Done today, it would acknowledge the valid existence of different sexual and gender identities, which would be an absolutely monumental shift in messaging. Even during Democratic leadership, it would be signal support for rights and equality, instead of diagnosis and demonizing.
It absolutely would not. There would need to be something behind it.
Would it have meaning during a Democratic government though?
Done today, it would acknowledge the valid existence of different sexual and gender identities, which would be an absolutely monumental shift in messaging. Even during Democratic leadership, it would be signal support for rights and equality, instead of diagnosis and demonizing.
Actions are louder than words though. It’s a valid question to ask, i.e. “are there actions accompanying the discourse?”