Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 19 submissions in the queue.
Breaking News
posted by takyon on Sunday June 12 2016, @06:00PM   Printer-friendly

A suspected Islamic terrorist opened fire at a gay nightclub in Florida, killing 50 people and wounding another 53 before he was killed by police. While authorities continue to investigate to determine whether this man had ties to ISIS, the terror organization has not been quiet in praising the attack. This comes three days after ISIS announced they would attack somewhere in Florida. Today's attack marks the largest act of terrorism on US soil since 9/11.

takyon: The gunman reportedly called 911 emergency services to pledge allegiance to ISIS. The President will hold a briefing momentarily. Compare this article to the original submission.


Original Submission   Late submission by physicsmajor

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @06:23PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @06:23PM (#359504)

    Are you seriously proposing the Republicans will stand up for gay rights?

    Heck no, but Trump would. Rick Santorum on the other hand...

    You don't lump democrats together, as shown by your acceptance of Bernie and non-acceptance of Hillary. Why lump republicans together?

  • (Score: 2) by julian on Monday June 13 2016, @08:36PM

    by julian (6003) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 13 2016, @08:36PM (#359595)

    So just answer a thought experiment for me:

    There's a person who is a homophobe, and it's really important to them. It's one of the primary things they vote on. They like seeing their homophobia translated into real legislation like banning same-sex marriage (kind of a lost cause now, but maybe it can be reversed later?) and allowing businesses to deny serving customers based on sexual orientation. They have their one vote to cast in November to do the most "good" for their worldview that they can. What party do they vote for?

    You know the correct answer to this question as much as I do.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @08:58PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @08:58PM (#359609)

      They focus on congress. Maybe there would be a difference.

      It's very clear that the republican party is trying to drop the issue. There are some who still claim to care, not that they actually care, in order to win votes in the deep south.

      • (Score: 2) by julian on Monday June 13 2016, @09:37PM

        by julian (6003) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 13 2016, @09:37PM (#359627)

        It's very clear that the republican party is trying to drop the issue.

        I think this is true as well. The problem I see for the GOP is that they don't have a working coalition without social conservatives, especially religious ones. If they joined with the liberals on same-sex issues they'd lose both houses of congress and the presidency for a generation.

        So I am really hoping that happens!

        It wouldn't be a total failure, however. Conservatism doesn't really exist to win or govern anyway. Conservatism is necessary for liberalism to have something to struggle against and triumph over, and secondarily to slow the rate of change to something manageable on a human timescale. It's been going on for thousands of years. Conservatism sets the agenda for what the next generation of liberals have to overcome. This issue is the perfect example of that process in action. In as little as 20 years it won't be possible to be a conservative who is against marriage equality; just like you can't be a serious candidate of any party today and be against interracial marriage.

        I hope our dysfunctional electoral system doesn't result in a total victory for the left however, because there are some areas where they've been overreaching. Our culture for example can only absorb so many externally sourced demographic changes. Or in other words, immigration needs to be slow enough that the new arrivals have no other option than to become American instead of arriving in sufficiently large groups that they can clump together into their own communities and preserve their birth country's culture entirely. That's very destabilizing and ultimately bad for everyone including the immigrants.

        There are a couple other issues I'm concerned with, which is why I am not entirely thrilled to see The Right imploding and losing its mind following this charlatan Trump. He's exactly the wrong kind of politician that conservatives need at this moment. Contrast him with William F. Buckley.

        I guess Trump is what you get for courting anti-intellectualism for so long.