Jump to content

Trump Adm targeting children of LGBT couples

30 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Bloo said:

Okay. The amount of back-bending you are doing to defend an idiot policy that is blatantly going to disproportionally affect LGBTQ people is just pathetic. What demographic of married couples cannot conceive children through traditional, natural means? You guessed it. Most LGBTQ married couples. So, it goes without ****ing saying that this bill will be a more pressing issue for LGBTQ people.

 

But, if saying it targets LGBTQ people is so triggering for you, then sure, let’s clarify that this bill ALSO makes adoption less viable even though the “pro-life” party screams about how women should just toss the unborn into the foster system and up for adoption instead of resorting to abortion. So, you have a policy, crafted by conservatives, that hurts LGBTQ people and makes adoption even less viable for women facing an unwanted pregnancy. 

 

SCORE! Feel better?

 

Why are you so mad? :rip: 

 

If a headline/article entirely & intentionally misrepresents information, it’s ok as long as it fits the narrative that “Trump is bad”??? Oh, ok.....

 

And for for the record, there are a ton of heterosexual parents (infertile & fertile) who are either adopting or having invitro-births abroad. And I’d imagine the abroad statistics don’t t differ much from the domestic ones (regarding in-vitro births & adoption) which is to say LGBT people are likely not being disproportion affected by this change. 

 

But sorry I didn’t whip my dick out & circle-jerk to your faux news. :/ 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Bloo said:

Okay. The amount of back-bending you are doing to defend an idiot policy that is blatantly going to disproportionally affect LGBTQ people is just pathetic. What demographic of married couples cannot conceive children through traditional, natural means? You guessed it. Most LGBTQ married couples. So, it goes without ****ing saying that this bill will be a more pressing issue for LGBTQ people.

 

But, if saying it targets LGBTQ people is so triggering for you, then sure, let’s clarify that this bill ALSO makes adoption less viable even though the “pro-life” party screams about how women should just toss the unborn into the foster system and up for adoption instead of resorting to abortion. So, you have a policy, crafted by conservatives, that hurts LGBTQ people and makes adoption even less viable for women facing an unwanted pregnancy. 

 

SCORE! Feel better?

 

If only people actually read the piece and not skim it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, inspiration4 said:

 

Right :skull: 

 

 

If reading beyond headlines, critically thinking, and questioning whether information is being misinterpreted or intentionally misrepresented is “so pedantic to defend right wingers!11” then.... 

 

Guilty

 

And what stats show this disproportionately affects LGBT parents? Your assumption? 

 

 

...isn’t that conjecture? Like, entirely? A massive claim without any hint of foundation? 

....................

 

But really, the extremely sensationalist title says it all: “Trump administration to LGBT parents: Your out of Wedlock kids aren’t criticizens”... 

 

A title that misrepresents a policy change that affects ALL American parents whose children were born outside of the US, and likely, doesn’t affect most LGBT parents.

 

 

 

 

Oh. I thought you were actually looking for an answer, but you were just asking a rhetorical question, I guess. I didn't realize you're a Trump supporter, so I'll just end it here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Witch Privilege said:

Oh. I thought you were actually looking for an answer, but you were just asking a rhetorical question, I guess. I didn't realize you're a Trump supporter, so I'll just end it here.

 

It wasn’t a rhetorical question question, I was genuinely confused about what I read because the content wasn’t matching the headline of the article, nor the title of this thread, and all I saw were replies saying “yaaas he hates gays, been knew1!11” 

 

Then when I read it fully I realized my initial interpretation was accurate, and the entire article was sensationalism masked as journalism. 

 

But apparently when you point out that 1+1 does not equal 4, that makes you a Trump supporter? Umm, ok.  

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites