Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is amusing. So far, all these claims about Graham's "destructive LGBT" policies. And yet not one has been cited. I guess it's just easier for lazy people to make claims and hope no one calls them on it.

voted to ban gay adoption.

In 1999, dolt. Obama was against gay marriage until 2012, and probably against gay adoption back in 1999 too.

"Follow the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015, Graham released the following statement: "I am a proud defender of traditional marriage and believe the people of each state should have the right to determine their marriage laws. However, the Supreme Court has ruled that state bans on gay marriage are unconstitutional, and I will respect the Court's decision. "

dolt

"proud defender of traditional marriage"

dolt

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He voted to ban gay marriage. What a hypocrite. Maybe he's being paid off by the gay escort union.

Basically every boomer voted against gay marriage. SCOTUS had to legalize it because politicians wouldn't touch it. So, LG is normal.

Right, so it's ok for Lindsey to say the government can interfere on you in your bedroom, but no one can peep on him? I don't think so. Hipocrisy ain't normal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is amusing. So far, all these claims about Graham's "destructive LGBT" policies. And yet not one has been cited. I guess it's just easier for lazy people to make claims and hope no one calls them on it.

Wrong. You didn't read the whole thread and you're calling others lazy?

I read the entire thread. Not sure what you're talking about. It's a thread full of lazy, gossipy liberals trying to fan the flames of nasty rumors and innuendo in order to shame a gay man. No facts whatsoever. LAZY.

Why would being gay shame him?

So you are in favor of outing gay people? That's okay with liberals?

I'm not a liberal. But there is a big difference between outing someone and shaming them. You claimed that people on this thread are trying to shame him. Why would hiring sex workers of the same sex shame him? Either there is nothing wrong with this or there is. Which is it?

False dichotomy. Gay people don't owe you an explanation of their preferences. And given that the world is hostile to them, outing them as gay, against their wishes, is a violation. It's called consent.

I'm sorry but there is no legal basis for this "consent." You don't have to get someone's consent to say truthful things about them in public. You seem like you want to ironically throw liberal talking points into this discussion. But you aren't doing it right. And I'm not a liberal so I don't care about vague notions of "consent."

It's not a legal argument. I'm not an attorney. This is a moral argument. If people choose to keep an aspect of their lives secret, especially one that could cause them harm when they travel or interact with people (being gay is illegal in many countries) it's not for you to decide otherwise for them. I don't care if you don't see that. Liberals claim to respect these principles and that is the issue at hand.

Perhaps this would be true if he weren't breaking the law. Prostitution is illegal. Senators don't get to keep breaking the law secret.

It's not clear he broke the law. You could drive a truck through prostitution laws and as long as he used one of the common loopholes, he didn't break the law.

Sounds expensive.

In November 2013, Graham voted against S.815 - the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2013, which "Prohibits covered entities (employers, employment agencies, labor organizations, or joint labor-management committees) from engaging in employment discrimination on the basis of an individual's actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity."[6]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is amusing. So far, all these claims about Graham's "destructive LGBT" policies. And yet not one has been cited. I guess it's just easier for lazy people to make claims and hope no one calls them on it.

voted to ban gay adoption.

In 1999, dolt. Obama was against gay marriage until 2012, and probably against gay adoption back in 1999 too.

"Follow the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015, Graham released the following statement: "I am a proud defender of traditional marriage and believe the people of each state should have the right to determine their marriage laws. However, the Supreme Court has ruled that state bans on gay marriage are unconstitutional, and I will respect the Court's decision. "

dolt

Anonymous wrote:He voted to ban gay marriage. What a hypocrite. Maybe he's being paid off by the gay escort union.

Basically every boomer voted against gay marriage. SCOTUS had to legalize it because politicians wouldn't touch it. So, LG is normal.

Anonymous wrote:Interesting

Trump is a provocateur who says things to rile people up. If the people of SC were to have an issue with LG being gay we would have known that the first 5B times this rumor was passed around. Literally no one who is anyone in the GOP cares.

He voted to ban gay marriage. What a hypocrite. Maybe he's being paid off by the gay escort union.

Interesting

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is so ugly. Yes, the guy should be defeated at the ballot box. No, he won’t be in S Carolina. No, he has no spine after turning on his friend, McCain, and sucking up to Trump. Yes, he is the world’s biggest hypocrite.

But outing him like this is just ugly. I hope this story slinks back to the sewers where it belongs.

Disagree. He has contributed to the anti gay agenda. If it’s simply- LG has sex with men, why on its face would that be politically damaging? It’s because of who LG hoods himself out to be. Facts matter. He’s fans shouldn’t give AF- but they likely will. And this could be a chance for LG to change the narrative on the role sexuality should play in politics. Big hint, it shouldn’t.

LG already railed against Rush Limbaugh's statements about Mayor Pete being gay as a disqualifier. But the fact that LG is gay doesn't require him to become a gay activist. He's allowed to just be a regular person, dealing with standard political issues. He doesn't have to "change the narrative." He has made clear that gay people should have equal rights. Now let him be equal too. This is what inflames me about liberals. Only cisgender straight white males get to be regular people with diverse views. If your identity is any different from that, and you dare to think unauthorized thoughts, you're a hypocrite, a traitor, etc. Kanye West was right when he said that the only thing the left offers is mental slavery. You'll be nice to minorities if they do what you say. But you're not actually nice or you wouldn't be delighting in outing LG. No one owes you anything. They don't owe you a larger portion of their paycheck so that it can be redistributed, they don't owe you allegiance simply because you claim to support their demographic, and they don't owe you an explanation about if or how they screw. You don't own people.

Anonymous wrote:This is so ugly. Yes, the guy should be defeated at the ballot box. No, he won’t be in S Carolina. No, he has no spine after turning on his friend, McCain, and sucking up to Trump. Yes, he is the world’s biggest hypocrite.

But outing him like this is just ugly. I hope this story slinks back to the sewers where it belongs.

Disagree. He has contributed to the anti gay agenda. If it’s simply- LG has sex with men, why on its face would that be politically damaging? It’s because of who LG hoods himself out to be. Facts matter. He’s fans shouldn’t give AF- but they likely will. And this could be a chance for LG to change the narrative on the role sexuality should play in politics. Big hint, it shouldn’t.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is amusing. So far, all these claims about Graham's "destructive LGBT" policies. And yet not one has been cited. I guess it's just easier for lazy people to make claims and hope no one calls them on it.

Wrong. You didn't read the whole thread and you're calling others lazy?

I read the entire thread. Not sure what you're talking about. It's a thread full of lazy, gossipy liberals trying to fan the flames of nasty rumors and innuendo in order to shame a gay man. No facts whatsoever. LAZY.

+1. Not a single, specific example of LG voting to harm gay people. Lots of innuendo that he could be blackmailed since he is gay. Which interestingly! Used to be a justification for not allowing gay people to have security clearances until it was shot down as discriminatory. My take away: the left is now promoting discrimination against gays.

Lol. HE VISITED PROSTITUTES! I'm 100% sure this is automatic disqualification for security clearances. It is illegal and immoral. His constituents deserve to know that their lawmaker breaks the laws.

He did not visit prostitutes. 14 year olds are under the age of consent so therefore they cannot be prostitutes. The trouble with Lindsey is, the older he gets, the younger the boys are. That is the problem. He should resign for his evil exploitation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's be liberal about this. If he paid them what they asked for and tipped nicely on top of that what he does on his own time is kind of stormy danielsy. Give Lindsey a pass here.

Because he is clearly trumps puppet, he is a horrific lawmaker, he supports policies that are damaging to LGBTQ people… He doesn’t have the right to stay in the closet given the way he treats this country. He is despicable

This. Graham is entitled to love/be attracted to/sleep with any consenting adult he chooses. His sexuality is his own. But the utter hypocrisy of this man who stands against LGTBQ rights and aligns with a sociopath President who attacks vulnerable groups in this country is despicable.

I am actually not super familiar with his politics. How has he stood against LGBTQ rights?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's be liberal about this. If he paid them what they asked for and tipped nicely on top of that what he does on his own time is kind of stormy danielsy. Give Lindsey a pass here.

Because he is clearly trumps puppet, he is a horrific lawmaker, he supports policies that are damaging to LGBTQ people… He doesn’t have the right to stay in the closet given the way he treats this country. He is despicable

This. Graham is entitled to love/be attracted to/sleep with any consenting adult he chooses. His sexuality is his own. But the utter hypocrisy of this man who stands against LGTBQ rights and aligns with a sociopath President who attacks vulnerable groups in this country is despicable.

Anonymous wrote:This is so ugly. Yes, the guy should be defeated at the ballot box. No, he won’t be in S Carolina. No, he has no spine after turning on his friend, McCain, and sucking up to Trump. Yes, he is the world’s biggest hypocrite.

But outing him like this is just ugly. I hope this story slinks back to the sewers where it belongs.

+1