What rights are you willing to give up?

[mercuryblues]

What rights are the people, who are promoting party unity willing to give up for the good of the party? pick one. Women all over this board have been told that not voting for an anti-choice Dem divides the party. The attempts at shaming us is disgusting. It will be worse if you don't!

American Disability act
Protects persons with disabilities from discrimination in many aspects of life, including employment, education, and access to public accommodations.

Age discrimination act
Prohibits discrimination on the basis of age in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.

Disaster relief and emergency assistance act
Provides for equitable and impartial relief operations, without discrimination on the grounds of race, color, religion, nationality, sex, age, or economic status.

Fair Housing Act
Prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of housing based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, and disability.

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972
Prohibits sex discrimination in education programs that receive federal funds, to increase educational and athletic opportunities for females in schools and colleges nationwide.


Civil Rights Act of 1964: Title VII
Prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin.


Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act
Protecting persons in institutions (including residents in government-run nursing homes, and prisoners) from unconstitutional conditions.

How about the hard fought equal rights marriage?

More to choose from here
http://civilrights.findlaw.com/enforcing-your-civil-rights/civil-rights-laws.html

How about instead, send a clear message that anti-choicers not welcome on the D ticket? How about standing up with women. If you can't do that, get the fuck out of our way. We aren't going back to the back alleys. My impression was that Democrats fight for these rights. Without the most basic and fundamental right a woman can have all other rights are gone. There will be no economic justice for the women forced to birth against her wishes. Once a woman has children her income and promotions start to stagnate.

[boston bean]

1. Good question. I'll await the answers.

[mercuryblues]

3. You and me both

I have been asking this question all day without an answer. Well I did get one answer "none." Apparently it is only women who need to step aside for "party unity"

[pangaia]

7. I am willing to give up left turn on red.

[athena]

4. It's only women's rights that are negotiable.

If we were talking about any other group's rights, there would be widespread outrage, combined with calls to congresspersons, and the person or persons who suggested that the Democratic Party relax its focus on those rights in order to win the votes of Trump supporters would be forced to walk back their comments.

But since we're only talking about women's rights, it's considered merely a "favorite issue" (those were the words used by one DUer), and we feminists are all being hysterical in insisting that our humanity be respected. Instead of the persons who advocated abandoning those rights, it is feminists who are being attacked. Nothing new, really.

[mercuryblues]

5. +1

I asked if a KKK member ran on the Democratic ticket would AfAms be told he/she is great on all other issues, so for the good of the party vote for her/him.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

16. Same sort of situation in my mind.

Did you get any response?

[mercuryblues]

40. Of course not n/t

just look above. Someone thinks this is a joke and willing to give up LEFT turns on red.

[Orrex]

47. If you were actual human beings instead of incubators & ornaments, it wouldn't be an issue

There can be no compromise on women's rights, including reproductive and sexual freedom.

A Democrat who says otherwise is not a Democrat.

[NobodyHere]

6. If the Republicans keep getting elected

Then you'll lose all of them

[mercuryblues]

12. there is that attempt at shaming

How about instead make it very clear that anti-choicers are not welcome on the D ticket? Aren't there enough D's that aren't against a woman's most basic right to run? IOW there is no reason women should be asked to vote for an anti-choicer.

[BainsBane]

24. If you are so anxious to see the party adopt GOP positions?

Why do you even care if the GOP wins?

[hamsterjill]

55. +1

n/t

[NobodyHere]

62. I'd rather vote for someone who agrees with me 75% of the time

than see someone who agrees with me 25% of the time win

[csziggy]

25. So women'd rights get thrown under the bus?

Because the Democratic Party has been playing at turning away from one group after another for a while. Bill Clinton accepted "Don't ask, don't tell" and that delayed LGTB rights for years. In the 1950s and 60s, Democrats continued their acceptance of segregation and voting rights for AAs and the party is still hurting from that blind eye. In fact, that blind eye has continued to ignore voter suppression and I believe that is a major factor in the loss on November 8. Democrats have avoided doing anything about getting citizenship for undocumented people for years - Ronald Reagan did more for providing a path than many Democrats - and now we watch nearly silently while hundreds are brutally arrested, held with no rights at all, and deported to unimaginable conditions.

This is a very uncomfortable echo of what German Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller wrote:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

NO ONE'S right should be ignored. Democrats need to fight for every single person without exception. By whining that we might lose if we don't give up one group or another's rights, we ARE losing them all NOW.

[BainsBane]

26. Because it was always about priviledge

That is the goal. The rhetoric was all artifice.

[Orrex]

48. Yes indeed. For some, when actually called upon to take a stand on this issue...

the first inclination is to prostrate themselves before the mighty Republicans, and to hell with the women getting skewered with coat hangers in back alleys.

[BainsBane]

56. and to work furiously to normalize

anti-choice views. That speaks volumes.

[Orrex]

58. Yes indeed. Quite chilling. (nt)

[NobodyHere]

63. We are losing them right now

And that's because we're losing elections to Republicans.

[LanternWaste]

61. That's certainly a new way to rationalize a dramatic lack of convictions.

That's certainly a new way to rationalize a dramatic lack of convictions.

[tallahasseedem]

8. None.

That is why I will continue to vote for true BLUE DEMOCRATS who do not negotiate basic human rights.

[mercuryblues]

13. Thank you

[tallahasseedem]

14. The fact that there is even...

a post on the front page telling us we need to accept an anti choice candidate makes me sick. This is not the DU I have known and loved for 13 years.

[Demsrule86]

9. Glad you posted this...cheers.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

10. K & R!!!!

[Demsrule86]

11. K&R too.

[shraby]

15. Not one.

[boston bean]

17. Still nothing, eh?

[killbotfactory]

18. The democratic party is not supporting any candidates who are vowing to restrict reproductive rights

So...

Can we focus on expanding rights to a living wage, healthcare, and education?

[musette_sf]

19. "Can we focus on expanding rights"

We must focus on DEFENDING and PROTECTING the sacred civil, human and Constitutional rights of women. We will never "expand" rights if we fail to do so.

[killbotfactory]

37. It's not a trade-off

Women's rights are not subverted by fighting for living wages or healthcare and education as a right.

[mercuryblues]

45. Womens right are subverted

When they do not have control over their own bodies. No other right will matter when forced into child bearing.

[killbotfactory]

60. Womens rights will not ne subverted by economically progressive ideas. Nt

[JTFrog]

20. K&R! nt

[Jersey Devil]

21. One right I will never give up is the right to trash threads, including this one.

I've had enough of this baloney.

[mercuryblues]

42. don't let the door

kick ya
where the good lord split ya.

Women's rights are being put on the auction block and now Democrats are willing and starting to sell them out, along with the republicans.

Without the most basic right to have control over their own bodies, all other rights for women will cease to exist.

[cheapdate]

22. My vote will always go to whatever weakens the power of Republicans

and strengthens the power of Democrats, given the present political arrangement.

And in a forced choice between the lesser of two evils (or the greater of two goods -- same thing) my vote will always go for lesser evil.

[BainsBane]

28. that's not the issue

of course people are going to vote among their choices. We all know that. The problem is that people are insisting on elevating anti-choice, reactionary politicians above liberals. It's not simply a question of dealing with whatever choices you have. It's choosing to force the party away from equal rights toward greater privileged and wealth for a minority.

[cheapdate]

35. My home state (TN) is completely controlled by lunatic Republicans.

They are laying the groundwork for a total abortion ban.

We are committed and working hard to rebuild the state party to take power back from these people.

We have new leadership, new members, a new office, and new energy here at the Rutherford County Democratic Party. We're building our capabilities, reaching out to the community, and gathering new candidates.

There is only so much we can do with the resources available. Our work must remain focused locally and not on out of state politics and out of state races.

We are solidly committed to safeguarding women's health and their right to control their own bodies. We have close relationships with Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and work together on these issues.

[mercuryblues]

43. By doing this

Our work must remain focused locally and not on out of state politics and out of state races.

We are solidly committed to safeguarding women's health and their right to control their own bodies. We have close relationships with Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and work together on these issues.

You are safe guarding women's rights down the line. IMO all anti-choicers belong in the republican party.

[BainsBane]

23. The problem is the calls for unity come from those

who depend on none, or very few, of those. People like them have always been a priority for government. They talk about how the Supreme Court isn't important because their lives are impacted by a Gorsuch or Alito. That is the nature of privilege. And I suppose the fact that the priority demographic only earns 2-8 times the median income and that that they occasionally see a low-priority citizen who has more than them makes them feel they are being exploited. So here we are, with Donald Trump as president and those working to enforce submission to second class citizenship.

[MLAA]

27. Thank you!

Excellent post. Simply excellent. Simply true. Thank you.

[EthanBlue]

29. Difficult.

Very often in politics we have certain agendas we focus on. Just to get say health care passed took a huge fight almost 8 years ago. There were other things that maybe we should have addressed as well, but just getting that into place wasn't an easy fight.

So what happens when we do this? Something falls along the wayside so that we can focus. Even after we get the accomplishment put in place we as a party have to fight like hell just to keep it.

It's a difficult position.

[LostOne4Ever]

30. My most passionate issues is LGBTQ rights

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4]Yet I voted for someone for president who stood before the senate and told the world marriage is the union of a man and woman. A person who lambasted a form for being inclusive of LGBTQ people out of fear of what Fox news might think. A Person who only supported SSM after it reached over 50% popularity.

I passionately support privacy rights, but again I gave this woman my vote despite knowing she voted to gut those rights via the patriot act.

I deeply believe in autonomy rights, but I voted for this someone who said they were willing to compromise on Abortion rights, and chose a VP who supported the Hyde amendment.

I did this because she was the democratic candidate for president and I know that while she had thrown my issues and rights I care about under the bus time after time, that her party in the end had my back on those issues and overall it would protect them.

The Person I did want to be president (lets call him candidate X) lost the primary. His critics said he was a purist who would never compromise; but, he also understood the need to put one's own ego aside for the greater good. He told his supporters that we had to be realisitic and that we should vote for her. So much for him being a purist. Anyway, I voted for her. But many of my fellow supporter didn't want to...and they were all shamed for it.

Now he is telling us to vote for another flawed candidate; because, overall this person would help the party out and all the issues I cared about. But now he and his supporters are being shamed for not demanding Purity. Apparently, party unity only matters around here when its one's favored candidate running.

I have held my nose and supported people who were willing to sacrifice my rights time and time again, because it was for the greater good. Because that is how progress is made. By pushing for your rights and your issues as hard as you can when it is feasible, and then biting your lip and making compromises when the time calls for it. It sucks but so long as you are moving forward you grin and bear it. Two steps forward and one step back is still a net gain of a step forward.

Why? Because if you don't you might not lose just one right but two or three. Or even all of them. When you put purity over the overall greater good you are not protecting that right, but rather putting your ego ahead of everything.

Just look at the situation we are in now. Trump got about the same number of votes as Romney did. Had the same people showed up in 2016 as did in 2012 we would have won. But those people didn't show. And now all the issues and rights Obama fought for are now in jeopardy. Instead of having a person in charge who is willing to sacrifice or endanger just one of our rights, we this overgrown umpaloompa threatening all of them.


Does this mean I think we shouldn't fight to keep these rights relevant to the party? Absolutely not. I will always fight so that the party puts civil rights and liberties first and foremost. But I know that there will be times I have to vote for someone who doesn't agree with me 100%.

When that times comes I will do what I always do: I will check my ego at the desk and vote for the overall greater good.[/font]

[beam me up scottie]

32. Outstanding response!

[QC]

33. Thank you. n/t

[Lordquinton]

36. Where's the rec button?

Best response I've read on the topic.

[PoliticAverse]

38. That response deserves its own separate OP/thread. n/t

Last edited Wed Apr 26, 2017, 05:35 AM - Edit history (1)

[Kentonio]

39. Brilliant post.

[Bettie]

41. Very well said

perfectly stated.

[mercuryblues]

44. Here is her platform on LBGTQ rights

As president, Hillary will:
Fight for full federal equality for LGBT Americans. Hillary will work with Congress to pass the Equality Act, continue President Obama’s LGBT equality executive actions, and support efforts underway in the courts to protect people from discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation in every aspect of public life.
Support LGBT youth, parents, and elders. Hillary will end so-called “conversion therapy” for minors, combat youth homelessness by ensuring adequate funding for safe and welcoming shelters, and take on bullying and harassment in schools. She’ll end discriminatory treatment of LGBT families in adoptions, and protect LGBT elders against discrimination.
Honor the military service of LGBT people. Hillary applauds the Pentagon’s decision to allow transgender personnel to serve openly, and as Commander-in-Chief, she will upgrade service records of LGBT veterans dismissed due to their sexual orientation.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/lgbt-equality/

her voting record

Voted NO on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes. (Jun 2002)
Rated 89% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance. (Dec 2006)
Provide benefits to domestic partners of Federal employees

http://ontheissues.org/hillary_clinton.htm#Civil_Rights

You misrepresented the facts to suit your bias. When your 1st paragraph was easily disproven, I consider the rest of what you wrote also subject to your bias.

[Kaye_NY]

52. Thank you.

I stopped reading at "I gave this woman my vote".

[LostOne4Ever]

65. So what you are saying is that when the facts don't suit your opinion you wont listen?

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4]I think there is a term for this type of behavior...what could it be?

Anyway, as my other post shows, everything I said was 100% FACTUAL.[/font]

[Egnever]

59. Yes her full throated support has been impressive....

Oh wait..

[beam me up scottie]

71. +1

[LostOne4Ever]

64. Everything I stated is a verifiable fact and nothing was misrepresented and I will prove it.

Last edited Thu Apr 27, 2017, 12:26 PM - Edit history (1)

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4]What I said was this:[/font]

[div class="excerpt" style="margin-left:1em; border:1px solid #bfbfbf; border-radius:0.4615em; box-shadow:3px 3px 3px #999999;"]My most passionate issues is LGBTQ rights

Yet I voted for someone for president who stood before the senate and told the world marriage is the union of a man and woman. A person who lambasted a form for being inclusive of LGBTQ people out of fear of what Fox news might think. A Person who only supported SSM after it reached over 50% popularity.

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4]There are three claims here. The first that said candidate stood before the senate and told the world marriage is the union of a man and a woman. Again this is a verifiable fact and here is the proof, a video of her doing just that:[/font]

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4]Further:[/font]

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4]and: [/font]

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4]My second claim was that she got upset about an LGBTQ inclusive form because of Fox News. Again, this is a fact:[/font]

http://www.advocate.com/election/2015/10/01/hillary-clinton-opposed-pro-lgbt-changes-state-department

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4]These are her exact words from the article:[/font]

[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#dcdcdc; padding-bottom:5px; border:1px solid #bfbfbf; border-bottom:none; border-radius:0.4615em 0.4615em 0em 0em; box-shadow:3px 3px 3px #999999;"]Hillary Clinton[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#f0f0f0; border:1px solid #bfbfbf; border-top:none; border-radius:0em 0em 0.4615em 0.4615em; box-shadow:3px 3px 3px #999999;"]“I’m not defending that decision, which I disagree w and knew nothing about, in front of this Congress. I could live w letting people in nontraditional families choose another descriptor so long as we retained the presumption of mother and father. We need to address this today or we will be facing a huge Fox-generated media storm led by Palin et al.”

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4]Again a verifiable fact and exactly as I said it was. Finally, I acknowledged that she did EVENTUALLY come around to supporting SSM, BUT ONLY AFTER it was polling above 50% support. Again, this is easily verifiable:[/font]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/17/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-change-position-same-sex-marriage/

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4]She officially came out in support in March of 2013, but support for SSM reached above 50% back in 2012:[/font]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/162398/sex-marriage-support-solidifies-above.aspx
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion_of_same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4]So again, what I said was a pure fact, and there was no misrepresentation at all. However, YOU misrepresented what I said. You posted her campaign position during the 2016 election, which I never even mentioned:[/font]

[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#dcdcdc; padding-bottom:5px; border:1px solid #bfbfbf; border-bottom:none; border-radius:0.4615em 0.4615em 0em 0em; box-shadow:3px 3px 3px #999999;"]mercuryblues[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#f0f0f0; border:1px solid #bfbfbf; border-top:none; border-radius:0em 0em 0.4615em 0.4615em; box-shadow:3px 3px 3px #999999;"]Here is her platform on LBGTQ rights

As president, Hillary will:
Fight for full federal equality for LGBT Americans. Hillary will work with Congress to pass the Equality Act, continue President Obama’s LGBT equality executive actions, and support efforts underway in the courts to protect people from discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation in every aspect of public life.
Support LGBT youth, parents, and elders. Hillary will end so-called “conversion therapy” for minors, combat youth homelessness by ensuring adequate funding for safe and welcoming shelters, and take on bullying and harassment in schools. She’ll end discriminatory treatment of LGBT families in adoptions, and protect LGBT elders against discrimination.
Honor the military service of LGBT people. Hillary applauds the Pentagon’s decision to allow transgender personnel to serve openly, and as Commander-in-Chief, she will upgrade service records of LGBT veterans dismissed due to their sexual orientation.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/lgbt-equality/

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4]Your exact words. I never mentioned any of that. Then you posted her voting history:[/font]


[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#dcdcdc; padding-bottom:5px; border:1px solid #bfbfbf; border-bottom:none; border-radius:0.4615em 0.4615em 0em 0em; box-shadow:3px 3px 3px #999999;"]mercuryblues[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#f0f0f0; border:1px solid #bfbfbf; border-top:none; border-radius:0em 0em 0.4615em 0.4615em; box-shadow:3px 3px 3px #999999;"]her voting record

Voted NO on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes. (Jun 2002)
Rated 89% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance. (Dec 2006)
Provide benefits to domestic partners of Federal employees

http://ontheissues.org/hillary_clinton.htm#Civil_Rights

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4]I didn't mention her voting record at all. Or her HRC rating (which is still lower than Bernies rating.)

But despite not addressing one thing that I actually said (and quoted above as proof), you then claim I misrepresented facts (Which I have proven I did not) and then you said what I said was disproven when you did no such thing:[/font]

[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#dcdcdc; padding-bottom:5px; border:1px solid #bfbfbf; border-bottom:none; border-radius:0.4615em 0.4615em 0em 0em; box-shadow:3px 3px 3px #999999;"]mercuryblues[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#f0f0f0; border:1px solid #bfbfbf; border-top:none; border-radius:0em 0em 0.4615em 0.4615em; box-shadow:3px 3px 3px #999999;"]You misrepresented the facts to suit your bias. When your 1st paragraph was easily disproven, I consider the rest of what you wrote also subject to your bias.

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4]Again, you didn't disprove a word I said because you didn't address a word I said. Further, I have proven that everything that I did say was 100% true and factual.

The person who is using alternative facts to suit their bias is not me, but you. Maybe before accusing someone of misrepresenting things and being biased you should take a long look in the mirror.[/font]

[hr]

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4]That said, debating Hillary Clinton's less than pristine record on the issue of SSM was not and is not my intention. In fact, I was trying to avoid using her or Bernie Sanders names entirely because I didn't this discussion to become about them. My point was voting for someone who is in favor of curtailing some of your rights for the greater good.

Which is why I am glad you brought up her voting history because that only further proves the point I am making. The video of her calling marriage a union of one man and one woman is from where she was actually arguing against making a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.

You see she was doing the very thing I advocated for: Compromising on part of an issue for the greater good. She was denouncing ever legalizing gay marriage but arguing that if states want to do so they should be allowed to legalize it (ie for states rights). She threw marriage equality under the bus in order to protect states rights.

She and Bill did a similar thing on Don't Ask Don't tell. They campaigned on allowing homosexuals to be allowed into the military, but support for that was nil. In fact, many people in legislature were working on a bill to specifically discriminate against homosexuals in the military. What did she and Bill do?

They passed Don't Ask Don't Tell as a compromise legislation:[/font]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_ask,_don%27t_tell#Origin

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4]She did exactly what advocated in my post, checking your ego at the desk and taking a compromise position for the greater good.[/font]

[beam me up scottie]

70. Another excellent response, thank you!

As the above video shows these are facts not in dispute.

[LostOne4Ever]

85. No, thank YOU for the support! It is very much appreciated! Nt

Last edited Thu Apr 27, 2017, 03:39 PM - Edit history (1)

[beam me up scottie]

93. You're very welcome.

Your posts have been spot on, keep up the good work!

[NurseJackie]

66. An excellent response. Thank you. -- When they go low, we go high!

[LostOne4Ever]

67. You go high by totally misrepresenting facts and telling untruths? That is not the high road. nt

[NurseJackie]

69. I can tell you that I haven't had a post removed in this thread...

... if that's any indication.

[Lordquinton]

79. Good qualifer

[LostOne4Ever]

86. Isn't it? Nt

[LostOne4Ever]

83. Neither have I.

Telling the truth is the high road after all!

[NurseJackie]

88. LOL

[Lordquinton]

91. ...

[beam me up scottie]

92. *snort*

Well played!

[Curmudgeoness]

78. From the link you referred us to:

It is unfair to claim that Hillary has always been a great champion of the LBGTQ community. I agree that she has come around in recent years, but she wasn't always fighting for them.

From your own link:

Gay Rights

Include gender identity in anti-discrimination laws. (Jun 2016)
LGBT people now married on Saturday & fired on Monday. (Feb 2016)
Pledged to sign Employment Non-Discrimination Act. (Apr 2015)

*I re-evaluated & changed my mind on gay marriage. (Jun 2014)*

We have all evolved on gay marriage since 1990s. (Jun 2014)
DOMA discrimination holds us back from a more perfect union. (Jun 2013)
I support gay marriage personally and as law. (Mar 2013)
Telling kids about gay couples is parental discretion. (Sep 2007)
Positive about civil unions, with full equality of benefits. (Aug 2007)
Let states decide gay marriage; they’re ahead of feds. (Aug 2007)
GLBT progress since 2000, when I marched in gay pride parade. (Aug 2007)

*Supports DOMA, which Bill Clinton signed. (Jul 2007)*

Don’t ask don’t tell was an important transition step. (Jun 2007)

*2004:defended traditional marriage;*

2006:voted for same-sex. (May 2007)
Federal Marriage Amendment would be terrible step backwards. (Oct 2006)
Gay soldiers need to shoot straight, not be straight. (Nov 2003)
End hate crimes and other intolerance. (Sep 2000)
Gays deserve domestic partnership benefits. (Feb 2000)
Military service based on conduct, not sexual orientation. (Dec 1999)

[LostOne4Ever]

84. Great points!

[LostOne4Ever]

89. A reminder

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8983126

[retrowire]

81. APPLAUSE excellent

This is exactly what I've been saying as well. Truth.

[LostOne4Ever]

87. The TRUTH will set you free! Nt

[DefenseLawyer]

90. Glad to see there is still some sanity afoot

I'm really hopeful that in what seems, unfortunately, to be a battle for the direction of the Party that people with a realistic understanding of politics will win the day.

[MedusaX]

31. In just 100 days many rights have been put on the chopping block

Legal Residents were denied entry to the country in which they live...

Other Legally protected Residents have been arrested, detained, and in some cases deported...

The family members of those denied entry and arrested/detained/deported have had their families ripped apart and are experiencing the loss 24/7.

Those expressing non-christian religious beliefs are met with verbal attacks and in some cases physical
Assaults....

Citizens & Legal Residents & undocumented residents live in fear of ICE...
children have been kept home from school
Families have withdrawn from their communities for fear that they will be detained.


Free and Appropriate Education has now effectively become a local option... as the Department of Education is no longer committed to public education nor does it actively support the inclusion of Individuals with disabilities....

Students with debt .... and citizens who have investment portfolios no longer have certain basic protections previously afforded by law...

Water, the environment, endangered species are no longer protected and in many cases have been subjected to increased threats...


The right to privacy & to feel safe and comfortable when using a public restroom is long gone....

State governments have already begun to aggressively eliminate equal rights to goods/service access ...replacing those rights with legal discrimination-- in the name of religious freedom...

International Funding / Aid has been restricted to certain healthcare providing organizations in an attempt to restrict the reproductive rights of women worldwide ....

I could go on...
and it has barely been 100 days...
Imagine what will be lost in the 500+/- days between now & the 2018 elections...

This is not a situation in which we have the desire or power to negotiate which rights we keep & which we lose....
And until the KGOP's Majority status is undone,
All rights and freedoms will be subject to infringement and/or elimination....

[mercuryblues]

46. But are Democrats

saying you must accept politicians in the Deomcratic party and vote for them, for party unity?

[padfun]

34. Instead of giving up, I'll trade

What I give up:::
Civil Rights Act of 1964: Title VII
Prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin.

I wont need it anymore since I will be retiring very soon.
Instead, give me these rights:

Prohibition. Lets get rid of it with Marijuana, add it with alcohol. Prohibition is prohibition.
And although it isn't a constitutional issue, I want the right to play online Poker again!!

[SticksnStones]

49. As Democrats why would we want to give up any of those hard fought rights?

But by the time the battle is down to an R or D, that part of the conversation is done. At that point in the process you vote D to stop R.

The battle for more progressive D's must be done during the primaries, duke it out, but the fighting has to stop once the race is down to R or D. You keep the pressure on the D candidate but you join in the overall strategy in that electoral moment: defeat the R's.

Winning is done strategically in a country as diverse as this one. It's the winning part that changes things. Protests highlight the problems but winning brings the change.

I don't get why this isn't simple...

[NurseJackie]

50. Thank you for saying it so perfectly.

How about instead, send a clear message that anti-choicers not welcome on the D ticket? How about standing up with women. If you can't do that, get the fuck out of our way. We aren't going back to the back alleys. My impression was that Democrats fight for these rights. Without the most basic and fundamental right a woman can have all other rights are gone. There will be no economic justice for the women forced to birth against her wishes. Once a woman has children her income and promotions start to stagnate.

I honestly do not understand why anyone so-called progressive or so-called liberal would be willing to negotiate these things away. What kind of egotistical self-serving politician would be willing to use our rights as a bargaining-chip? It's all just beneath contempt. I won't stand for it.

[Skidmore]

51. No back alleys and

no barefoot and pregnant because outlawing birth control is on the list of the religious extremists. We need to add to the OP list the constituional right to not have religion forced on us.

[CrispyQ]

53. I will never vote for an anti-choice candidate.

If that's the best dem candidate that the party can get, then the party isn't working hard enough at recruiting solid dem candidates.

[hamsterjill]

54. I'm not giving up any of my rights.

Your OP is spot on.

Frankly, I'm sick to death of the discussion of "for the sake of party unity". I am a Democrat for a reason. I don't think we need to change our platform and ideas to attract new voters. I think we need to work on convincing those voters that the Democratic platform is better for 99% of Americans than the Republican platform. For those who cannot see reason, forget about them. Trump did not win without help. We need to concentrate on exposing the inequity of elections.

The Democratic platform has always favored choice and equality. I do not want that to change, and if we start chipping away at that principle, it will change and the Republicans will have done what they wanted. We need candidates who reflect that platform and if we don't have one in a race, then we need more candidates available to us.

I'm not voting for anyone who believes a woman a murderer for having a medical procedure. It's no one else's business but the woman's.

I am a pro-choice Democrat and that is not likely to change. I think the movement to accept a different platform is ridiculous. If we move to the center, we become Republican-lite. We should be proud of our principles, fight for them, and in fact, insist upon them.

[rock]

57. I generally maintain that all rights are inalienable

You can't give them up though you can decline to exercise them. Just not give them up.

[loyalsister]

68. Mine have already been taken

I cannot fully enjoy my rights under ADA because when I declared bankruptcy my student loans were exempt. Taking advantage of the anti-discrimination in the workplace would do more harm than good because the student loan relief programs only go so far and even SS disability payments can be garnished.

[Squinch]

72. Kick

[Squinch]

73. Kick

[Squinch]

74. Kick

[Squinch]

75. Kick

[Squinch]

76. I'm bookmarking this thread to be used as a reply to anyone who defends that shit about

"This right is expendable because we have more important things to attend to."

So sick of that bullshit, I can't tell you.

[NurseJackie]

77. Excellent idea.

[cwydro]

80. K and r. nt

[musette_sf]

82. K & f'n R !!