Hacker News Reader

>His personal choices to support legislation that will deny basic human rights from the LGBTQ community is a BIG clue.

Personal views legitimately expressed in totally distinct political matters should absolutely not be factored in.

Is it fair to call an action which materially supported oppression of people "personal"? The goal of that action was to deny people the right to marry.

Attempting to deny rights to an entire class of human beings should not be classified as simply “personal views legitimately expressed.”

I still fail to see how it's any different than any other moral disagreement. eg. If I were a evangelical christian, and he supported abortion rights for women, I can claim that he's literally trying to kill babies.

Right to happiness is not a moral question that needs to be debated every time someone on Fox News needs to generate mass hysteria for profit. I think the average person can differentiate between what’s moral and what’s immoral and where are the boundaries between the two. The USA is in a complete meltdown because some still insist on staying blind.

But you're describing what a large subset of evangelicals actually do, so that doesn't really help your point.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com