We are discussing whether or not reparations are a good idea to redress the centuries of homophobia that LGBT+ people have traditionally dealt with
No. They are not a good idea. There are a great many reasons. I could put my conservative hat on and simply answer that; the remedy of every problem is not necessarily to throw money at it.
I could put my logical hat on and simply reply that if we are to spend money on this problem then if we want a long term solution, the money should be spent changing minds.
Buying a gay person a Cadillac is not going to make his bigoted neighbor hate him less. Indeed it will probably make the bigot hate the gay more.
I could put my skeptic hat on and ask this question. "Where is the evidence that LGBTQTRSPPNR or whatever people are economically disadvantaged?" Some are of course but is there widespread poverty, caused by sexual orientation, that would be cured by an infusion of money? Not that I am aware. There is widespread poverty period and money certainly can cure it but one need make no sexual orientation distinction to look for it. There are lots of people who can claim they were denied a job because of bigotry or discrimination of one kind or another who went on to get a fine job and prosper. (Ask black people about this.) Are conservatives more homophobic than liberals?
First of all I object to the use of the term -phobic. There was a time in my life when I opposed gay marriage. Many years ago. Fear had nothing to do with it. I have changed my mind. What caused me to do that was an examination of the facts, friendship and familiarity with many gay people, and the application of my Christian belief in the goodness of love in general. As a social liberal/fiscal conservative (conservative of the old order or, if you will, what a republican was 50 years ago) I simply realized that at the end of the day I had no dog in the fight. I concluded that my political beliefs demanded that I have a good reason to deprive someone of their liberties; pretty much no matter what liberty it is that they assert. And that, at the very least, to deprive someone of a particular liberty, we need a broad consensus, which, in the case of same sex marriage, did not appear to exist. I could see no parade of horribles which would occur should same sex people marry so I decided that the service of my belief in smaller, less intrusive government demanded that I support letting people do it. SO:
I know people who are quite left of center with regard to income distribution who oppose same sex marriage on religious grounds. I know fiscal conservatives who do the same thing. So though those who self identify as liberal are probably less likely to be resistant to making sexual orientation some sort of protected class this does not mean that a conservative is more likely to be a bigot.
Yes. There are those who, drawing from a couple of fairly obscure versus in the Bible, decide that homosexuality is a sin and that it ought not be promoted or even allowed. I believe this is unfortunate but arguing with them on religious grounds is pointless. Attacking their religious beliefs in general is counterproductive
. Decidedly so. It is unwise to do it. Nothing like insulting someone's deeply held beliefs to get them to come over to your side, right? So what to do about them...
There is a great healer. Perhaps the greatest healer known to medicine and every doctor applies this medicine quite frequently. The saying goes, "sometimes the best application of medicine is to do the most nothing possible for as long as necessary".
Among my generation racism and disdain for homosexuality is rife. Though most of us have learned to at least be quiet in private conversations you would be surprised at the number of times I have to either bite my tongue with my friends or check them by telling them that I do not permit racism in my home. But according to actuarial tables, my life expectancy is about 20 years or perhaps a bit less. If I get really lucky maybe 30. SO baring some medical breakthrough of earth shattering proportions, my generation and the not all that much better gen x ers are going to be gone in about 50 years and will have ever diminishing effect on society in the meantime. The beliefs of younger Americans, who are decidedly less bigoted WRT homosexuality will prevail and the problem will become on of isolated bigotry, which will never go away as stupid never goes away.
Finally. The republican party is in full defensive mode. In the service of corporatism it has lost its philosophical center. It is no longer the constitutionalist party, which it once most decidedly was. About the only personal right that it discusses these days is the second amendment and it refers to the free expression of the beliefs of others as "fake news". In an attempt to raise money and remain in power it has assembled a coalition of frightened people and attempted to frighten them more. The argument against gays is not framed as an argument against anything gay people do but rather as an assault by "liberals" on "traditional values" and "religion". This is working for them and will continue until the people they seek to recruit simply no longer hold these values. And that will take some time yet.
So that is why reparations are a bad idea. They do not apply the remedy for a single problem faced by gay people. (I am using this term in the service of brevity.) In fact, the studies show that not all gay people suffer wage gap at all. Lesbian women, for example, earn more than their straight counterparts. But that does not even matter. The very idea of transferring money to someone because they claim to hold a particular sexual orientation (and it is always a claim, not necessarily a fact) would cause such a backlash that the cause of gay folks would be damaged for a couple of generations. So the best thing to do is to educate people.
Band idea. Hugely bad. Does damage to the image of LGBTQRSTMB...whatever....people in general. The way to change minds is not to jump on police cars in this case. The police do not represent the problem as they did in the issue of race. Disorderly conduct is not a good way to get orderly people to like you or accept you. The rioters were not only protesting a problem that hardly exists IMO but they were damaging their message. What many people concluded goes something like this..."These folks are trashing police cars so let's go hire some". Right.
"We won with poorly educated. I love the poorly educated." Trump.
"I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, okay? " Trump
The American dream is about freedom. Pelosi