Hillary Clinton on LGBT Teens — Page 4

We talked about transsexuals in my Human Sexuality class today.

Mood: (Still) Ambivalent (on Obama and Clinton)

---

I'm glad it's a different world now.

And I'm glad that Barack Obama will be practicing a different politics if he becomes president.

And I'm glad President Obama won't betray us to placate the black homophobes the way President Clinton was forced to placate the white homopbobes.

And I promise not to say I told you so if he does.

---

Oh PJ! I missed the manhunt joke...but isn't all of manhunt a joke?

Here's the thing too: I'd like to know who came up with the idea for both DADT and DOMA, cause they sound like marketing slogans, which would lead me to believe they were Hillary's idea...of course we'll not know until 2012. Cause she won't let us see her papers--what ya hidin' girl?

I believe that Hillary will support 100% gay rights whether or not she can say so now. I tend to believe that the same can be said of Obama.

"I somehow have a hard time believing that women will ever be able to grow penises, even with stem cells "

It's the same body part when we are in the womb. Thus, with hormones and surgery, it already can transition to some extent. But, it's nowhere as "easy" as transitioning a man to a woman. So, it is believed that stem cell research would be able to aid in that process.

---

Just how big will a stem-cell penis be?

---

I don't believe that they will halt progress. I'm not saying that I believe they will get in there and fight for our rights loud and proud. If anything, I think we all learned how that can backfire--why DADT came to be. I believe they care deeply about civil rights and include us in that.

They certainly won't rail against us like the GOP has and will.

---

I'm not saying that I believe they will get in there and fight for our rights loud and proud.

Well, the 100% did sound kind of definitive.

Jennifer DeNuccio is a SLUT!

Namo, I understand what you are saying. And I have wrestled with whether or not I can vote for someone who says they don't support our right to marriage even if I think that's just the rhetoric they have to speak--with the possibility that it will all end like with Clinton: compromises and seemingly little progress. Sometimes I am all or nothing minded about these issues. Sometimes, I remember that we have to take baby steps. It's very frustrating as I believe we deserve nothing less than full equal rights, but I have to respect the process.

All of that in mind, I have come to the decision that I can vote for Obama or Hillary or Edwards, believing what I have already posted. And, believing that they are infinitely better for us than the GOP.

With Gore's recent comments, he would clearly be my first choice if he were running.

---

No. I haven't been changing my arguments with you. I have only been changing the way to express them to you, especially since you seem to be so confounded by bisexuality and religion. Instead of repeating myself, I try to find a new way to explain what I am thinking. And sometimes that's not easy to do when the topic is particularly complex. Especially, when you pick and prod and twist what I have said to try to "win" an argument.

My stance here hasn't changed, I just realized I didn't word myself very well. And frankly, I'm too tired to fight with you. I don't give a flying crap what you think of me or my views or how I express myself. You already know everything, so why should I think I could enlighten you about anything?

---

How can I prove an opinion? I watch the woman speak on LGBT issues, and I sense something that tells me she is on our side. I look at her voting record on the issues. I look at what she has said and says she will do for us. The only thing I find questionable with her is what she SAYS is her stance on gay marriage. And, I do not believe she really feels that way. I think she and Obama and Edwards know they have to say what they have been saying to get elected. It's just the cold hard truth of this nation right now.

---

And as for your other BS. I don't come to BWW to lay out definitive statements on issues

I never accused you of that, or implying that was your MO, but when you say you believe something 100%, that seems to indicate a pretty definitive stance. I'm sorry that my literal interpretation of 100% upsets you, but ultimately I don't know what to do with that (much like I didn't know what to do with the fact you didn't know what agnostic means).

I try to make definitive statements in my videos.

Oh dear. I guess try is the operative word, though. For what it's worth, I did watch your gays and Christian video, but I didn't understand why it took you ten minutes to say essentially, "You can believe whatever you want as long as you twist the interpretation to suit your means." Discounting the whole of the Old Testament, which is essentially what you're doing isn't really different from most moderate Christians, both those that condone homosexuality and those who don't. Hell, a Jew can be a Christian if they interpret the bible a certain way.

Jerby, the fact remains that you make these "bold" definitive statements that you can't back up. And when you can't back them up you try and put the burden on the person questioning you, getting more and more defensive. That's fine, but it doesn't really make for sound discussion, or a sound belief system for that matter.

I believe that Obama and Clinton include us 100% when they think of civil rights. And at worst, if that % is wrong, they will not halt progress. Got it?

And, as many people in that religion thread posted--I'm not the only person who misuses the term agnostic. So, while I will agree that I and many others have not used that term correctly by current dictionary definitions, I am not off my rocker for having used it that way as MANY people do. Very rare does anyone say Deist.

The problem with you on that issue is that you can not stand it that I am ok with doubt. Doubt used to be a sign of wisdom, but now it is regarded as a weakness. You seem to believe the latter given your comments in that thread. I believe it's just as arrogant to blast people with "There is no God--you are wrong!" as it is to blast people with "There is a God--you are wrong!" I see nothing wrong with "Maybe".

"but I didn't understand why it took you ten minutes to say essentially, "You can believe whatever you want as long as you twist the interpretation to suit your means.""

I was providing evidence for alternative interpretations as well as the huge possibility that the English Bibles have corrupt translations and/or biased interpretations. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

And I created the video to address what I consider to be the biggest obstacle in our getting equal rights in this country--the religious right. Well, I believe there is a religious left. I believe that if you are going to be a Christian, there is another view on the subject. And that view doesn't condemn gays. Why is that so difficult to grasp?

And why is ANY of this so worthy of your antagonism? If I am such a horrible debater or speaker--if I am such a utter failure at communicating these issues, why do you even bother with me?

The fact is that a lot of people have been enthusiastic about those political videos. And the writer of What The Bible Really Says About Homosexuality saw the video himself and was quite fond of it.

---