom. So if benefits are being extended to any two people who make commitments to each other, then I don't see any rational reason to limit it to those who are married [[in the traditional sense).

I don't approve of the gay rights movement's appropriation of the term marriage, which has a pre-existing meaning to religious people. And I don't approve of the state treating marriages different than other forms of committment since the state has no business supporting religion.

Huh? What? Let me get this straight. You believe in "freedom" but somehow you feel you have the right to approve or disapprove of the legal use of the term "marriage" in a union between any two Americans that love each other?

You have no clue what freedom is.

[Honky Tonk]

Huh? What? Let me get this straight. You believe in "freedom" but somehow you feel you have the right to approve or disapprove of the legal use of the term "marriage" in a union between any two Americans that love each other?You have no clue what freedom is.

You mean as in "freedom of speech" ?

[ABetterDetroit]

You mean as in "freedom of speech" ?

Nope.

A asshole has the right to run their mouth all day long if they so choose. I am referring to enacting laws that restricts the freedom of others. Freedom and the constitution cut both ways. If you want yours you had better be willing give the same freedoms to other Americans or everyone's are at risk.

[Wesley Mouch]

Huh? What? Let me get this straight. You believe in "freedom" but somehow you feel you have the right to approve or disapprove of the legal use of the term "marriage" in a union between any two Americans that love each other?

You have no clue what freedom is.

Freedom is not anarchy. If marriage has no bounds, then is polygamy between consenting adults OK? I don't see why not. In fact, I think its a good idea. If you are OK with granting special rights to 'just one' other, why should those who have 'two special others' be excluded.

To me, this just points out that all marriage rights under the law should be extinguished, and some 'child rearing' credit.

But this is far off topic, isn't it. But it is fun.

However the point was that Trump, while a 'traditionalist' is very progressive on gay rights, and that is something we can all celebrate.

[dtowncitylover]

However the point was that Trump, while a 'traditionalist' is very progressive on gay rights, and that is something we can all celebrate.

A true progressive on gay rights would not hire one of the most conservative governors . As a gay man, I find it insulting to believe that Donald Trump who might perceive himself to be progressive on gay rights would choose Mike Pence. He lost all credibility. And don't give me the "he's balancing out the ticket". BS. BS. BS.

[emu steve]

Add the kitchen sink while you're at in terms of where this thread has gone. When will either of them be back to Michigan to grace us with more fun, facts and frivolity!

If we have an African-American poster who supports Trump, he or she could go to a Trump rally and maybe get a shout out: "There is my African-American." [[I think Trump was shocked to see an African-American supporter. Someone must have told him that he has support of 1% African-Americans, but since it is based on a poll, it could be say + / - maybe 5% or more [[small number in the survey). So he could have say -4%. That's bad. Lucifer polls in double digits in national polls of all adults.

[Hypestyles]

what kind of perks does the Detroit Economic Club offer? What does membership get you?

[canuck]

If we have an African-American poster who supports Trump, he or she could go to a Trump rally and maybe get a shout out: "There is my African-American." [[I think Trump was shocked to see an African-American supporter. Someone must have told him that he has support of 1% African-Americans, but since it is based on a poll, it could be say + / - maybe 5% or more [[small number in the survey). So he could have say -4%. That's bad. Lucifer polls in double digits in national polls of all adults.

Trump is an African-American at heart. He has all of Al Jolson's records I'm sure.

[Honky Tonk]

Lucifer polls in double digits in national polls of all adults.

I didn't realize Shillary was doing so good.....

[Wesley Mouch]

A true progressive on gay rights would not hire one of the most conservative governors . As a gay man, I find it insulting to believe that Donald Trump who might perceive himself to be progressive on gay rights would choose Mike Pence. He lost all credibility. And don't give me the "he's balancing out the ticket". BS. BS. BS.

Not every voter is 'single issue'.

I find Trumps position on gay rights rather refreshing. He's generally with the plan, but sees a role for tradition too. I understand why that's not popular with the activists. Its a perfectly reasonable moderate, straightforward position on a divisive issue.

[Zacha341]

Rally's, well, that's one thing. I think your going to have varied races going into the actual booth voting every which way -- saying something else publically. Still some may sit this one out [[privately). But, if the republican party thinks it will have access to the African American vote beyond the token person you see at an event, they must do better than Trump! I feel this is so even with black people who are otherwise conservative in many areas.

If we have an African-American poster who supports Trump, he or she could go to a Trump rally and maybe get a shout out: "There is my African-American." [[I think Trump was shocked to see an African-American supporter. Someone must have told him that he has support of 1% African-Americans, but since it is based on a poll, it could be say + / - maybe 5% or more [[small number in the survey). So he could have say -4%. That's bad. Lucifer polls in double digits in national polls of all adults.

[emu steve]

Rally's well that's one thing. I think you going to have varied races going into the actual booth voting every which way -- saying something else publically. Still some may sit this one out [[privately). But, if the republican party thinks it will have access to the African American vote beyond the token person you see at an event, they must do better than Trump! I feel this is so even with black people who are otherwise conservative in many areas.

Two thoughts:

1). I don't think there is a huge hidden Trump vote. I think huge hidden votes in American elections are now mostly a myth. We didn't see it in the primaries. Lot of the polls were pretty accurate with a few notable exceptions [[e.g., Bernie's win over Hillary in MI), BUT with so many primaries and caucuses a few surprises are to be expected, esp. among caucuses [[caucuses are very different than primaries and regular elections).

2). If I were a Republican leader I'd be very upset where their PARTY is headed. The GOP is doing terribly with African-Americans [[almost unimaginably bad), very badly with Hispanics, Asians, poorly with millennials, struggling with college educated of any race esp. women, etc.

How can a party write off 25% of the electorate [[i.e., African-Americans, Hispanics) without trying to contest those votes?

Can the GOP adapt enough to be appealing to that 25% of the electorate?

One thing for political 'geeks': There is a 'theory' in poli sci that there is kind of an 'imprinting' that goes on for new voters, typically 18 - 29. It basically says that there is a strong relationship between how a young voter votes in his or her first few elections and their voting throughout their lives.

The article I read suggests that the GOP is losing millenials having lost them in 2008, 2012 and presumably 2016 badly to the Dems.

[Pam]

The article I read suggests that the GOP is losing millenials having lost them in 2008, 2012 and presumably 2016 badly to the Dems.

Many of the millenials [[and others) who supported Sanders will be voting Green party in Nov.

https://twitter.com/hashtag/demexit

https://twitter.com/hashtag/JillNotHill?src=hash

[Bham1982]

Can the GOP adapt enough to be appealing to that 25% of the electorate?

Blacks and Latinos are 30% of the U.S. population, and nonwhites overall will be around 40% of the U.S. population by the 2020 Census, thanks to particularly rapid growth among Asians and multiracial.

The Republican party, at least as currently constituted, is at a dead-end. They're writing off basically everyone but old, uneducated white guys.

The bedrock Republican voter, the "country club" Republican type, usually fiscally conservative and socially moderate, is furious right now. Trump is hated in the Bloomfield-type areas. And the Republicans have nothing to offer to women, minorities, young people.

[Bham1982]

Many of the millenials [[and others) who supported Sanders will be voting Green party in Nov.

Jill Stein is a nut. I hope the vast majority of Sanders supporters choose Hillary, esp. in the battleground states.

If the Green party wants to be taken seriously, as in Europe, they need to stop nominating wacky, fringe candidates.