Posted on 10/07/2006 1:35:46 PM PDT by rface
I'm sure that in the spirit of bi-partisanship the Democrat list will be released shortly. /sarc
In some circles being a closet Republican is a far greater sin and source of shame than being a closet gay.
b
That is exactly how I feel. I know some gay Republicans who are "out" but do not believe in the "homosexual agenda".
I have found that democrats are only tolerant when you agree with them.
I'm in CA, seeing Drier's name on that list is no surprise.
Yes, same here. In the Silicon Valley, in the midst of the Bay Area and just south of San Francisco, you run into a lot of gay people. Some I couldn't give a darn about, and some that are good friends. There's one guy who I'm pretty sure is and is closeted, and (if that's the case) I wish he came out. (Uh, but without a "flourish", if you know what I mean.)
Some gays are very very messed up people, but some aren't. Just like the rest of us, only more so.
We live in a small Southern town. I just found it to be very amusing that he did not mind if everyone knew that he was gay, but heaven forbid should anyone find out that he supports G. Bush!
Well, the D's fail to understand that the rest of us realize that not all Gays are pedophiles. They are pushing this issue and implying that all Gay's try to seduce/abuse children.
The sooner somebody steps up and challenges them on this, the better off we'll all be.
I know straight people who have taken advantage of children and have consequently served their time. But I don't know of anybody who spends every waking hour trying to convince everyone that all heterosexuals are pedophiles.
There's a real disconnect in their logic. Correction: They have no logic. There is a real disconnect in their thought process.
I DO CARE... so, are you saying you are for homosexual marriages? raising kids under a homosexual environment? homosexual priests? homosexual scout-leaders? homosexual teachers?
I don't mean to attack you... I am just interested in your views as a member of FR. I am kind of new here.
(CNN) -- The head of the Republican House campaign committee apologized Saturday for not catching Rep. Mark Foley in alleged lies about his Internet exchanges with teen pages.
Rep. Tom Reynolds, R-New York, issued the apology in a TV commercial aired in his Buffalo-area district.
He also reiterated his assertion that he told House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois, about Foley's behavior in the spring. (Watch how the Foley scandal has changed the political landscape -- 2:10 )
"I trusted that others had investigated. Looking back, more should have been done, and for that, I'm sorry," Reynolds said.
"I was told about odd but not explicit e-mails between Mark Foley and a page," he said. "I never saw a single e-mail, not one. Even so, I reported what I had been told to the speaker of the House.
"At the time, I thought I had done the right thing. I have since learned that newspapers in Florida and the FBI had copies of the e-mails for months and that Foley had been confronted about them and lied," Reynolds said.
"What is ridiculous about this "List" is that it does not mention so many others who are homosexual (bi or otherwise). For instance, the person standing next to Sen Mikulski below."
Somebody HAS been uncharacteristcally quiet of late, hasn't she?
I find it extremely hard to believe that most of the names listed are Republicans, while we're at it... let out all the Dims too!
I can't really lay it out any clearer than I did.
I want all the gay republicans to step forward.
If they'll hurt the party because they're from districts that will not vote for them, so be it. They should be willing to take a hit for the team and put their personal aspirations in second place.
If they're in places where they do not hurt the party, then let them run.
But, if they're not out of the closet, then they are saying they're afraid to come out. That makes them targets for blackmail by any number of people and organizations.
As for me, I will vote against any gay who gets "outed" by opponents and hurts the party.
I will vote against any gay who is also a pedophile.
I will vote against any gay who is grossly promiscuous.
But I will respect any who come out knowing that they are helping their party but hurting themselves.
thanks for making my point even clearer.
I suspect that many on FR are willing to aknowledge that that adults make choices (or whatever) and they will accept gays as friends and co-workers and as parts of their families.
I would suspect that almost all on FR want to hold that marriage is a special institution that is between one man and one woman ... and that children are better provided for in a household that has a mom and dad.
I bet most on FR would not "shun" anybody for merely being gay....."just don't get in my face about it"
You have a keen sense of common sense. For democrats there are three ways of doing things: their way, their way and (again) their damn way. I live in MO, so I am pretty sure it is much worse in CA than it is here. Nice, solid post (ping). Thanks for the response.
My my, who is looking out for the children (that should know better)? I would like to hear from the girls about the dirty old men hitting on them. Suppose we can get them on Larry King?
Condidit also comes to mind. Wasn't he a bit kinky? You know a man, any man, hitting on a woman has never been considered predatory but for some reason a gay man or woman looking for a friend and hitting on another man or woman (respectively) doesn't sit right with the general public. According to the MSM it even makes them change their votes or not vote at all. I wonder why?
Since so far Foley has committed no crime, I think the Dems and the Media have exposed themselves regarding their disgust toward homosexuals?
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.