It's morally wrong to vote for Ramaswamy

[Dan Ben Noah]

I hate to break it to JTF's Ramaswamy faction (if you exist), but Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy has said that he will not ban transvestites from the military.  He's fine with adult transvestism, he just doesn't want kids exposed to it.  Well guess what -- once you start rolling down the slippery slope to Sodom, it's kind of hard to stop half way.  If you allow evil behavior for adults, eventually it's going to be passed down to children one way or another.  I don't give a flying fig newton if Vivek is an entrepreneur.  Decent people vote based on ISSUES.  When a presidential candidate takes a weak stance on transvestism, abortion, etc, it is your moral duty to find a candidate who is demonstrably better on those issues, like Ron DeSantis.  Tut tut, none of your feeble excuses...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFPxwsO5K4s

[Chaim Ben Pesach]

בס''ד

Very true!

[Rubystars]

Probably still better than Biden. Most of what people have a problem with is the targeting of kids. Honestly being a transvestite isn't something you can really outlaw for adults without gutting the first amendment.

I think DeSantis would definitely be better than Ramaswamy though because I like what he's been doing in Florida to protect children.

If you want to regulate adults then you're going to be more limited on what you can do. I do think banning cosmetic "gender affirming" surgeries for all ages is something we should want to do though because it's just pure mutilation and taking advantage of a mentally ill person to get money out of them and leave them with permanent damage to their bodies.

[Dan Ben Noah]

Yes, Ramaswamy would probably be better than Biden.  However, it is certainly possible to regulate the sexual behavior of adults.  For example, sodomy used to be a felony in every state, and at one time punishable by death in Virginia.  The Supreme Court has upheld sodomy laws in the past.  The Constitution can be interpreted various ways depending on who the judges are.  At one time the Supreme Court said there's a constitutional right to abortion, and thankfully now there's not.  The way the American legal system is set up, laws can be reversed one way or the other.  So the obstacle is not the Constitution, that's just a convenient cop-out.  The obstacle is that people like Ramaswamy and his cult of Rama Swama Ding Dongs are moral cowards and just don't care enough to stand up for what's right.  They don't have the will or the stomach to push for it.  They don't want to lose the respect of modern-day weirdos.  Populism is not conservative.  It's the same thing as being a Democrat, except it's not quite as far down the slippery slope to Sodom as today's Democrats.  But the end result is the same.  If you defend faggots in the bedroom today, tomorrow you won't be able to defend children in the bathroom.

(Ram770, I realize you don't speak much English.  So if you read this thread, don't worry.  You're not the Ram in the Rama Swama Ding Dong.  I'm not trying to insult you indirectly.)

[Nachus]

                                                                                                                          

  It surely is morally wrong to vote for
  him particularly in view of some of
  the things he supports that would
  define some of his policies.
 

[Rubystars]

Yes, Ramaswamy would probably be better than Biden.  However, it is certainly possible to regulate the sexual behavior of adults.  For example, sodomy used to be a felony in every state, and at one time punishable by death in Virginia.  The Supreme Court has upheld sodomy laws in the past.  The Constitution can be interpreted various ways depending on who the judges are.  At one time the Supreme Court said there's a constitutional right to abortion, and thankfully now there's not.  The way the American legal system is set up, laws can be reversed one way or the other.  So the obstacle is not the Constitution, that's just a convenient cop-out.  The obstacle is that people like Ramaswamy and his cult of Rama Swama Ding Dongs are moral cowards and just don't care enough to stand up for what's right.  They don't have the will or the stomach to push for it.  They don't want to lose the respect of modern-day weirdos.  Populism is not conservative.  It's the same thing as being a Democrat, except it's not quite as far down the slippery slope to Sodom as today's Democrats.  But the end result is the same.  If you defend faggots in the bedroom today, tomorrow you won't be able to defend children in the bathroom.

(Ram770, I realize you don't speak much English.  So if you read this thread, don't worry.  You're not the Ram in the Rama Swama Ding Dong.  I'm not trying to insult you indirectly.)

I don't agree with homosexual behavior but I'm not sure if modern society is willing to regulate private behavior between adults at this point.

I do think you are right though that we do have to be wary of a slippery slope. That's how they got a lot of their agenda pushed through. They did it in little steps that seemed somewhat reasonable and added on to it. I don't think we're anywhere near the bottom of the slope either if things keep sliding the wrong direction.