Besides your comment being some broad generalization, it fails to assert the reality of the 'world' and in its place takes a group of progressive first world countries which align with liberal politics.
The world includes such places as India, Pakistan, Africa and China, oh my, where liberal ideology is a far cry from what you are describing
or...from the perspective that much of Europe views it. American politics is bunk, bought and sold by corporations that think of nothing but profit, by design. literally a country where bribery is legal and encouraged
Is one on the "radical left" if they think LGBTQ people should be able to get married, that the non-religious / non-Christians should have equal rights? This is a serious question, not a troll. I ask it because the "conservative" party in the US explicitly is against such things in their platform documents.
It's rather strange to me that it is so hard for the term "radical left" to be defined in any sort of objective way, often it seems no definition is available at all which makes discussions about the topics hard to have.
LGBTQ people can get married federally, and there is no serious effort to reverse that. It is disingenuous to use marriage rights as a litmus test because whether one morally supports it is irrelevant under the law.
>Is one on the "radical left" if they think LGBTQ people should be able to get married, that the non-religious / non-Christians should have equal rights?
Globally, supporting marriage equality puts you in the minority, both in terms of # of countries as well as per capita. [0] Personally I think it's an obvious right, but that doesn't make it popular.
> Is one on the "radical left" if they think LGBTQ people should be able to get married, that the non-religious / non-Christians should have equal rights? This is a serious question, not a troll.
No, that is not “radically far left.”
In 2019, according to Pew Research, 44% of “Republicans and Republican leaners” supported same-sex marriage.
As for your question about equal rights for “non-religious / non-Christians”, I’m not sure what you’re referring to. Can you elaborate?
> I ask it because the "conservative" party in the US explicitly is against such things in their platform documents.
I assume you’re referring to the Republican Party platform document? It’s quite large; can you identify the portions you’re specifically referring to?
P18 in the PDF (p11 as per the included numbering) condemns and calls for the reversal of both US vs Windsor & Obergefell v Hodges as well as calls for marriage to be between one man and one women only.
P 19/12 calls for special rights to worship "God" which is the Christian god in this context, it doesn't call for the same rights for other religious beliefs. It all calls out for special rights to display the Ten Commandments but not other religious artifacts / documents.
Polling doesn’t seem to suggest that the positions you’ve represented are held by moderates, so no, I wouldn’t label opposition to them as “radically far left”.
I’d suggest this recent piece as a very cogent breakdown of the lost ascendancy of the religious right in conservative politics:
How about letting men takeover woman's sports?
Forcing people to pretend that men are woman or one of 86 other things.
Reparations is now a thing?
Forcing people promote things they don't believe in.
Grooming 5 year olds with deep sexual content.
Schools taking away basic rights of parents.
Or the last few years where random government agencies can just make up whatever rules they want to fully control peoples lives.
Constantly attacking anyone that disagrees on any topic.
Edit: clearly the down votes don't seem to see the context wherein OP has described the commenter.
My post is not an opinion, it's the contextual position given by the OP.
But by all means downvote away per your bias.
Thanks Mods