2016 US Presidential Election
- Thread starter Oilgarchy
- Start date
Kannex
TNPer
I hope Rand Paul gets the nomination, but that's probably not happening. I suppose even W.'s brother is better than Donald Trump.
To be fair, I honestly feel like even if Donald Trump were elected president, nothing would really change in the U.S. The only real difference would be you'd have a buffoon in office.
To be fair, I honestly feel like even if Donald Trump were elected president, nothing would really change in the U.S. The only real difference would be you'd have a buffoon in office.
New Aquilia
TNPer
If a Tea Partier gets the Republican nomination, the Republican party will be even more of a joke then it currently is now.
Yeah, let's elect a person with libertarian views that don't really work well in actual practise like eliminating the Federal Reserve for instance, that'll show em.
Yeah, let's elect a person with libertarian views that don't really work well in actual practise like eliminating the Federal Reserve for instance, that'll show em.
Kannex
TNPer
I don't know who the hell you're talking about. Rand Paul wants to audit the Federal Reserve, for greater transparency and accountability. He wants to lower taxes, end corporate welfare, and he opposes the militarization of our police and the NSA. In many ways, he's more progressive than the Democrats. The Democrats are up there with the conservatives, spending your money on further electronic surveillance.New Aquilia:
New Aquilia
TNPer
Auditing the Federal Reserve? That's a new term, cause last election cycle he was still following his father's idea of eliminating it entirely.
Lowering taxes also doesn't do anything but cut spending to key departments that need it. Corporations will love Rand Paul for that and the corporate welfare will just show up again in another form, after all, he's a free market libertarian style Republican.
As for the militarization and the NSA...yeah, good luck with that. Not in this day and age in the US. In fact, I don't see anyone other then a far-left candidate that would never get elected doing anything to eliminate that.
Lowering taxes also doesn't do anything but cut spending to key departments that need it. Corporations will love Rand Paul for that and the corporate welfare will just show up again in another form, after all, he's a free market libertarian style Republican.
As for the militarization and the NSA...yeah, good luck with that. Not in this day and age in the US. In fact, I don't see anyone other then a far-left candidate that would never get elected doing anything to eliminate that.
Kannex
TNPer
Several of these "key departments" would be better off downsized and reformed. There's enough bureaucracy in Washington as it is. Unlike the Democrats, Rand Paul actively makes a stand for civil rights. I don't hear of the Democratic administration opposing the Freedom Act. We don't need more liars, Bushes, and Clintons in the White House.
Nebula
TNPer
1. Lower taxes = no money for infrastructure. I'm in favor of lower taxes for the middle class, but you've got to raise taxes for the rich to cover the difference.Kannex:
2. Bernieeeeeeee
Rand Paul is anti-gun control. Do you know what that means? There's nothing that stops a psychopath from buying a machine gun or an RPG and murdering a bunch of people.
New Aquilia
TNPer
Yeah the free market has done such a wonderful job with taxes before hand or infrastructure. You just mean widen the gap and then exert more pressure on the government later on to deal with exploding factors in wages,welfare and social security.Kannex:
And as there exist now, there is something that is barely followed by gun manufacturors and gun store sales to prevent that. Rand Paul's plan might as well just hand out free guns to more criminals and mentally disturbed people with a picture of himself on every gun grip.
Kannex
TNPer
Reform welfare to make it more efficient. If you downsize government bureaucracy, there'll be plenty of money left for roads and vital services. Plus, tax cuts generate more spending -- more money for us and more money flowing in the economy.
Really, there's already little way of psychos getting guns and little real way to stop them. With greater private gun ownership, there will be greater protection against such threats.
Really, there's already little way of psychos getting guns and little real way to stop them. With greater private gun ownership, there will be greater protection against such threats.
New Aquilia
TNPer
Straw man fallacies.Kannex:
Bureaucracy decreases as does resources to draw on, and as demand grow the system over compensates by spending the smaller resources they have in getting the bureaucracy back in place to deal with the issues...with now less funds then it had before.
As for the "gun control" issue, spoken as though you are reading it straight from the NRA and Smith and Wesson's websites. Yeah, more guns doesn't actually lead to lower crime rates. Most industrialized nations that have gun control with far more credible restrictions on ownership have far less gun related violence then the US does per capita and far less crime in general then the US per capita.
Switzerland is not on that list for a good reason.
New Aquilia
TNPer
They also have a culture that handles weapons responsibly, that actually enforces ID's for gun owners and does not sell to anyone with criminal records or mental illness.plembobria:
Yes, Switzerland can handle guns responsibly. Unless you count the 200 to 300 suicides by gun that occur there every year, at least according to TIME. But their model of gun ownership and laws surrounding that would be "draconian" in the US.
Another fallacy used by the right falsely to point at as a model, when actual statistics and research suggests otherwise.
Romanoffia
Garde à l'eau!
Saying that lower taxes = no money for infrastructure is an inaccurate over-simplification.Nebula:
The complicated answer is that sometimes when you lower taxes, that increase in available capital in the free market will produce additional income that in turn will increase the tax revenue. It's very similar to the concept of 'marginal cost of production' - which, in this instance, translates to setting tax rates to where you optimise tax revenue without killing business by removing the incentive for profit. If you tax people too much, they simply realise they are being used as slaves by the state to support an ever-growing welfare class, and they simply stop working. Why bother working at all when most of it is taken from you and given to others who didn't work for it?
On the other hand, a flat tax on income without any progressive rate scheme is a good idea that will bring in more revenue. You have to remember that income tax in the US is not an income tax at all - it is a wage tax, and that is something entirely different than an income tax. For instance, Hillary and Bill Clinton are making millions upon millions upon millions of dollars and probably pay a lower rate of 'income tax' than we do. Take a simple 15% off the top regardless of now much someone makes and you get a hell of a lot more money than you do under the present idiotic tax code.
Also, in order for an economy to thrive, the idiotic Marxist/Socialist/Fascist concept of 'redistribution of wealth' (which leads to a tax system that is confiscatory and punitive) must be entirely abandoned.
But the primary problem that needs to be solved first in the US Economy is that the idiots in Congress and the idiot in the Whitehouse need to stop spending more money than we have by borrowing it and running the printing press like it's 1923 in the Weimar Republic.
I they don't, the US is toast within two or three years, if not sooner.
Romanoffia
Garde à l'eau!
And if you remove from the US Statistics cities where guns are prohibited altogether (Chicago, New York, Detroit - all run by gun-grabbing Democrats), the homicide rate for the US for the US goes down to about .2 per 100,000.Nebula:
Remember, the Anti-Gun people are only anti-you having a gun. But most people never understand that until they find themselves in a situation where having a firearm saves their lives.
My idea of gun control is that if there is a gun in the room, I want to be in control of it!
Nebula
TNPer
Without better gun control nationwide there is absolutely nothing stopping people from bringing guns into the cities.Romanoffia:
Our gun control policies are too open. We need to ensure better checks; the current system has failed. Legally, Dylann Roof should not have been allowed to buy a gun. But because our policies are too lax, nine people died. And people will continue to die until we can enforce a stricter policy.
New Aquilia
TNPer
Agreed.Nebula:
But now as for Trump news.....seems he really can't help being a bigoted hypocrite either. From Reuters:
Exclusive: Donald Trump's companies have sought visas to import at least 1,100 workers
y Mica Rosenberg, Ryan McNeill, Megan Twohey and Michelle Conlin
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Donald Trump is staking his run for U.S. president in part on a vow to protect American jobs. But this month, one of his companies, the elite Mar-a-Lago Club resort in Florida, applied to import 70 foreign workers to serve as cooks, wait staff and cleaners.
A Reuters analysis of U.S. government data reveals that this is business as usual in the New York property magnate's empire.
Trump owns companies that have sought to import at least 1,100 foreign workers on temporary visas since 2000, according to U.S. Department of Labor data reviewed by Reuters. Most of the applications were approved, the data show.
Nine companies majority-owned by Trump have sought to bring in foreign waitresses, cooks, vineyard workers and other laborers on temporary work-visa programs administered by the Labor Department.
The candidate's foreign talent hunt included applications for an assistant golf-course superintendent, an assistant hotel manager and a banquet manager.
Two of his companies, Trump Model Management and Trump Management Group LLC, have sought visas for nearly 250 foreign fashion models, the records show.
Trump’s presidential campaign and a lawyer for the businessman declined to comment. The Mar-a-Lago Club could not be reached for comment.
The analysis of Trump's history of actively importing foreign workers comes as he has emerged as an early front-runner in the race for the Republican nomination in the November 2016 presidential election. Trump has positioned himself as a champion of American workers whose livelihoods are threatened by illegal foreign laborers and the offshoring of U.S. jobs.
“I will be the greatest jobs president that God every created," he said in announcing his candidacy on June 16. "I will bring back our jobs from China, Mexico and other places. I will bring back jobs and our money."
Trump generated both notoriety and buzz by singling out Mexican immigrants in the United States. “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best," he said in the speech. "They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists."
In a speech on July 11, Trump distinguished between those working legally and illegally in the United States, saying thousands of "legal" Mexicans - "incredible people" - have worked for him over the years.
The Labor Department records don't specify the nationality of the foreign workers sought by companies. But Trump could be bringing many Mexican workers into the United States.
Reuters examined records of applications for three categories of temporary work visas - the H-2A, H-2B and H-1B programs - submitted by employers to the Labor Department.
A CONTROVERSIAL VISA PROGRAM
The temporary work visa program through which Trump's companies have sought the greatest numbers of workers, H-2B, brings in mostly workers from Mexico. Mexicans made up more than 80 percent of the 104,993 admissions to the United States on H-2B visas in 2013. The Trump companies have sought at least 850 H-2B visa workers.
The H-2B program, which receives little government oversight, is used by companies in sectors ranging from hospitality to forestry to hire foreign workers for temporary jobs. Companies must prove that the jobs are seasonal - and that they tried and failed to hire Americans.
U.S. government watchdogs have criticized the H-2B and H-2A programs over the years for failing to protect foreign and American workers alike.
In 2003, the Labor Department Inspector General said: “Abuses of these programs may result in economic harm to American workers and businesses, exploitation of foreign workers, and security risks associated with aliens who are admitted to this country by fraudulent means.”
This year, the Government Accountability Office published a report saying that workers in the country on H-2A and H-2B visas have experienced abuse, including being charged illegal recruiting fees, substandard housing and low pay.
The Mar-a-Lago, a luxury resort in Palm Beach, Florida, has sought the most foreign workers of the nine Trump businesses: 787 workers since 2006, according to the data.
This month, the resort filed paperwork seeking to bring in 70 foreign workers later this year on H-2B visas to serve as maids, cooks and wait staff, according to paperwork known as “job orders” published on the Labor Department's web site.
In addition to the resort and the modeling agencies, the Trump-owned companies identified in the Reuters analysis were Jupiter Golf Club, Lamington Farm Club LLC, Trump Miami Resorts Management LLC, Trump National Golf Club LLC, Trump Payroll Chicago LLC and Trump Vineyard Estates LLC.
So much for his sworn protection of American jobs
Romanoffia
Garde à l'eau!
Straw man argument. First,you are falsely assuming that all homicides are committed with firearms and that all 'homicides' are criminal acts. If a policeman shoots a criminal or someone shoots a criminal in self defence, it is counted as a 'homicide'. If someone gets killed in a car accident, it is a homicide. If you get hit by a car crossing the street and you die, it is a 'homicide'.Nebula:
For instance, compare Chicago with Dallas. Two cities nearly identical in income and race statistics, but two different sets of gun laws:
18.4 for Chicago which has no gun stores and no concealed carry permit and nearly all homicides are by firearm (mainly because you have a disarmed law abiding citizenry).
9.6 for Dallas where there are over 1000 gun dealers and people can get a concealed carry permit. Very few homicides (about 2% are by firearm) and most of them are drug dealers shooting each other or the police shooting criminals.
In 2013, here were the "homicide rates" for the US:
All homicides
Number of deaths: 16,121
Deaths per 100,000 population: 5.1
Firearm homicides
Number of deaths: 11,208
Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.5
(Source: CDC)
in 2014, with the lessening of restrictions upon law abiding citizens to lawfully carry firearms (concealed or open carry) the rates for all homicides dropped by 50%. This is mainly because criminals, like dictators and tyrants, prefer unarmed peasants.
Also, about 1000 of these homicides are police shootings according to the FBI:
".........FBI records over the past decade show only about 400 police shootings a year — an average of 1.1 deaths per day. According to The Post's analysis, the daily death toll so far for 2015 is close to 2.6. At that pace, police will have shot and killed nearly 1,000 people by the end of the year. May 30, 2015"
That said, I absolutely disagree that our policies are too "open". I, however, absolutely agree that the current system has failed, not because the system is flawed, but because the people operating the system are not competent.
Dylan Roof was indeed prohibited under the NICS check from obtaining a firearm due to previous criminal (felony) convictions as provided by under the law. However, despite his name being up in big flashing red letters (metaphorically) saying, "DO NOT LET THIS NUTTER BUY A GUN!", the person who did the NICS check at the Federal Level (where it is done) for some odd reason did not convey this information to the gun dealer, and, in fact, was cleared by the NICS personnel to purchase the firearm. They system worked, but some incompetent moron neglected do his or her duty according to their job description. This is a personnel failure, not a mechanical failure of the system - laws are only as good as the people enforcing those laws, and the big problem in the US is the fact that the laws are not being enforced, be it drug laws, immigration laws or existing firearm laws.
And what really irks me is when laws don't work because the laws aren't enforced properly, if at all, the government morons start crying for more laws that will go equally unenforced.
As for nine people dying because our policies are too lax, one has to remember that laws only apply to those who are law abiding. Criminals will always find a way to get firearms.
Here's a thought for you, firearm murders in Britain in 2011/12 represent 6% of the murder cases, and that is in a country where nearly all law abiding citizens find it impossible to own an operating firearm at all. In fact, all but two or three murder cases involved a firearm that was legally owned and those were not prosecuted as 'murder' or prosecuted at all.
No, IMHO, if you want to reduce violent crime there are two ways you do it: allow law abiding citizens their constitutional right to self defence under the 2nd Amendment *AND* bring back the Death Penalty for violent criminals like murderers, violent sex offenders and child molesters (who should be castrated and then hanged), and terrorists.
And frankly, I am more afraid of the government having guns than I am of criminals. I can deal with criminals who want to do me harm with little or no problems because I have a concealed carry permit.
Nebula
TNPer
Perhaps, but a complete lack of gun control will allow sociopathic killers to get their hands on machine guns and commit mass murder with greater ease. There are so many incidents of mass killings in the US already, far more than there are in Scandinavia.
And as for your allegations that towns where guns are legal being safer and less prone to violent crime:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman
And as for your allegations that towns where guns are legal being safer and less prone to violent crime:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman
New Aquilia
TNPer
Whitman is only one minor example of the ACTUAL right-wing straw man used in the states only to justify no gun control.Nebula:
It's hilarious to think that cold weather is much more of a excuse murder, not gang prevalence in Chicago being higher then it is in Dallas or even and tellingly omitted the number of gun crimes in Chicago or Dallas is left of the list completely...just homicides in general.
Poke at statistics and you begin to spot the omissions
Empire of Narnia
TNPer
All my posts are serious.Nebula:Whoa, a serious post from Narnia? Things must really be bad!Empire of Narnia:
Trump really is the symbol of everything wrong with the American Right. A rich, privileged man with some racist attitudes who really only looks out for the interests of big business in the end. He doesn't represent conservatism, just greed.
Romanoffia
Garde à l'eau!
Nebula:
Hey, we have had only 4 homicides in my county in North Carolina since the county was founded in the 1850's. And everyone one here owns a gun.
But seriously, we have open carry (no permit required, but the various legal restrictions as to who and where you can carry exist in detail) and oddly enough, rarely do you see anyone carrying a handgun. Same with concealed carry permits - you would expect heaps of people to go out and get a CCP, but oddly enough, only about 10,000 people out of 9 million decide to get a CCP. Why bother when you can open carry.
But the straw man argument most people fall for is that guns somehow are responsible for crime. That's the same logic that by removing the Confederate Battle Flag from the CW monument in Columbia, SC somehow will end racism. The logic is flawed. Buy this flawed logic it might be argued that spoons and forks cause obesity. Let's ban spoons a forks!
The real problem is not guns, it is criminals who commit crimes. Guns don't pull their own triggers and shoot people on their own. Someone has to pull the trigger. And if it isn't a gun, it's a baseball bat or a knife.
If you really want to save lives, let's ban automobiles which kill 50,000 people each year.
Nierr:
Sure it's a deterrent - the murderer you execute is deterred from every committing murder again.
And given the rate of recidivism of criminals in general, incarceration is not a deterrent either.
Public executions generally do deter crime as history has shown. The US had very few executions when they were done publicly. Now that punishment for murder is hidden away from public view, people are not deterred as much.
The root of the problem is that people today, particularly in the US, live in a culture where very few people have any fear or concept of the consequences of their actions. There is a big lack of personal accountability.
Let's see, you send someone to jail for murder for 20 years and what do they get as punishment? Free food, shelter, medical treatment and even college degrees at the taxpayers' expense. That's not punishment - it's a reward when you get right down to it.
Now if we brought back hard labour as a punishment, criminals might think twice about doing anything that puts them in jail.
Then add to it the number of people who go to jail who shouldn't even be in jail: in the US, if you commit first degree murder, you generally spend about 8 years in prison for it. If you re-use a postage stamp, you get 20 years, no parole under US Federal Law. Go figure.
Nebula:
I was being sarcastic, you realise.
But here's a beautiful example of why it is beneficial for law abiding citizens to be allowed to carry sidearms:
I live in an area where feral Russian Boars have become a problem. In fact, we are infested with them in unpopulated areas. When I go riding, I carry a British Cavarly .455 Webley revolver. Today, as a matter of fact, while riding through an unpopulated area that borders the farm, my horse and I got charged by a 450 lb Russian Boar with tusks that would make a small elephant proud and would also send a Ninja running home to cry to his mommy. It came right out of the woods at us. I shot the bugger right between the eyes and dropped it. You don't want to ever tangle with a wild boar because they will kill you, or worse yet, hurt you very badly and then kill you.
That said, I do believe that if one is going to own firearms of any kind, that one be educated as to their proper use and maintenance. There is nothing more deadly than some idiot who doesn't know how to accurately apply a firearm in a selective fashion. And honking big firearms are a lot more efficient (most of the time) than a P1865 cavalry lance when confronted by a feral boar.
Romanoffia
Garde à l'eau!
I have an interesting theory about dealing with people who like to do drugs:Kannex:
You decriminalise drug use, but with one proviso: if you want to do drugs, then do not expect to receive any medical treatment for doing drugs.If you OD, you don't get treatment. If you want to get on the dole, then you need to get drug tested before you get a welfare check - I mean, after all, if someone must be drug tested to get to earn the money, then I suppose it is only fair that people who get that money be drug tested too before they can get someone else's money (tax payer money).
And, as a rather humorous and semi-serious thing - a major problem with society is that the average person is a moron (which means that they aren't really morons, they're just average) and therefore the cause of 99% of the problems in the word. I have a rather humane way of eliminating morons: remove all warning labels from all products. In two weeks, all the morons would be gone. Problem solved.
I saw a warning label on a curling iron the other day. It said, "Not for internal use".
I wonder what someone did to result in a lawsuit to result in that label.
A better example. This is an actual warning label on a chainsaws sold in the US ( I sh*t thee not, as the Quakers would say. People who need to be told this do not deserve medical care for their stupidity. Give them a Darwin Award and a lollipop and send them off):
It should be a crime against humanity to save stupid people from themselves because if they continue to propagate, we will all be stupid. Then again, I have concluded that stupidity and ignorance is actually a survival adaptation. The more stupid a species is, the more of them there are and the shorter their lifespan. Think about it.
New Aquilia
TNPer
I agree with the drug possession thing in part. But drugs like Heroin and meth scream for rehabilitation policies put in place if caught rather then jail time. Dropping everything when it comes to drug policy is as dangerous as an over regulated Reagan-era drug policyKannex:
New Aquilia
TNPer
I don't think blanket legalization is the answer either.....that just enables ones with habits that refuse treatment to get worse. We do not need to be a culture of enablers either. We need smarter ways of dealing with drugs, not either or scenarios.
Romanoffia
Garde à l'eau!
Yeah, that was indeed not the way that I meant it.Nebula:
But I do think that in urban areas that public/mass transportation is the way to go. I used to work in New York City many, many moons ago, and let me tell you, anyone who drives a car into New York City deserves what they get. Not that public transportation in big cities like New York is the safest thing to do (muggers and hookers and weirdos, oh dear!). Which brings to mind a very odd incident involving the subway that is rather amusing, in a demented sort of way that illustrates the advantages of being armed in the rare event in which one is confronted with homicidal maniacs:
I guess it was back in the mid-1980's and some nimrods came up with a diabolically brilliant way to rob token booths in the subways. You remember those water filled fire extinguishers that were used in schools, etc.? They were filled with water and then compressed air to propel the water in the event of a fire. Well, these diabolical nimrods decided that gasoline was a good substitute for water in these fire extinguishers.
So, they would take the gasoline and compressed air filled fire extinguishers up to the window of the token booth, insert the nosel of the fire extinguisher through the pass-through into the boot and then spray down the entire interior of the booth, including the attendant, and the demand all the money and if they didn't get it, they would ignite the booth and you get the picture.
After about 50 or so robberies and several toasted token booth attendants, it was decided that it was good idea to arm the booth attendants. That's all it took to stop the robberies. One attendant knew what was about to happen and immediately came out of the boot to give the robber the money. Well, instead of getting the money, the attendant pumped a couple .357 Magnum FMJ rounds into the assailant, and one of the rounds passed through the gasoline fire extinguisher and sprayed the assailant down with his own gasoline. Neither of the two bullets were lethal, but when the robber tried to run, he jumped down onto the tracks, hit the third rail and somehow managed not to electrocuted himself, but, ironically, the resulting electrical spark did ignite the gasoline he was soaked with. What makes it all the more ironic is that the robber survived his human torch act (move over, Richard Pryor...) just long enough (about 6 hours or so) to realise what had happened to him, which gave him a hobby for the rest of his life. All six hours of it.
Karma is often ironic, and even sarcastic at time, but generally apropos.
To be honest with you, over the years I have seen the absolute worst that the human species is capable of which has removed from me any and all belief I ever had in the benevolence of the human species. And this is exactly why I liken a parachute (or an un-altered fire extinguisher in the event of a fire) to a gun: you may never need it, but it's really nice to have one should the need arise. I'm sure the token booth attendant thought the same thing after that botched robbery.
Then again, there was a New Jersey State Trooper of The Year who, while receiving his award, was fiddling with his sidearm in its holster, somehow caused the handgun to fall from its holster and upon striking the ground, the handgun discharged. Right into the cop's testicles, thus, in a non-fatal way, removed him from the gene pool and resulting in the first possible Darwin Award in which the recipient lived.
Again, an abject lesson in why firearm safety is of the utmost importance (and why guns and pointy objects need to be kept as far away from idiots as possible).
And for your dining and dancing pleasure, here is a video of a cop delivering a gun safety lecture to a bunch of high school kids. Apparently, the cop wasn't paying attention in firearms safety classes at the academy and shoots himself in the leg. Talk about a literal demonstration of why gun safety is of utmost importance and why the less than absolutely situationally away should not carry firearms.
[flash]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=am-Qdx6vky0[/flash]
OK, I know you guys are laughing. Admit it. Sickos.
Romanoffia
Garde à l'eau!
Yeah, it looses some of the irony if you don't hear the gunshot.Nebula:
New Aquilia
TNPer
Not ironic...just a sad commentary on Americans and guns.
- Pronouns
- Any/All
- TNP Nation
- Frances_Francis_the_First_of_Frances
- Discord
- Just_a_Lore
Oh yes he just loves civil rights I feel that every time he tells people that my right to marriage should be decided by biblical scholars and how he wants to repeal all the laws that stop employers from firing me just becuase of my sexual preference and gender identity. And also your talking about him as this great defender of civil rights well, your talking about the man that said my ability to marry who I want will cause an economic collapse and also that the US government oversteped in making it illegal to racial segregate in the private sector as in he wants to make it legal for companies to fire you for your skin colour.Kannex:
He is just as underhanded as the lot of them he will tell you that things should be decided by the states but in reality he campaigns and supports federal bans on whatever he doesn't personally agree with. I can atleast respect some of the other candidates that own up to their stances but I could never respect someone as underhanded and hypocritical as Rand, that will tell you its a state's right to decide then support pushes to ban something at the federal level.
Kannex
TNPer
Rand Paul's in favor of government butting out of marriage entirely, so yes, there will be gay marriage. In the public sector he will not have any discrimination; in the private sector it's up to the business owners. At any rate he's not against the Civil Rights Act; he wants religious exemptions to non-discrimination laws. Some religious sects simply do not accept non-heterosexuals.