Posted on 05/08/2006 4:06:47 PM PDT by skandalon
She says she considered quitting her role as campaign adviser over the issue of gay marriage, but Vice President Dick Cheney's daughter Mary Cheney tells ABC News "Primetime" anchor Diane Sawyer her sexuality has never created problems within her family.
Mary Cheney discussed the campaign, her feelings about President Bush, life with her partner of 14 years, and what it was like to come out as gay to her parents.
"I struggled with my decision to stay on the 2004 campaign," Cheney told "Primetime." Her personal challenge came when President Bush said the nation must defend the sanctity of marriage.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
And some people choose to make others miserable, and some people choose to focus on others' misery and some people like to sit in judgment of others' choices - as if they are God's little helper.
No, they don't all act the same; just the activists you see on your TV screen. A lot of homosexuals don't even want marriage; they just want to be left alone to live their lives.
"Is this your idea of moral equivalence? Homosexuality is morally equivalent to killing someone or being a dictator?"
No, it's my idea of moral inequivalence.
Please see my post 29. There is not equivocation intended in my post whatsoever outside of the common theme of a parent feeling shame over the actions of a child.
If anything, my post is a question of degree. But even if it were an equivocation, how would saying that a parent's love trumping a child's actions (be it murder or homosexuality) make my post even worth commenting on?
Further, I pondered if a dictator's parents could view that child's actions with shame, which given the nature of my post, would certainly not imply equivocation.
Thanks for the clarification
I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume this is none of your f'cking business. What happens in their family is none of our business, unless Dick decides to shoot them or something lol.
Yeah, on re-reading my original post, I wasn't being clear at all, and I see how you could have drawn that inference. Hope I didn't come across hostile. That wasn't my intent.
Sure they do. They may not choose their appetites but they do choose their behaviors. If they have no capacity for self-control, as you suggest, then they are a danger to society. I am sure that some live much riskier lives than others. In fact, some wonder whether marriage might bring more safety.
The thing that irks me is that they promote this hedonistic idea as if there will be no consequences for self indulgence, then they are standing right there to profit and benefit from the downfall and degradation of any opponent like jackals.
No problem. I just wasn't clear what your point was(g). I appreciate you explaining it. Turns out, imo, it was a good point!
Lesbians' brains react differently to sex hormones than those of heterosexual women, new research indicates.
That's in line with an earlier study that had indicated gay men's brain responses were different from straight men - though the difference for men was more pronounced than has now been found in women.
Lesbians' brains reacted somewhat, though not completely, like those of heterosexual men, a team of Swedish researchers said in Tuesday's edition of Proceedings of the National...
But giving them "domestic partnerships" is the same thing as being married. Just a different name for it...
At first I thought you may have meant to say regresses. But I see your point - the liberal can only accommodate the Bible if it progresses or is metamorphosed to their beliefs.
Nevertheless, you're correct, and although homosexuals have no monopoly on the practice they are prime examples of the type that discount or outright ignore those parts of the Bible which don't coincide with how they think matters should be. (God has some nerve telling us how to live!)
I would think that the Cheneys love their daughter very much. I have seen or heard nothing that would indicate otherwise. They seem to be a wonderful family.
As a parent of 3 teens, I can assure you that it is quite possible (and common) to love your children and still be disappointed in some of the things they do. Most of us are very fortunate that parents can love their children, in spite of their faults.
Here's the question/issue nobody addresses: Every day legally ordained clergy perform "weddings" for gay couples. The unions, of course, are not recognized by the gubmint.
So, should these clergy be banned from conducting the services? And what defines a marriage -- gubmint recognition or the blessing of clergy?
She is flogging a book.
Does a subsidiary of ABC own the rights to the book? must be so.
Newsflash to the deviant, no way is homosexuality accepted in marriage in europe. Only in countries which need a weak family unit to keep socialism on life support.
Even the EU order is only advisory and non-binding.
She should have quit.
It works out quite well when attempting to remain on topic -regardless, I do not consider moral relative or anecdotal arguments valid -as such I do not promote their introduction. Whether or not I am heterosexual, male or female, have children, grandchildren or practice a celibate monastic existence is not relevant to the facts...
Your statement is too ambiguous to derive any position from... I guess I can assume you advocate defeatism and social pacifism with a smidgen of indignant outrage and ambiguous finger pointing...
Homosexual activity is a choice and it is a wrong choice...
There are some like myself that oppose the homosexualization of society because they know that homosexual activity is unhealthy, disordered and promulgates a miserable death style that negatively impacts all of humanity...
I probably don't notice them.
I am not aware of the existence of lesbian brains...
It looks like more junk science -more propaganda...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.