It'd remarkable to me how many people who support 'diversity' and 'inclusion' will shun those who have ideas/beliefs they disagree with. Good job to Mark for not being one of those people.
and it's pretty hypocritical of thiel to be mad at gawker for outing him as gay due to his fear of repercussions since he now supports a candidate who would gladly keep the status quo in making homosexuality something you have to worry about being "leaked" to the public.
this is why there is outrage over thiel giving/supporting a candidate like trump. and further outrage against zuck and sam altman for advocating "diversity" while allowing thiel to support someone who is completely against that idea.
so no, it really shouldn't be that remarkable that people who support "diversity" would not support people who are against those ideals.
I cant see any reason for Trump to be against gay people either, or any other group for that matter, but liberals have no problem saying that he's anti-everything. This is the same kind of overly PC whining that is fueling the Trump fire.
Have you heard the man speak, or heard him quoted? You don't denigrate Mexicans, federal judges whose parents are Mexican, and blacks because you're a fanboy of diversity. You don't judge women solely on their appearance and yet still get to be the poster boy of diversity. Making fun of the disabled is not only a cheap shot beneath even most 13 year old boys, it also doesn't get you the "Diversity Champion 2016" award.
Why would Trump have anything against gay people?
Because he hasn't shown any respect for anyone else that isn't white, straight, male, and American-born. Why would homosexuals get a pass?
"Because he hasn't shown any respect for anyone else that isn't white, straight, male, and American-born. Why would homosexuals get a pass?"
This exemplifies exactly what I was trying to say. Do you really believe that Trump has never shown respect for anyone except for white men? I feel like there's nothing Trump could do to avoid this stigma, because our PC culture attaches it to anyone who speaks out against them. I think this is exactly why Peter Thiel is pro-Trump.
Then you haven't been paying attention. He said a judge couldn't do his job because his parents were Mexican. The highest ranking elected official from his own party, Paul Ryan, called it the "textbook definition of a racist comment".
He has hired more or less any race, have several women on his boards and trust his daughter with big parts of the business.
His actions are very different than the claims of him.
I would agree that he comes of rather ego-driven but there is a world of difference between that and the way he is portraid as the anti-christ.
Not[0] Really[1]
0: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/08/donald-trump-cas... 1: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-courtship-of-...
But for instance
Key Executives For The Trump Organization LLC
Cathy Hoffman Glosser
http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/people.asp?...
In other words he does have women in leading positions.
huh?
https://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughTrumpSpam/comments/4r2yxs/a_f...
The people who support diversity and yet support Hillary seems to disagree with your last line.
1. US Women are 5% of the world's population of women. Yet US Women are 30% of the world's prison population. 2. Women going to prison are 5x as likely to have to put a child into foster care than men. 3. Women are not given respect when going through pregnancy or menstrual cycles.
She has not said she was only helping women but that women need more attention in this process.
[0]: http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/27/opinions/hillary-clinton-women...
2. One sexist system being used to justify another.
3. Prisoners aren't given respect. Nothing special about either of those conditions that make it stand out any more than all the recent cases of prisoners with medical needs dying because of disrespect.
Saying women need more help is not just sexist, it is so incredibly and blatantly sexist that any educated person that agrees can have significant judgments made about their views in regards to sexism.
Here, let me give an example.
1. Whites in the US are X percent of the total white population but white US prisoners are >X percent of the total white prisoners.
2. Whites going to prison are more likely to be an active patent to a child, meaning the child will be instead raised in a single parent family or go to foster care.
3. Whites in prison aren't respected.
Thus, whites in prison need more special treatment to help them more than minorities.
Anyone seriously giving the above argument, who was also educated in the racial disparity in prison, would clearly be acting racist.