• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Another anti-gay person comes out of the closet

Diesel

Diesel

Banned
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
2,998
Reaction score
1,114
Location
NYC, USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Aaron Schock is gay. Whatever. Here's what interests me:

While defending himself against all the charges made against him, Schock admitted to one clear regret — being against gay marriage while in office.

Ex-Rep. Aaron Schock comes out as gay, disowned by family

This begs a question that I have been considering for decades. In a representative democracy, when is it appropriate for an elected official to subvert the popular will of their constituency? In this case, we didn't just have a white guy opposing civil rights for black Americans. We had a gay guy opposing civil rights for gay Americans. Not only did he do what was wrong in general, but he did what was wrong for himself. I think that this kind of politician actually damages the society he represents.
 
Politicians of both sides subvert the actual will of some of their constitutions all the time. You can never please everyone, and to think a Republican is going to be on board with non-republican issues, is silly (and vice-versa).
I just hope ex-Rep Schock finds the way to a happiness he worked so hard for others to never be able to obtain.
 
I agree. I think there are too many politicians, mainly republicans, who are hypocrites and can't be trusted to be fair in the regard of civil rights, gay rights or women's rights. I give Schock credit though for finally coming out, there's some more it seems who are still hiding in the closet because their party will reject them if they come out. I also give him credit for acknowledging and appreciating those who worked hard to give all Americans equal rights regardless of sexual orientation.
 
Diesel said:
Aaron Schock is gay. Whatever. Here's what interests me:

While defending himself against all the charges made against him, Schock admitted to one clear regret — being against gay marriage while in office.

Ex-Rep. Aaron Schock comes out as gay, disowned by family

This begs a question that I have been considering for decades. In a representative democracy, when is it appropriate for an elected official to subvert the popular will of their constituency? In this case, we didn't just have a white guy opposing civil rights for black Americans. We had a gay guy opposing civil rights for gay Americans. Not only did he do what was wrong in general, but he did what was wrong for himself. I think that this kind of politician actually damages the society he represents.
Click to expand...


Voters can vote him out of office if they want.
 
Pound4abrown said:
Politicians of both sides subvert the actual will of some of their constitutions all the time. You can never please everyone, and to think a Republican is going to be on board with non-republican issues, is silly (and vice-versa).
I just hope ex-Rep Schock finds the way to a happiness he worked so hard for others to never be able to obtain.
Click to expand...

Some issues aren't political, even though small minds reduce every issue to its political value. That's my point. A person who is so invested in a political effort that he would use a political platform to damage his own self is a psychopath.
 
Old 'N Chill said:
I agree. I think there are too many politicians, mainly republicans, who are hypocrites and can't be trusted to be fair in the regard of civil rights, gay rights or women's rights. I give Schock credit though for finally coming out, there's some more it seems who are still hiding in the closet because their party will reject them if they come out. I also give him credit for acknowledging and appreciating those who worked hard to give all Americans equal rights regardless of sexual orientation.
Click to expand...

I give him an appropriate amount of credit. It's really hard to come out of the closet most times. But this asshole spent a career working against the basic civil rights of other human beings. I hope he will be happy and fulfilled. All people deserve that. But I would spit in his hair if I was standing behind him at a concert.
 
When is it appropriate for an elected official to subvert the popular will of their constituency?

When he or she doesn't believe it is the right thing to do. On the other hand, there are situations where they could go against their "best judgement". So the answer is "it depends".
 
Diesel said:
Aaron Schock is gay. Whatever. Here's what interests me:

While defending himself against all the charges made against him, Schock admitted to one clear regret — being against gay marriage while in office.

Ex-Rep. Aaron Schock comes out as gay, disowned by family

This begs a question that I have been considering for decades. In a representative democracy, when is it appropriate for an elected official to subvert the popular will of their constituency? In this case, we didn't just have a white guy opposing civil rights for black Americans. We had a gay guy opposing civil rights for gay Americans. Not only did he do what was wrong in general, but he did what was wrong for himself. I think that this kind of politician actually damages the society he represents.
Click to expand...

Are homoxexual "rights" superior to my non homosexual rights? Rights for what?
 
Robertinfremont said:
Are homoxexual "rights" superior to my non homosexual rights? Rights for what?
Click to expand...

For starters, the right to get married to someone they love, and the right to be served by a business that is open to the public without being discriminated against. All Americans should have equal rights.
 
Scorps2000 said:
When is it appropriate for an elected official to subvert the popular will of their constituency?

When he or she doesn't believe it is the right thing to do. On the other hand, there are situations where they could go against their "best judgement". So the answer is "it depends".
Click to expand...

While not super helpful, I appreciate your response. Yes, in some cases, there is a right option and a wrong option as opposed to a better and a worse. Sometimes most people support the wrong thing. A leader (as opposed to a politician) will do the right thing even when it opposes popular will. I'm trying to coax this sentiment out of people, but I'm not having a lot of luck.
 
Robertinfremont said:
Are homoxexual "rights" superior to my non homosexual rights? Rights for what?
Click to expand...

See that is the bigoted mind set. Equal rights is not a zero sum game that you seem to think it is. equal means equal, this does not diminish any of your rights.
 
Last edited:
Anyone who practices homosexuality and claims not to practice it is a liar.

Those who practice it suffer its consequences regardless, but to lie and play the hypocrite adds to these consequences. Better to admit the act than to conceal it. This is true for any evil: adultery, addiction, violence, hatred, gambling, etc.

People who adopt positions of leadership receive the stricter judgment, since their misconduct can bring reproach on the values they represent.

Mr. Schock has evidently made a lot of bad decisions in his life. At a glance it doesn't seem he's interested in putting the evil away from him, hence his family is right to cut him off for his own sake. Hopefully in time he'll realize they love him, that the enmity between them is the result of his own damnable conduct, and that values supersede feelings. Hopefully he'll forsake his misconduct. And if/when he does, hopefully his family is eager to forgive and forget his transgressions, wipe the slate clean, and welcome him back without any misgivings or reservations--which is their moral obligation.

Either do what the world wants or else do what's right. These days, it's either one or the other. Mr. Schock has learned the hard way that if you try to do both, you fail in both.
 
Diesel said:
Some issues aren't political, even though small minds reduce every issue to its political value. That's my point. A person who is so invested in a political effort that he would use a political platform to damage his own self is a psychopath.
Click to expand...

Can't say I disagree with all of that. But to be surprised by it? Nah.
 
Pound4abrown said:
No. They should be equal, but aren't. Don't be obtuse.
Click to expand...

I think rights are indeed equal. Options such as fishing licenses, and hold out the state has rights to tax you for getting food are not equal.
 
Robertinfremont said:
I think rights are indeed equal. Options such as fishing licenses, and hold out the state has rights to tax you for getting food are not equal.
Click to expand...

I am going to have to ask you to cry me a river. You are part of the least oppressed demographic in the world. Hell, the known universe.
Sucking it up, may be in order.
 
Diesel said:
Aaron Schock is gay. Whatever. Here's what interests me:

While defending himself against all the charges made against him, Schock admitted to one clear regret — being against gay marriage while in office.

Ex-Rep. Aaron Schock comes out as gay, disowned by family

This begs a question that I have been considering for decades. In a representative democracy, when is it appropriate for an elected official to subvert the popular will of their constituency? In this case, we didn't just have a white guy opposing civil rights for black Americans. We had a gay guy opposing civil rights for gay Americans. Not only did he do what was wrong in general, but he did what was wrong for himself. I think that this kind of politician actually damages the society he represents.
Click to expand...

I think it would be awesome if someone crated a trophy of a sculpture of Larry Craig in an airport men's room and awarded it to one hypocritical "conservative" each time this happens.
 
Robertinfremont said:
Are homoxexual "rights" superior to my non homosexual rights? Rights for what?
Click to expand...

Please elaborate - what is a "non-homosexual right"?

We all anxiously await your exiting response!
 
Robertinfremont said:
Are homoxexual "rights" superior to my non homosexual rights? Rights for what?
Click to expand...

Oh look, it's the dain brammaged language of hate; the idiotic pretense that treating another human being as an equal somehow takes something away from you.

The only thing it takes away is societal advantages that you do not deserve, ill gotten.
 
Last edited:
COTO said:
Anyone who practices homosexuality and claims not to practice it is a liar.

Those who practice it suffer its consequences regardless, but to lie and play the hypocrite adds to these consequences. Better to admit the act than to conceal it. This is true for any evil: adultery, addiction, violence, hatred, gambling, etc.

People who adopt positions of leadership receive the stricter judgment, since their misconduct can bring reproach on the values they represent.

Mr. Schock has evidently made a lot of bad decisions in his life. At a glance it doesn't seem he's interested in putting the evil away from him, hence his family is right to cut him off for his own sake. Hopefully in time he'll realize they love him, that the enmity between them is the result of his own damnable conduct, and that values supersede feelings. Hopefully he'll forsake his misconduct. And if/when he does, hopefully his family is eager to forgive and forget his transgressions, wipe the slate clean, and welcome him back without any misgivings or reservations--which is their moral obligation.

Either do what the world wants or else do what's right. These days, it's either one or the other. Mr. Schock has learned the hard way that if you try to do both, you fail in both.
Click to expand...

Practices? Wow do you practice heterosexually?
 
Robertinfremont said:
I think rights are indeed equal. Options such as fishing licenses, and hold out the state has rights to tax you for getting food are not equal.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to equate the discrimination that gay people have suffered to your having purchase a fishing licenses ?
 
SCrider said:
Are you trying to equate the discrimination that gay people have suffered to your having purchase a fishing licenses ?
Click to expand...

Homosexuals would be treated equally once they learn how. But no, the license example was to show a right that must include a license.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom