Mary Cheney's pregnancy affects us all

Townhall ^ | 12/07/2006 | Janice Shaw Crouse

[highball]

I think you're mistaken about that. We're pro- people making their own private decisions without undue interference from people who are not concerned. You know, what used to be conservatism before the busybodies got into the act, and wanted Big Government, as long as it was Big Government who would enforce their own moral code.

Bingo.

[gdani]

Or is it just selectively pro-gay because it's Dick Cheyney's daughter?

Of course. I wonder if it would still be "nobody's business" if she announced she was going to marry her partner, too.

[Responsibility2nd]

You can have a book, too.

[Antoninus]

It looks like FReepers are now going pro-gay. Or is it just selectively pro-gay because it's Dick Cheyney's daughter? 'It's ok when this person does it, but no one else can.' Despicable. No wonder conservatives are losing. We can't even be consistent in our message.

Don't be fooled. FR has been a target of the homo-positive types for a long time. Many of them are all over these threads, posting at all times of day--almost as if it were their jobs. I'm beginning to think for many of them, it IS their job.

The left spares no expense when it comes to infiltrating and destroying their opponents.

[Responsibility2nd]

Riiiight. So conservatives should just shut up and keep quiet on moral issues like gay marriage, lesbian rights, abortion, immigration, teen sex, pornography, etc. etc.

After all it's "no one else's business."

Have a book:

[Ol' Sparky]

I don't see how fathers abandoning their kids is Mary Cheney's fault

You don't see how intentionally bringing a child into the world without a father is a problem?

[Ol' Sparky]

What can anyone do about adult, willful children who march to their own (often misguided) drummers?

Condemn their actions while making it clear you love them?

[Ol' Sparky]

Most of the pro-homosexual posts are likely FR's liberaltarians, the same ones that want to legalize drugs and prostitution.

[Responsibility2nd]

Thank you for this comment. I feel like I'm stuck in DU or something. I am amazed at the pro-gay commetns on this thread.

Bears repeating:

It looks like FReepers are now going pro-gay. Or is it just selectively pro-gay because it's Dick Cheyney's daughter? 'It's ok when this person does it, but no one else can.' Despicable. No wonder conservatives are losing. We can't even be consistent in our message.

[snugs]

For all we know she may well have or if not a legal marriage as such she may well have gone through some sort of ceremony in fact I think I read somewhere she had though not what would be considered a marriage service.

[Cecily]

Imagine the outrage and criticism that would be going on here if this were Chelsea Clinton and her female partner. Yet Mary Cheney gets a pass from a large section of the social conservative (so-called) crowd. No, we are not too consistent in our beliefs and principles.

[He Rides A White Horse]

Mary Cheney is among that burgeoning group of adult women over age 20 that are driving the trend of women who don’t want a man in the picture

They do; they merely substitute the State for hubby.

[Ace of Spades]

You have to be kidding. Her baby is none of our business.

[drjimmy]

Well I'm sure they are laughing at us from Tehran to Damascus. This might be a bigger chuckle getter than the Baker-Hamilton report. I mean the Islamofascists already thought we were weak and decadent before this week.

Yeah, because as we all know, 9/11 was the fault of the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America. I point the finger in their face and say 'you helped this happen.'

[Responsibility2nd]

Keep these pro-gay comments coming folks. I've got plenty of books to hand out.

[SoothingDave]

What if the father bolts during pregnancy? The woman carrying the child to term is "selfish"? That's a new one.

When did we lose the capacity to argue rationally without appeal to irrelevant, emotional side issues?

When did we lose the ability to distinguish between circumstance beyond one's control and one's own life decisions?

Yes, some children have no fathers, through no fault of their own nor of their mother. This is not the same thing as making a conscious, premeditated decision to deliberately, on purpose, bring a fatherless child into the world.

People get hit by buses all the time. That doesn't make it right to push someone in front of one.

SD

[Ace of Spades]

Am I posting at Free Republic here? Or DU?

Can someone please, PLEASE for the love of God please come up with something a little more original. Thank you.

[Wolfie]

You don't see how intentionally bringing a child into the world without a father is a problem?

Depends on the situation. With the Cheney's resources, I don't see a problem.

[Ace of Spades]

I bet you're the kind who peeks into your neighbors' windows at night.

[He Rides A White Horse]

Yeah, because as we all know, 9/11 was the fault of the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America.

If Muslims perceived a nation that would blow them to kingdom come for formulating such a plan, they wouldn't have dared do it.

Muslims negotiate when they are weak, and attack when they perceive their enemies are weak.