DiscussMormonism.com

https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/201 ... -resigned/
https://carigervin.substack.com/p/no-13 ... -anti-lgbt

"Since he took office in 2011, Tennessee state Rep. Bill Sanderson (R-Kenton) has voted repeatedly in favor of legislation designed to harm the LGBT community. During that same time period, the 59-year-old Sanderson has also been openly soliciting sex with much younger men on Grindr, a gay hook-up and dating app, both from his home in West Tennessee and in Nashville.

Sanderson’s campaign website states he “is proudly pro-life and pro-family … [and] is leading the charge to defend the rights of the unborn and preserve the values that have defined our families for generations,” adding that he “knows that our nation was founded on conservative, Christian values.” His (now-deleted) campaign Facebook page describes Sanderson as a “Family Man, Small Business Man, Farmer, Public Servant” whose favorite activities include running, working in the yard and “spending time with my dear wife, Marjie

I can not speak to how Aussie's do it (presumably on the Barbie) but it seems that you may not understand that in the United States a politician with "Rep." preceding their name is typically a representative and thus is obliged to vote/legislate according to the will of his or her constituency and not according to personal preference.

subgenius wrote:I can not speak to how Aussie's do it (presumably on the Barbie) but it seems that you may not understand that in the United States a politician with "Rep." preceding their name is typically a representative and thus is obliged to vote/legislate according to the will of his or her constituency and not according to personal preference.

Exactly. Thus, there is nothing wrong with a lawmaker being a thief, liar and philanderer, but making long public speeches with tears in his eyes about how dear he holds Christian values and how he will defend them to the end.

That's not hypocrisy. He's just doing his job.

Amirite?

It's always the ones that scream the loudest. Always.

Chap wrote:

subgenius wrote:I can not speak to how Aussie's do it (presumably on the Barbie) but it seems that you may not understand that in the United States a politician with "Rep." preceding their name is typically a representative and thus is obliged to vote/legislate according to the will of his or her constituency and not according to personal preference.

Exactly. Thus, there is nothing wrong with a lawmaker being a thief, liar and philanderer, but making long public speeches with tears in his eyes about how dear he holds Christian values and how he will defend them to the end.

That's not hypocrisy. He's just doing his job.

Amirite?

Kewl, did not realize that a politician being gay was like a politician being a thief, liar and philanderer.

and for what it's worth, being hypocritical is neither illegal nor a violation of one's oath of office....but please, pass judgment anyway; because you vote style over substance every time…..how is that new Prime Minister and his new cabinet looking? (is it too soon for a Boris thread?)

...but please, pass judgment anyway; because you vote style over substance every time…

In this case, supporting a self-proclaimed “family values” politician that publicly rages against gay folks while privately arranging extracurricular activities via Grindr would be the very definition of voting for ‘style over substance’.

You really should strive to develop a fundamental grasp on the concepts that you think you’re talking about. ; )

Chap wrote: Thus, there is nothing wrong with a lawmaker being a thief, liar and philanderer, but making long public speeches with tears in his eyes about how dear he holds Christian values and how he will defend them to the end.

That's not hypocrisy. He's just doing his job.

Amirite?

subgenius wrote:did not realize that a politician being gay was like a politician being a thief, liar and philanderer.

I thought I'd better cover the whole spectrum for you, so as many as possible of your favourite politicians were in the clear.

But Sanderson? Philanderer certainly:

aussieguy55 wrote:During that same time period, the 59-year-old Sanderson has also been openly soliciting sex with much younger men on Grindr, a gay hook-up and dating app, both from his home in West Tennessee and in Nashville.

Liar? Hmm where did he tell his "dear wife, Marjie" he was going when he met his young friends?

It is of course quite possible to be gay without being anything reprehensible at all. But Sanderson was different ...

subgenius wrote: ... being hypocritical is neither illegal nor a violation of one's oath of office.

Wow, what a relief that must be for a good number of lawmakers!

Finally:

subgenius wrote:how is that new Prime Minister and his new cabinet looking? (is it too soon for a Boris thread?)

Johnson is a liar and a hypocrite. By all means start a thread about him if you think many readers of this board will find the topic interesting.

[Edited for typo]

Welp. Now we see the Trump effect in, uh, full effect. It's cool to be liar and hypocrite as long as you are voting for legislation that your constituents support.

- Doc

Nothing wrong with being gay.

Being Republican and gay, however, forces you to lie (actually, just being Republican is enough).

MissTish wrote:It's always the ones that scream the loudest. Always.

Sure seems that way.

subgenius wrote:being hypocritical is [not] a violation of one's oath of office

Hmm. Let's look at the oath:

“I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

So doing X but concealing that fact from your electors [url]who you know would never have voted for you if they had known you did X[/url], and even telling them how dreadful doing X is and how it should be made illegal - that is "well and faithfully discharg[ing] the duties of the office".

O ... K ... But I wonder how many electors would be happy with the idea that their congressman acts that way?