This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: "https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr"

jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (17 posts)

Would you ever consider voting for an openly gay/lesbian presidential candidate?

  1. Luke M Simmons profile image77
    Luke M Simmonsposted 3 years ago

    Would you ever consider voting for an openly gay/lesbian presidential candidate?

    https://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/12331288_f260.jpg

  2. ChristinS profile image96
    ChristinSposted 3 years ago

    Absolutely. One's sexual orientation has absolutely nothing to do with their ability to perform as president.  As with any candidate, it's about their ability to perform their duties once in office.

    1. Luke M Simmons profile image77
      Luke M Simmonsposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Excellent.  I'm sure he/she couldn't possibly do worse than the last few guys.

  3. dashingscorpio profile image89
    dashingscorpioposted 3 years ago

    Yes. I've never voted for anyone based upon their race, gender, age, or sexual orientation. Those things have nothing to do with creating jobs, reducing the deficit, and keeping our borders safe.
    The goal is to vote for whom one thinks can accomplish resolving whatever issues the individual voter believes are the most important.
    When Apple passed the baton to Tim Cook an openly gay CEO the company didn't fold. They continue to produce new products and remain a very profitable company.
    Clearly his sexual orientation isn't an issue. I believe it's probably easier for a gay married person to get elected president than it would be for a single bachelor who periodically dates multiple women.
    People don't want their president to openly be a playboy. smile

    1. Luke M Simmons profile image77
      Luke M Simmonsposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Great point.  I think culturally we associate polyamory with volatility and assume it's going to spill over into his/her governance.  Though I don't agree, it's a better argument than of those opposed to gay people.

  4. adagio4639 profile image81
    adagio4639posted 3 years ago

    Sure. His or her sexual orientation wouldn't be a factor at all. It would depend on his/her position on a variety of issues. Would you vote for an atheist?

    1. Luke M Simmons profile image77
      Luke M Simmonsposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Holding other factors constant, I would absolutely rather vote for an atheist.  Wasn't there some sort of saying about this... separating of something and another?

    2. Lady Guinevere profile image60
      Lady Guinevereposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I'll say it..separation of church and state.  Then the topic about what is in the pledge of allegience and such.  A good Hub for that:  http://linzieroberts.hubpages.com/hub/T … -Under-God

    3. Luke M Simmons profile image77
      Luke M Simmonsposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Oh bother... it was right on the tip of my tongue too. Thanks DA.

  5. syzygyastro profile image80
    syzygyastroposted 3 years ago

    No! That president would fare far worse than Obama and gay people woul face unparalleled calamity, just as blacks are being openly shot daily during Obama's watch. We now live under Jim Crow 2.0. A gay/lesbian president would make the Obama presidency look great in comparison.

    1. Luke M Simmons profile image77
      Luke M Simmonsposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Are you implying that it's Obama's fault there seems to be a spike in discriminatory police brutality? He has made us less tolerant? Perhaps there's a sample discrepancy, as these cases are actually getting reported now?  Please explain your stance.

    2. syzygyastro profile image80
      syzygyastroposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Voter suppression and Jim Crow re-emerged during his watch. Either tis is a set up to allow for black suppression, or racism that has exploded is a result of his win. Obama did not cause this. It was and is part of theUS political fabric.

  6. word55 profile image74
    word55posted 3 years ago

    No, I would not. God created man to have a woman as his help meet. Children are confused enough in society today.

    1. Luke M Simmons profile image77
      Luke M Simmonsposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Come on buddy.

    2. jlpark profile image87
      jlparkposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I'm gathering from this answer, you'd also not vote for a woman to be president either?

  7. R K Beran profile image59
    R K Beranposted 3 years ago

    Would I give an LGBT candidate fair consideration? Yes.
    Would I base my opinions of him on his qualifications and merit? Yes.

    But I wouldn't vote for any LGBT candidate who wishes to legislate morality, who is unqualified for his position, who has bad domestic and/or foreign policy, who thinks I should vote for him simply because he/she's LBGT, who thinks not voting for him/her makes me a bigot or "homophobe", or who thinks that Jim being able to marry Roger is the only matter of importance in our nation.

  8. tsadjatko profile image54
    tsadjatkoposted 3 years ago

    https://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/12341581_f260.jpg

    This question is no different than: Would you ever vote for a black person? would you ever vote for a woman? how about a Muslim? as if a person's gender preference for sex or, for that matter, their color or religion has anything to do with a reason to or not to vote for someone. This question is what I would call likened to a race bait question.The only answer is yes, unless you harbor prejudice against openly gay/lesbian people.

    I'll say this I would never vote for a person who was hiding their sexual preference because that does not show character or honesty. The only reasons to vote for anyone is their integrity, their qualifications, their policies and track record as compared to their opponent. Anything else is as bigoted as women saying they would vote for Hiliary solely because she is a woman (or I guess you could say because she is NOT a man) which is no less mindless than saying you'd vote for someone only because they are not heterosexual, or wouldn't just because they are heterosexual. If a gay candidate outperformed his/her opponent on the real issues anyone would be a fool to not vote for him/her.

    You might say, "Really, but you are a Christian." Yeah, and being a Christian I know we are all sinners so if the sin of homosexuality disqualifies a gay person for consideration of your vote, HELLO! NO ONE else is any better. In God's eyes our righteousness is as filthy rags. That is why we need a savior.

    Do you believe a recent polls aid 65% of women would vote for Hiliary only because she is a woman? How low has this country sank?

 
working