LGBTQ Elected Officials’ Letter to the 116th Congress

[Sougra]

There's a difference between nihilism and just basing things off of what has happened in the past. And most letter to Congress are rarely addressed unless they're something that fits in what that Congress want to enact. At least, that's how it seems to me.

Sounds like a self-fulfilling prophesy to me.

(is that how "prophesy" is spelled? It doesn't look right, but the browser seems to like it... )

Most people are not the ones writing to Congress, but are bystanders and it's spelled with a "c" from what I recall. Calling your congressman is important and should be done, but I doubt everyone in NSG who can do that actually does. We talk politics, but don't enact them. We're commenting on the likelihood of these words being heard and then implemented, which from what I know about Congress is minimal at best. Doesn't mean it shouldn't be advocated for by people, but we'd need to take more steps than just talking about it on social media, on NS, or with friends. We need to contact the ones representing us, otherwise to them this is just another idea that they can disregard or ignore with little repercussion, as it doesn't effect their standing much. However, if even one Republican Congressman comes out and bring this up, then it's a whole different situation, although I doubt that'll happen due to party allegiances.

[The Niceties of Normal Moral Constraints]

Sounds like a self-fulfilling prophesy to me.

(is that how "prophesy" is spelled? It doesn't look right, but the browser seems to like it... )

"Prophecy"

Huh, apparently I accidently-ed into a relatively uncommon more Middle Englishy spelling

TIL.

[Hrythingia]

Why do you think its appropriate to legislate that someone be forced to provide you a service?

I think its inappropriate deny people access to what they need to survive, on the basis on their characteristics which have no bearing on the capacity to engage in free exchange, and then somehow claim we're engaged in "free" anything in particular.

It is inappropriate, but that doesn't necessarily equate to it being needed to be considered as unlawful.

[Kannap]

I assure you that I, and millions of other LGBT people living in the United States, never forget about all the rights we lack that every other citizen has.

Join the club, everyones rights are little more than political footballs nowadays for the other side to kick around.

Sure it'd be great if we could just treat LGBT people and everyone else like normal people and just respect everyones rights but that isn't going to happen because of politics and no amount of letters will change that.

That may very well be the case, but that doesn't mean the best option is to lay down and take it. We've been fighting for our equal rights for 50 years, no point in giving up now.

[Hrythingia]

They may not have any effect whatsoever but it still ought to be his choice. he owes you nothing so if he says no, unlucky. He's not denying access to anything other than the services he provides which he likely does not run a monopoly on. Why do you think its appropriate to legislate that someone be forced to provide you a service?

If you're opening your doors to serve the public, you serve the public, end of story.

No. Its your business you run it as you wish, unless you're selling magic mushrooms to children or have a mortar factory in your shed or something. I have a bad customer service model that will come to bit me in the arse if it so upsets people.

[Valrifell]

"Prophecy"

Huh, apparently I accidently-ed into a relatively uncommon more Middle Englishy spelling

TIL.

Sounds like a vestige of the American spelling reforms that didn't get adopted quite as widespread.

[The Niceties of Normal Moral Constraints]

Exactly, the law is that you can't discriminate on the matter of race, religion, national origin, sex, etc, so I don't understand why that line stops at sexual orientation.

Homogenous money isn't as green, or something?

Hell, if anything doesn't belong it's religion, but I won't speak out to remove it because I'm a Christian.

Could not disagree more strongly, and I'm a godless atheist

(Something, something, playing into their hand, etc.)

[Kannap]

Sounds like a self-fulfilling prophesy to me.

(is that how "prophesy" is spelled? It doesn't look right, but the browser seems to like it... )

Most people are not the ones writing to Congress, but are bystanders and it's spelled with a "c" from what I recall. Calling your congressman is important and should be done, but I doubt everyone in NSG who can do that actually does. We talk politics, but don't enact them. We're commenting on the likelihood of these words being heard and then implemented, which from what I know about Congress is minimal at best. Doesn't mean it shouldn't be advocated for by people, but we'd need to take more steps than just talking about it on social media, on NS, or with friends. We need to contact the ones representing us, otherwise to them this is just another idea that they can disregard or ignore with little repercussion, as it doesn't effect their standing much. However, if even one Republican Congressman comes out and bring this up, then it's a whole different situation, although I doubt that'll happen due to party allegiances.

This happened yesterday, but I'm not sure it really matters much because he's not remaining in office. This could just be a last thing to say to make himself look good in his retirement, or it could be him being genuine - but if it's the latter then it's a shame he won't be in office to continue pushing this ideal.

[The Niceties of Normal Moral Constraints]

I think its inappropriate deny people access to what they need to survive, on the basis on their characteristics which have no bearing on the capacity to engage in free exchange, and then somehow claim we're engaged in "free" anything in particular.

It is inappropriate, but that doesn't necessarily equate to it being needed to be considered as unlawful.

Where the law prevents people from becoming homeless (denial of home loans, etc), destitute (denial of education, denial of business loans, etc), hungry (denial of ability to buy food, etc), or disenfranchised (denial of voting rights), the appropriateness of that law should be self-evident.

[Jello Biafra]

They may not have any effect whatsoever but it still ought to be his choice. he owes you nothing so if he says no, unlucky. He's not denying access to anything other than the services he provides which he likely does not run a monopoly on. Why do you think its appropriate to legislate that someone be forced to provide you a service?

Great idea. 'Hey, this hospital is not one where black people can come, so send him to the hospital fifty miles away. I know he's bleeding heavily, but since we don't have a monopoly on medical services we should be allowed to deny treatment to people based on the color of their skin.'

[Washington Resistance Army]

Join the club, everyones rights are little more than political footballs nowadays for the other side to kick around.

Sure it'd be great if we could just treat LGBT people and everyone else like normal people and just respect everyones rights but that isn't going to happen because of politics and no amount of letters will change that.

That may very well be the case, but that doesn't mean the best option is to lay down and take it. We've been fighting for our equal rights for 50 years, no point in giving up now.

Nor should you give up, but with the makeup of the court and the Senate you're probably not gonna get much done for a few decades.

Which is rather obnoxious really and shouldn't be the case.

[Hrythingia]

It is inappropriate, but that doesn't necessarily equate to it being needed to be considered as unlawful.

Where the law prevents people from becoming homeless (denial of home loans, etc), destitute (denial of education, denial of business loans, etc), hungry (denial of ability to buy food, etc), or disenfranchised (denial of voting rights), the appropriateness of that law should be self-evident.

But there are other places to go. If the state ran the distribution of all those services and was denying them then aye, there'd be a problem but if those services are run by many many private companies then its up to them. Chances are more will be willing to cater for you than won't. And if none will then obviously society has a problem with you, in which case the problem is larger.

[Sougra]

Most people are not the ones writing to Congress, but are bystanders and it's spelled with a "c" from what I recall. Calling your congressman is important and should be done, but I doubt everyone in NSG who can do that actually does. We talk politics, but don't enact them. We're commenting on the likelihood of these words being heard and then implemented, which from what I know about Congress is minimal at best. Doesn't mean it shouldn't be advocated for by people, but we'd need to take more steps than just talking about it on social media, on NS, or with friends. We need to contact the ones representing us, otherwise to them this is just another idea that they can disregard or ignore with little repercussion, as it doesn't effect their standing much. However, if even one Republican Congressman comes out and bring this up, then it's a whole different situation, although I doubt that'll happen due to party allegiances.

This happened yesterday, but I'm not sure it really matters much because he's not remaining in office. This could just be a last thing to say to make himself look good in his retirement, or it could be him being genuine - but if it's the latter then it's a shame he won't be in office to continue pushing this ideal.

Cool. But I doubt the Republicans will heed his words, even if I agree with them. I think we can both agree on the fact that more needs to be done by the people advocating for change, especially change as important as this.

[The Niceties of Normal Moral Constraints]

Huh, apparently I accidently-ed into a relatively uncommon more Middle Englishy spelling

TIL.

Sounds like a vestige of the American spelling reforms that didn't get adopted quite as widespread.

I googled both spellings. Apparently, one's a noun and the other's a verb.

[Valrifell]

Sounds like a vestige of the American spelling reforms that didn't get adopted quite as widespread.

I googled both spellings. Apparently, one's a noun and the other's a verb.

Ah, so to prophesy is the act of giving out a prophecy.

That's just annoying, I hate English, who's idea was that.

[The Niceties of Normal Moral Constraints]

But there are other places to go.

You assume.

Appropriate civil rights legislation is a big legal step towards ensuring it, or making it so if necessary.

And if none will then obviously society has a problem with you, in which case the problem is larger.

See also: the entire fucking history of discrimination and civil rights ever.

LGBTQ as a protected category didn't just fall out of the sky into the middle of a historical vaccum. "If none will" is precisely the historical horror we're trying to avoid here, thanks.

[Hrythingia]

But there are other places to go.

You assume.

Appropriate civil rights legislation is a big legal step towards ensuring it, or making it so if necessary.

And if none will then obviously society has a problem with you, in which case the problem is larger.

See also: the entire fucking history of discrimination and civil rights ever.

LGBTQ as a protected category didn't just fall out of the sky into the middle of a historical vaccum. "If none will" is precisely the historical horror we're trying to avoid here, thanks.

If no one is willing to serve LGBTQ people then society is not ok with them in which case they should probably go underground.

[The Niceties of Normal Moral Constraints]

I googled both spellings. Apparently, one's a noun and the other's a verb.

Ah, so to prophesy is the act of giving out a prophecy.

That's just annoying, I hate English, who's idea was that.

Well, according to Google, Old French is etymologically implicated for each, and there's lots of crazy conjugation in French.

So, the French.

</bulletproof linguistcs>

[Hrythingia]

I googled both spellings. Apparently, one's a noun and the other's a verb.

Ah, so to prophesy is the act of giving out a prophecy.

That's just annoying, I hate English, who's idea was that.

It is the finest language in God's green earth. Also helps that God himself is an Englishman, but thats off topic.

[The Niceties of Normal Moral Constraints]

If no one is willing to serve LGBTQ people then society is not ok with them in which case they should probably go underground.

Or, bigots (generally speaking) can fuck off and everyone lives in the light.

Yep, going with that, thanks again.

[Kannap]

You assume.

Appropriate civil rights legislation is a big legal step towards ensuring it, or making it so if necessary.



See also: the entire fucking history of discrimination and civil rights ever.

LGBTQ as a protected category didn't just fall out of the sky into the middle of a historical vaccum. "If none will" is precisely the historical horror we're trying to avoid here, thanks.

If no one is willing to serve LGBTQ people then society is not ok with them in which case they should probably go underground.

Wow, we're really setting the bar low for ideas early this thread.

[Hrythingia]

If no one is willing to serve LGBTQ people then society is not ok with them in which case they should probably go underground.

Or, bigots (generally speaking) can fuck off and everyone lives in the light.

Yep, going with that, thanks again.

No, bigots can be bigoted if they want. If the society you live in doesn't like you you can always migrate away somewhere absurd like the Netherlands or wherever.

[Western Vale Confederacy]

Or, bigots (generally speaking) can fuck off and everyone lives in the light.

Yep, going with that, thanks again.

No, bigots can be bigoted if they want. If the society you live in doesn't like you you can always migrate away somewhere absurd like the Netherlands or wherever.

Well, my fellow autistic friends, guess I'll pack up and leave the United States of "Death by easily preventable disease is preferable to autism/bleach is a legitimate cure for autism".

[The Niceties of Normal Moral Constraints]

They may not have any effect whatsoever but it still ought to be his choice. he owes you nothing so if he says no, unlucky. He's not denying access to anything other than the services he provides which he likely does not run a monopoly on. Why do you think its appropriate to legislate that someone be forced to provide you a service?

Great idea. 'Hey, this hospital is not one where black people can come, so send him to the hospital fifty miles away. I know he's bleeding heavily, but since we don't have a monopoly on medical services we should be allowed to deny treatment to people based on the color of their skin.'

It's not my fault you're so full of blood. Why are you compelling my labor like I'm some sort of slave?

Or something like that?

No, bigots can be bigoted if they want. If the society you live in doesn't like you you can always migrate away somewhere absurd like the Netherlands or wherever.

Forced migration/cleansing, is there anything it cann...

No, fuck it, I can't even finish that sarcastically.

[Hrythingia]

Great idea. 'Hey, this hospital is not one where black people can come, so send him to the hospital fifty miles away. I know he's bleeding heavily, but since we don't have a monopoly on medical services we should be allowed to deny treatment to people based on the color of their skin.'

It's not my fault you're so full of blood. Why are you compelling my labor like I'm some sort of slave?

Or something like that?

That sort of thing is likely dealt with by the Hippocratic oath or something. Refusing to save a dying person is just generally shitty regardless of who they are.