Posted on 05/26/2007 10:46:29 AM PDT by Sleeping Beauty
“discrimination” has been twisted:
Do you think very many sane people (let alone Christians) wish for Gays to be treated badly: NO@!
On the otherhand is is not discrimitory to gays to refuse them special rights such as “marriage”, “civil unions”, and “hate speech protections”, highering protections, ect.. I am not discrimination AGAINST gays by not support “Special Rights” for an immoral behavior. On the other hand I dont want the ordinary (rights) granted explicitcly in the US (or State) constitutions to be denied to gays.
There is one thing to be against an immoral behavior, and the thing Romney doesn’t recognize is that gays want to force acceptance of their lifestyle through radical-public policy. Now I as a Christian have the right to be opposed to that lifestyle because it is IMMORAL, and harmful, and should be defeated!
Sure. Huckabee, Tancredo, Lamborn, Pence, ect..+ true RR Conservatives.
Works for me.
sometimes...
Hey, as long as you have a "living prophet," things could change.
Hey, you're not trying to impose your narrow-minded, parochial view of theft & slavery, are you?
[sarc] Good point!
In track, they call this a "false start"--jumping the gun. McRomney is running to the left even tho the primary starting line is to the right.
But the good thing about this is folks won't be as surprised come next summer were he to win the primaries.
I didn’t ever really care for Mitt Guiliani.
You get my vote for the most perceptive post yet!!!
That is exactly what Mitt has done: "You, see, candidates for secular positions should not discuss what they think is 'immoral' or 'moral' sexuality-wise--and BTW, homosexuality is not a moral issue, it's a 'choice' and 'belief.'"
He can't even get through one interview without contradicting himself.
That's what I thought, I figured he'd want to run on a "Massachusetts went for gay marriage on my watch, so my LDS faith does not threaten anyone" platform during the general election, but I figured he'd be silent on homosexuality during the primaries.
Hmm, another "lifelong hunter" misstep? He was hitting all the right notes since that time, thought he was learning when not to open his mouth.
OK, will the real Mitt please stand up? Should public folks express "tolerance and respect for" practing polygamists "regardless of our differences," or should we say, "Yuck. Gross. Oooh?"
Either way he's inconsistent. Or, since we keep hearing about Mitty's "converted" status on other social issues, perhaps after last week's comments on polygamy he started having second thoughts about commenting publicly on other folks' sexual lifestyles and sexual "choices" and sexual "beliefs." Maybe dear ole great, great, great uncle Parley Pratt wasn't so bad, after all, to have had a dozen wives.
"I don't think that a person who's running for a secular position as I am should talk about or engage in discussions of what they in their personal faith or their personal beliefs is immoral or not immoral," Romney told the AP.
So, Mitt are you condemning yourself for talking about & engaging in discussions last week of what your personal faith or personal belief was as to the immorality of polygamy?
“Sure. Huckabee, Tancredo, Lamborn, Pence, ect..+ true RR Conservatives.”
Here is what Huckabee had to say:
Do you believe that homosexuality is immoral?
Huckabee: That’s their business. I may not agree with it and, in fact, don’t agree with it. But I respect that they have the right to do it. When they want to change the rules, though, of institutions like marriage, I feel I have a responsibility to speak out. The rules are one man, one woman for life.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1607158,00.html
Sounds to me exactly like what mitt romney had to say. I bet the same goes for all the others but I dont have time to check on that right now.
Hah! Really like the “Men’s Pomade.” For some reason, it really describes the new brand of superficial conservatism we’re seeing lately.
No, at best that's comparable to only half of what Mitt McJulie-Ani said. He also said: "I don't think that a person who's running for a secular position as I am should talk about or engage in discussions of what they in their personal faith or their personal beliefs is immoral or not immoral," Romney told the AP.
So he said candidates shouldn't even have a public discussion on what is immoral or moral if their personal faith or personal beliefs inform that morality. What utter nonsense! Of course people's faith and beliefs inform their morality, and of course sexual issues of every type enter into not only public discussions but public policies pertaining to health, marriage, family, etc!
And some folks want this guy in the oval office?
Every law by its very presence sends a "morality" message. Drunk driving laws are a "morality" message. Statutory rape laws are a "morality" message. Even a yellow "yield" sign is a "morality" message concerning submission to another driver's right-of-way.
It sounds like you box up morality so tight that when people react to politicians' stories like this, it jumps at you like a Jack-in-the-box as if it was some sudden surprise.
Please, don’t say a word against Romeny....he is the favored RINO in these parts and he is untouchable...
Guess the Repub party is hitchin' up the pioneer wagon train and headin' out due east to a plot of turf where they don' heerd prez-ee-den-tial candy-dates growd like wiii-ld weeds on the edges of a piile of fer-tee-lizer.
Ya know, that harvest field bo-nan-za that gave us the likes of Teddy K., Michael Du-ka-kis, and John Kerry. Boy, what a plum rich sucka--a bedevilin' boom--that Mass mecca has been for suckin' up to voter con-fee-dence!
Mitt should be replaced by a parrot.
The parrot would get his lines right and have even better hair.
Exactly: he said it was immoral, and (even though you can’t, neither is it my or his business to legislate personal behavior). He (Huckabee) I’m sure would not agree with allowing homosexual (other) special rights.
Romney on the otherhand has been a big supporter of homosexual special rights (barring “homosexual marriage”).
You are either for it or against it!
I concur with your opionion.
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.