Posted on 01/17/2008 9:54:16 PM PST by Tramonto
Not All Presidential Candidates Are Equal The Marriage Protection Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, championed by President Bush, has not yet met with the congressional approval required for referral to the states for ratification. Will the next president continue to champion this effort? Will he sign commonsense marriage protection bills into law? Will he veto legislation that tampers with marriage? Will he appoint reliable justices to the U.S. Supreme Court? These are important questions, for when it comes to saving marriage in our laws and customs, the president makes a profound difference. And not all presidential candidates are equal.
Rudy Giuliani - Giuliani has not endorsed the Marriage Protection Amendment; rather, he supports gay rights in general, and supports domestic partnership laws, but reportedly opposes gay marriage. As Mayor of New York City, Giuliani extended the benefits city agencies must grant to gay and lesbian couples. In 1998 he was quoted by the New York Observer as saying, "National Republicans can lump it if they don't like his new domestic-partners bill," "I really haven't thought about what the impact is on Republican politics or national politics or Democratic politics," and "I'm proud of it." As late as 2005, Guiliani openly opposed Bush's call for a federal ban on gay marriage, saying, "I cannot support it at this time."
Mitt Romney - In his unsuccessful 1994 bid for Ted Kennedy's senate seat, Mitt ran hard left, committing to be the friend of gay rights advocates. Writing to the Log Cabin Republicans, Romney pledged,
"For some voters, it might be enough to simply match my opponent's record in this area. But I believe we can and must do better. If we are to achieve the goals we share, we must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern. My opponent cannot do this. I can and will."
In a seeming turnabout in 2004, Romney came out strongly against gay marriage and in support of a constitutional amendment protecting traditional marriage:
"Massachusetts has a law that attempts to restrain this infringement by restricting marriages of out-of-state couples to those where no impediment to marry exists in their home state. Even with this law, valid same-sex marriages will migrate to other states. For each state to preserve its own power in relation to marriage, a federal amendment to define marriage is necessary."
John McCain - McCain opposes the Marriage Protection Amendment. In response to a question about gay marriage, he said, "I think, uh…I think that gay marriage should be allowed if there's a ceremony kind of thing, if you wanna call it that…I don't have any problem with that." While McCain voted in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act, to this day he persists in his opposition to a constitutional amendment that can protect traditional marriage in state legislatures and courts nationwide. In spring of 2007, Dr. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, said, "Speaking as a private individual, I would not vote for John McCain under any circumstances."
Fred Thompson - Thompson opposes the Marriage Protection Amendment. His federalist views would prevent him from seeking federal protection of marriage at the state level. In a November 2007 interview with Tim Russert, Thompson attempted to clarify his position:
"Yes. This, this, this – the – marriage is between a man and a woman. Nobody ever thought that that was contested until recently, and we've had a couple judges in a couple states decide to turn all that on its head. So we've, we've had, again, a judge-created problem. I would support a constitutional amendment that addresses this judge-created problem...and say judges can't do that. But, at the end of the day, if a state legislature and a governor decide that that's what they want to do, yes, they should have, they, they should have the freedom to do what Fred Thompson thinks is a very bad idea." (emphasis added)
All GOP presidential candidates pay some lip service to the need to preserve traditional marriage, but when you look at their actions and their own words, their credibility rings hollow. America needs a president who will fight with every ounce of his being to make sure that narrow special interests don't make a legal mockery of the most precious, God-given institution that holds our society together.
Mike Huckabee: A Champion for Marriage Mike Huckabee has held a biblical view of marriage all of his adult life, and as a former pastor, he worked directly with individuals to grow strong marriages. On his Web site, Huckabee makes this pledge,
"I support and have always supported passage of a federal constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman. As President, I will fight for passage of this amendment. My personal belief is that marriage is between one man and one woman, for life."
Huckabee does more than just talk about these values--he lives them. As Governor of Arkansas, he
* Led a successful effort to pass a marriage defense amendment to the state constitution in 2002. * Led a successful effort to adopt "covenant marriage," a legal version of marriage that encourages reconciliation and weakens no-fault divorce. * Renewed his marriage under a covenant marriage in a Valentine's Day 2005 ceremony, encouraging other couples to do the same.
The breakdown of the marriage institution has taken a tremendous toll in our nation. The ones who perhaps suffer the most are children and unwed mothers. According to the Center for Data Analysis, "children raised by never-married mothers are seven times more likely to be poor when compared to children raised in intact married families." (emphasis added) But even this statistic fails to register the emotional, relational, and spiritual toll on families and their loved ones when we collectively reject the sanctity of matrimony. The last thing we need at this critical time is to drive a stake in the heart of marriage by making a mockery of it in our laws and customs.
“There are 700,000 physicians in the US and the number of accidental deaths caused by them per year is 120,000, making the accidental death rate per physician 17%. Using the same logic, there are about 80 million gun owners, and the number of accidental gun deaths per year among all age groups is 1,500. The same calculation reveals the number of accidental deaths per gun owner to be 0.00188%. In other words, statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 more times more dangerous than gun owners. Yet, I hear no one suggesting we ban doctors.”
“My position on the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution is as clear for me as the position held by most journalists toward the 1st Amendment. While I do not consider myself a “gun nut,” I proudly own a variety of firearms and enjoy hunting as well as sports shooting. But even if I were not a hunter or did not enjoy shooting, I would still be a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment right of Americans to own firearms for self-protection and as a matter of principle.”
“there is an absolute right that people have to protect themselves and even their property.”
-Huckabee
I didn’t mean to leave out Hunter. I wonder if he would have been the next POTUS if Thompson and Huckabee weren’t running.
Huck, no! A conservative is what we need, not another Jimma Carter.
I was married in a covenant with God, not Uncle Sam.
I’m legally married, but I didn’t ask the government for permission, for approval or for help.
I don’t need government to “strengthen” my marriage. It isn’t weak, probably in part because my marriage is between the three of us: my husband, my Lord & myself.
I don’t need the government’s help in such matters.
Why should I?
I think that it is important to save the institution of Marriage. There is an inverse relationship between marriage and poverty, a direct link between poverty and Democrats and an inverse relationship between Democrats and Liberty.
But seriously, the marginalizing of traditional marriage is bad for our society and our future.
“......... he is someone who deserves consideration.”
Considered and REJECTED.
He’s also the biggest lier. Typical baptist minister out to fleece the flock. If I want an ex-governor from Arkansas I’ll elect his wife.
all that is fine but I hardly see this as a sole reason to vote for Huck. I think all the candidates will do ok here and they all are better on other important issues than Huck.
Vote for Fred Thompson! :)
He is in it until the end. That will be after Thompson and Huckabee have moved on.
be stupid, vote huckster.
I Know You cant find david thomson in little rock arkansas and I am sure this was written by a phony in fact a paper anonamosly sent in an email are you sure you wish to continue?
All right. He's a proven mega-tax raiser, by his record as governor.
He's a proven huge overspender, having nearly trebled Arkansas' budget during his regime.
He's a nanny-state scumbag, as proven by his cozying up to NEA and his call for a national smoking ban.
He's a liar and a con man (a nice parlay for a ''Christian''), in that he's changed AT LEAST 7 of his positions, as described by his actions as governor, in the past 6 weeks. Now, forsooth, he's the ''anti-illegal immigration'' candidate.
He's an anal SOB, as illustrated by his reiteration of his senseless Metamucil comments.
And he's duck soup for the 'Rats to beat.
Now, go drink some more Kool-Aid.
Please note that YOU invited comment on the huckster. Please note also that I did not invite such, nor invite your comments upon comments made about him.
Do you really think that Huckster can get a Democratic Senate and House to pass the marriage Amendment? Not only are we in the minority today, but after November we might even lose a few more seats especially in the Senate so how do you think he can get this promise done???
Do you really think that Huckster can get a Democratic Senate and House to pass the marriage Amendment? Not only are we in the minority today, but after November we might even lose a few more seats especially in the Senate so how do you think he can get this promise done???
I’d rather save the country and conservatism and vote against him.
“He is in it until the end. That will be after Thompson and Huckabee have moved on.”
If thats the case, at the very end I will be voting for him here in Oregon.
There will be tremendous pressure on many Democrats to vote for an amendment. Even here in liberal Oregon, if a senator votes against the amendment, they probably won’t win reelection. In a couple of years this will probably no longer be the case.
No he’s not.
http://travismonitor.blogspot.com/2008/01/unbelievable-huckabee.html
Proamnesty-antiBushtaxcuts-proCO2caps-CFR-RINO John McCain delenda est!
“If Fred does not make it to Super Tuesday, it will be in part due to your candidate’s sleazy push poll tactics which he used in Iowa and now again in SC.
Huckabee has turned out to be the dirtiest campaigner of them all. How could anyone support him “in good conscience”.”
YUP.
Links to proof of that are here.
http://travismonitor.blogspot.com/2008/01/unbelievable-huckabee.html
“He’s a liar and a con man (a nice parlay for a ‘’Christian’’), in that he’s changed AT LEAST 7 of his positions, as described by his actions as governor, in the past 6 weeks. Now, forsooth, he’s the ‘’anti-illegal immigration’’ candidate.”
Which 7 ones?
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.