- Position1 of 2›
- LQBTQ+ people should vote for Joe Biden.
Biden promises in his campaign to protect the rights of LGBTQ+ youth.
The argument
Biden has promised to: Ensure young LGBTQ+ people are supported and protected in our schools and college campuses by: - Guaranteeing transgender students have access to facilities based on their gender identity. - Protecting LGBTQ+ students from sexual assault, harassment, and bullying. - Ending school discipline policies that disproportionately impact LGBTQ+ students. - Work to end suicide among young LGBTQ+ individuals. Eliminate LGBTQ+ youth homelessness. LGBTQ+ young people are about twice as likely to be homeless as their non-LGBTQ+ counterparts. Focus on juvenile justice reform and prevention. LGBTQ+ youth are disproportionately overrepresented in the juvenile justice system. Protect LGBTQ+ Dreamers. There are an estimated 75,000 Dreamers who identify as LGBTQ, 36,000 of whom are DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) participants.
Context
Throughout his career, Biden has championed equality and inclusion for young LGBTQ+ individuals. Biden knows how important it is for young LGBTQ+ people to feel safe, supported, and valued at home and in school. Through policies and public leadership, the Obama-Biden Administration made it a priority to change the culture from one of fear and rejection to one where young LGBTQ+ individuals feel safe, affirmed, accepted, and loved. As private citizens, Joe and Jill Biden continued this work through the Biden Foundation’s “As You Are” campaign, which promoted understanding and acceptance among young LGBTQ+ individuals and their families.
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] Not disputed. It establishes that a problem exists, not that any particular candidate would address it, and on its own it does no work toward the conclusion. [Rejecting P2] A pledge is a statement of intent. Several of the listed items — facilities access, school discipline rules, protections for Dreamers — depend on rulemaking that courts have repeatedly enjoined or on legislation requiring Congress, and the premise reproduces campaign material without any account of what could be enacted, funded or defended in litigation. [Rejecting P3] Moving from commitments to support requires confidence that they would be carried out, which critics contest by pointing to a long record in which backing for same-sex marriage, for repealing the ban on military service and for anti-discrimination protections arrived late relative to other Democrats and after the position had already shifted. The conclusion is also broader than the premises: recommending how a whole constituency should vote turns on comparing both candidates across every issue, not on reading one platform on its own terms.