Reading other articles it seems like no, he was generally very positive and encouraging to others online. The impression I get (from 10 minutes of reading, not saying this conclusively) is that he was not overtly hostile whatsoever to trans people.
There are enormous social pressures in small conservative towns, and the man was 63. I can imagine life leading someone otherwise pro-trans into being a republican preacher in that environment. An awful tragedy
Because they (wrongly) believe that being “one of the good ones” will save them from being targeted by republicans and their proposed legislation like Project 2025
That doesn’t mean people who have previously voted red are in the wrong (lots of internalized homophobia can lead to opposite beliefs). But once you realize your identity and continue to vote against yours and other people’s human rights, you’re absolutely in the wrong.
Pretty sure there were slaves that actively sought to maintain slavery. In some cases, they had relatively decent lives compared to other slaves and even some free black people.
But it’s not just “an issue”. We are talking about a demographic and their legal recognition. No I’m sorry but we cannot agree to disagree on something so fundamental as equal treatment of people.
Disagreeing on policy is one thing; disagreeing on human rights is another. You cannot be a Republican and have respect for queer rights at the same time. It has to be a 100% deal-breaker.
I’m not sure what you’re talking about. There are tons of Republicans who support gay rights in some fashion, even if it’s not a majority position within the party.
No, there are precisely zero Republicans who support gay rights. What you’ve cited is a poll showing some who claim to, but are lying. Their deeds, not their words, prove their true intentions.
How likely are those Democrats to get bullied to the point of suicide if their “secret” of being against increased gun control was to come out? Or to preemptively commit suicide in anticipation of the bullying they’re going to receive?
This is not the same thing. Democrats are, generally speaking, flexible about a lot of their positions. It’s how they wind up with problem members like Manchin and Sinema. The Republican party is very different.
That’s not the right comparison. He didn’t commit suicide because he was ashamed of supporting gay rights, he was ashamed of wanting to cross dress and of having engaged in the activity. Regardless of politics, that’s a pretty uncommon behavior. Most people don’t want other people to know they’re a sexual deviant of some kind. I’d guess that this behavior is much more maligned in conservative circles than liberal or left, for sure, but the point is that it’s not just the breaking from the standard beliefs of that side.
It says he hasn’t posted or supported anything publicly so he wasn’t a hypocrite, he belonged to the wrong party though, I do feel bad for his family because he doesn’t seem to be a right wing asshole
deleted by creator
Reading other articles it seems like no, he was generally very positive and encouraging to others online. The impression I get (from 10 minutes of reading, not saying this conclusively) is that he was not overtly hostile whatsoever to trans people.
There are enormous social pressures in small conservative towns, and the man was 63. I can imagine life leading someone otherwise pro-trans into being a republican preacher in that environment. An awful tragedy
This. People are complicated, even when it is inconvenient.
Except for being a member of the anti LGBTQ party.
Yeah, but so is Caitlyn Jenner…
How anybody takes someone like that seriously is beyond me
You’ve got me. I don’t understand why any trans person would be a Republican, but I guess money trumps all when you’re rich.
Because they (wrongly) believe that being “one of the good ones” will save them from being targeted by republicans and their proposed legislation like Project 2025
That doesn’t mean people who have previously voted red are in the wrong (lots of internalized homophobia can lead to opposite beliefs). But once you realize your identity and continue to vote against yours and other people’s human rights, you’re absolutely in the wrong.
Pretty sure there were slaves that actively sought to maintain slavery. In some cases, they had relatively decent lives compared to other slaves and even some free black people.
You can disagree with your party on one issue. There are tons of Democrats who are opposed to increased gun control, for example.
But it’s not just “an issue”. We are talking about a demographic and their legal recognition. No I’m sorry but we cannot agree to disagree on something so fundamental as equal treatment of people.
It’s not comparable gun control.
I’m talking about whether people are physically capable of breaking with their party on a single issue. They obviously are.
Gallup poll
Good luck trying to get the terminally online to understand the nuances and complexities of the human condition
Disagreeing on policy is one thing; disagreeing on human rights is another. You cannot be a Republican and have respect for queer rights at the same time. It has to be a 100% deal-breaker.
I’m not sure what you’re talking about. There are tons of Republicans who support gay rights in some fashion, even if it’s not a majority position within the party.
Gallup poll
No, there are precisely zero Republicans who support gay rights. What you’ve cited is a poll showing some who claim to, but are lying. Their deeds, not their words, prove their true intentions.
How likely are those Democrats to get bullied to the point of suicide if their “secret” of being against increased gun control was to come out? Or to preemptively commit suicide in anticipation of the bullying they’re going to receive?
This is not the same thing. Democrats are, generally speaking, flexible about a lot of their positions. It’s how they wind up with problem members like Manchin and Sinema. The Republican party is very different.
That’s not the right comparison. He didn’t commit suicide because he was ashamed of supporting gay rights, he was ashamed of wanting to cross dress and of having engaged in the activity. Regardless of politics, that’s a pretty uncommon behavior. Most people don’t want other people to know they’re a sexual deviant of some kind. I’d guess that this behavior is much more maligned in conservative circles than liberal or left, for sure, but the point is that it’s not just the breaking from the standard beliefs of that side.
And that, right there, is exactly my point.
I would imagine that becoming mayor in certain parts of the country is much easier if you’re a member of the dominant party in the region.
Or existing in society at all. Sometimes in those parts of the country the first question upon meeting someone is “what church do you go to”.
He didn’t have to become mayor.
No, he didn’t. But people get to want things. Sometimes they want things for themselves, sometimes they want things for their communities.
It’s a feature, not a bug.
He was a Baptist minister too…
I don’t think many of them preach acceptance of LGBT
Removed by mod
Some do. It’s just correlation because low church denominations like Baptists suit rural areas more than being at the behest of a large denom.
https://www.parkroadbaptist.org/
He was a Republican so yes he voted repeatedly to hurt LGBTQ people AS LONG AS IT WASNT HIM
If you read the article, it said, about halfway through, that he never spoke up on LGBTQ issues despite being a Republican.
It says he hasn’t posted or supported anything publicly so he wasn’t a hypocrite, he belonged to the wrong party though, I do feel bad for his family because he doesn’t seem to be a right wing asshole