I'm hyper conservative, not a pro trumper, and I can't believe this. No matter how you feel about same sex marriage or anything else the government of the united states need to go out of it's way...
I'm hyper conservative, not a pro trumper, and I can't believe this. No matter how you feel about same sex marriage or anything else the government of the united states need to go out of it's way to allow diplomats and whoever they want to bring into the country.
If a diplomat wants to bring a tiger with them then figure it out, your feelings and personal views need to go out the window when it comes to diplomacy, this is sooooooo ridiculous.
Emphasis mine. So in order to come to the US as a diplomat with your same-sex partner, you have to: out yourself to your government or allow the US to out you so that your government can prove...
The United States informed foreign governments that they would allow “limited exceptions” to its new policy in cases involving diplomats from countries where same-sex marriage is illegal. But that government would have to provide documentation proving that same-sex marriage was illegal and commit to accepting same-sex partners of U.S. diplomats.
Emphasis mine. So in order to come to the US as a diplomat with your same-sex partner, you have to:
out yourself to your government or allow the US to out you so that your government can prove that homosexuality is illegal, (because the US can't figure it out themselves, I guess? They need the foreign government to prove it?) and
convince your government to accept gay US diplomats and their partners.
What a crock. This is basically a bar on any gay diplomats from countries where being gay is illegal. All in the name of "bring[ing] its international visa practices in line with current U.S. policy."
there might not be a particular reason in the moment, but it pisses off liberals which–given what this administration seems to prioritize and falls back on for post hoc justifications of their...
There is no particular reason they need to require these same-sex couples to marry, and as only 12% of UN countries have legalized gay marriage, if they do so, they could be prosecuted back in their home countries.
there might not be a particular reason in the moment, but it pisses off liberals which–given what this administration seems to prioritize and falls back on for post hoc justifications of their questionable policy decisions–behind the scenes is presumably reason enough to implement it. a lot of this administration's policies really do just seem intended to spite people opposed to donald, even if it makes absolutely no sense for the policy to be put in place.
Well, the article does actually mention the stated reason: Though it wouldn't surprise me if the real reason was just to undo another thing Obama did. That seems to be the motivation behind a...
Well, the article does actually mention the stated reason:
The U.S. Mission to the U.N. portrayed the decision [...] as an effort to bring its international visa practices in line with current U.S. policy.
Though it wouldn't surprise me if the real reason was just to undo another thing Obama did. That seems to be the motivation behind a significant amount of the current administration's policy choices. Anyone know if the rule allowing non-married same-sex partners to get visas was put in place by the Obama administration?
I'm hyper conservative, not a pro trumper, and I can't believe this. No matter how you feel about same sex marriage or anything else the government of the united states need to go out of it's way to allow diplomats and whoever they want to bring into the country.
If a diplomat wants to bring a tiger with them then figure it out, your feelings and personal views need to go out the window when it comes to diplomacy, this is sooooooo ridiculous.
Emphasis mine. So in order to come to the US as a diplomat with your same-sex partner, you have to:
What a crock. This is basically a bar on any gay diplomats from countries where being gay is illegal. All in the name of "bring[ing] its international visa practices in line with current U.S. policy."
Well that's horrid :(
there might not be a particular reason in the moment, but it pisses off liberals which–given what this administration seems to prioritize and falls back on for post hoc justifications of their questionable policy decisions–behind the scenes is presumably reason enough to implement it. a lot of this administration's policies really do just seem intended to spite people opposed to donald, even if it makes absolutely no sense for the policy to be put in place.
Well, the article does actually mention the stated reason:
Though it wouldn't surprise me if the real reason was just to undo another thing Obama did. That seems to be the motivation behind a significant amount of the current administration's policy choices. Anyone know if the rule allowing non-married same-sex partners to get visas was put in place by the Obama administration?