🇳🇱
People seem to think being a moderate means I'm always in the middle on every issue, like somehow I on the fence about guns and LGBT rights and uncertain about both..
No, It just means I am capable of seeing past dogma and accepting good principles no matter what side of the political fence it lies on. I can completely support gun rights AND completely support LGBT rights at the same time. Hell I say give all the LGBT members guns, they will probably be a lot safer for it.
@freemo that sounds more like "independent" than "moderate" to me. Being moderate has to do with avoiding extremes, while being independent has to do with having little loyalty to any particular party.
Then again, it's certainly possible usage in Holland doesn't quite line up with other regions.
@khird While I agree that "moderate" is about avoiding extremes I wouldnt say that considering arguments from both sides and picking the ones that are ration is somehow an extream.
Supporting LGBT rights is an extreme? I wouldn't say so. But if you support everything that is liberal without consideration of its merit just because its liberal, now thats extreme.
Well yes, that too, I agree.
For example if i supported a law that forced people to use someones pronouns or else face jailtime, I would say that would make me an extreamist.
While I do think one SHOULD use someones pronouns of choice out of respect I do not feel it should be codified into law in a way that would violate free speech principles.
Marriage of equal legal status would be a nice start, equal consideration when adopting would be another.
0With that said i only said supporting lgbt righta, i said nothing about which of those rights were not yet codified into law.
@freemo @khird for the marriage, is it not recognized in the same way legally where it is recognized? or are you talking about getting it recognized legally in more places?
As for equal consideration for adoption, considering this involves a third party that technically cannot give consent, i'd like to see some data on the existing adoptions. Not saying i can't support it, but i don't wanna say i blindly support something cuz it makes me feel like i'm in the right when i don't know all the particulars.
Both. First off they need the right to marry in states where they have no right of any kind. Second in states where their marriage is not consider the same as legal marriage but is instead a civil union with reduced righta under law that too should be fixed.
As for adoption obviously the health of the child should be considered, whi h is why any adoption requires a lot of hoops to jump through including random inspections. But if they can pass the tests they should have the same right to afopt as everyone else.
@khird
@freemo @khird firstly, in states where they have no right of any kind, I'd like to see the arguments against marriage. I've always said I personally don't care which adults want to marry which other adults, but leave religious institutions out of it whether or not it goes against the religion. So if the argument for marriage in those states includes something like "and we need to be able to married in any religion", I can't be for that. If its just legal recognition and whatever else goes along with that, yeah, sure, go ahead.
In states where there is some difference between straight marriage and otherwise legally, yeah, thats kinda shitty. don't approve it half way. have a good argument for or against.
As for adoption, if they pass all the hoops, go right ahead. As long as it is established that for the purposes of adoption the same standard can be applied. And just to preempt, I'm not assuming that a straight couple is the same as a same sex couple or whatever else there is because I don't think that is an assumption that can just be made because on the face of it they very clearly aren't the same or they would also be a straight couple. Which is why I said I need more data on that.
So go read, get yourself informed.
Though I have to wonder, how much reading and research did you have to do before you decided if straights getting married should be allowed.. Did you bother listening to counter arguments on why they shouldnt be allowed to marry... Probably not.
@freemo @khird if straight people should get married? That's one angle of attack I guess? I mean I guess marriage doesn't have to mean anything at all? The only reasons for it (outside of sentimentality) are religion/govt/politics to be fair. Like I'm not arguing against lgbt rights if that is what you are thinking, i'm saying if it exists and its unequal, it needs to be equal. If it doesn't exist, then it should. And i'm specifically talking about recognition by the govt.
While a bit of a tangent, I do agree, an would support, abolishing marriage as a legally recognized status at all. Its a fine stance to take.
But the fact is, that wont happen. If you are willing to accept and support straight people getting married then there is no excuse not to extend that right to non-straight people. Its really as simple as that.
You were the one who said they needed to do research before having an opinion.. dont blame me for saying "ok, go do that"
@freemo @khird I said specifically for the arguments against lgbt marriage. I assume they have them, and I said if its because of something like the lgbt community trying to get more rights than they should (like demanding it be recognized by the church also) then I can't agree with that. So I never argued against it, just against the possible case of seeking unequal rights.
@khird Also...
Independent suggests you are not a member of either party, you do not usually vote for either party, and usually vote for independent candidates (candidates that have no party or are a 3rd party).
Since I am registered with one of the main parties I am not considered a independent. though I sometimes do vote as one. But I am a moderate.
@freemo actually the most annoying criticism of being centrist.
@freemo Quite true! 👍🏾