Biden will protect LGBTQ+ people from violence

The argument

Biden has promised to: Reduce domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking against LGBTQ+ individuals and support survivors of this violence. Combat the epidemic of violence against transgender women of color. Enforce and strengthen the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act. End our gun violence epidemic and its impact on the LGBTQ+ community. End Trump’s detrimental asylum and immigration policies that damage our global standing by: - Ensure asylum laws protect people fleeing persecution. - End prolonged detention and reinvest in a case management program. - Rescind the un-American travel and refugee bans, also referred to as “Muslim bans.” Support LGBTQ+ survivors of violence.

Context

One of the driving forces throughout Biden’s career has been fighting back against abuses of power. That force motivated him to write and champion the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, to defeat the National Rifle Association twice, and to strongly condemn the epidemic of violence against the LGBTQ+ community, including transgender women of color. As President, Biden will protect LGBTQ+ people from violence, whether in the home, in their community, or when coming into this country. He will also ensure that we support LGBTQ+ survivors of violence.

Premises

Counter-arguments

"Biden’s actual record, spanning over 40 years in Washington, instead shows a politician who spent his entire career attacking gay people and the LGBT community. From his persistent opposition to gay marriage, to continued support for regimes that murder homosexuals, and even suggesting gay people might be “security risks” as federal employees, Biden’s open support for LGBT rights arrived very late, even among Democrats, and well after great advances toward LGBT equality had already been made."

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] The disparity is not in dispute, but the premise concerns the problem rather than the remedy. Establishing that a group faces disproportionate violence does not establish that any particular candidate would reduce it. [Rejecting P2] These are campaign commitments and the argument treats them as delivered. Several require Congress — firearms legislation and asylum statute in particular — and hate-crime enforcement turns largely on local reporting and prosecutorial discretion rather than presidential direction. [Rejecting C] The conclusion rests on a record that critics contest: a long career in which support for LGBTQ+ rights arrived comparatively late relative to other Democrats, which is at minimum a reason to weigh pledges against past votes. A voting recommendation also requires a comparison the premises never make, since nothing here addresses the alternative.