undefined | Better HN

0 pointsfennecfoxen11y ago0 comments

According to this piece:

(a) Miscellaneous fundamentalist elements of the Christian right who clearly don't support gays have been doing miscellaneous agitation through their missionary arms; African churches have been lobbied (in the passive voice) "to drop ties with mainstream Christian groups." I'm not sure who these shadowy figures are, but it sounds like they're not mainstream.

(b) Everyone is helping support the death penalty for gay people because the Obama administration gave the Museveni regime cash and military aid.

This situation seems problematic. However, notably absent is commentary about people who "say they support gays but are against gay marriage" lending any form of material support through their actions. Is it possible you have conflated several of your political enemies? It's an easy mistake to make, we pretty much all do it from time to time...

0 comments

Alex391711y ago

> I'm not sure who these shadowy figures are, but it sounds like they're not mainstream.

My understanding is that they are actually quite mainstream:

http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?story...

E.g. they include several prominent senators and congressman. I'll admit that I don't know for a fact that the exact same people have said they support gay people, but I still think my comment is valid because that's basically the right-wing party line and these are folks at the very top of the Republican party.

Again I'm not saying that if the left had a monopoly on politics that they wouldn't do a terrible job, only that I think they have less of a propensity to say they want X when really what they want is Y.

E.g. when they say they want to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% because that's what climatologists say is necessary to prevent runaway climate change, I don't get the feeling that what they really want is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 100%.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse